Omicron variant and the measures implemented in response to it

[John Luxton]

All these “expert scientists “ like Ferguson etc with their doom and gloom modelling projections which are always wishy washy do they have a wheel full of doom and gloom numbers on , give it one spin each day and go bandying it around to the media and goverment and to anyone who will get hysterical over it ?

One thing I would have done if PM would have to have forbidden SAGE from going directly to the press. Everything would have to be approved by HMG before release.
Any deviation and dismissal would follow.
Same would apply to government employees and ministers.
Would seal up the leaks fairly effectively as there has been too much leaking and posturing without official sanction.

 

[yorkie]

At some point we're going to have to do the unthinkable and stop testing and isolating.... Controversial!

It shouldn't be controversial! Indeed take a listen to the podcast at the top of the previous page (post 2401) from around 32 mins 30 seconds

 

[SJN]

I’ve thought for a while that maybe the best thing would be to only test people who go to hospital. I don’t see the point in these 2 times a week LFT’s for people who have no symptoms.

 

[35B]

One thing I would have done if PM would have to have forbidden SAGE from going directly to the press. Everything would have to be approved by HMG before release.
Any deviation and dismissal would follow.
Same would apply to government employees and ministers.
Would seal up the leaks fairly effectively as there has been too much leaking and posturing without official sanction.

For SAGE, dismissal from an unpaid post? As for ministers, why would they take such a ban from this PM seriously?

The best way for a government to give unwanted stories credibility is to sack or prosecute the leaker - just think about cases like Clive Ponting, Sarah Tisdall or Peter Wright.

 

[John Luxton]

For SAGE, dismissal from an unpaid post? As for ministers, why would they take such a ban from this PM seriously?

The best way for a government to give unwanted stories credibility is to sack or prosecute the leaker - just think about cases like Clive Ponting, Sarah Tisdall or Peter Wright.

I wasn't aware that SAGE was completely unremunerated. For an unpaid job they appear to put in a hell of a lot of effort. Perhaps leaking could be removal from their professional body for a period of 10 years. That may restrict their ability to find work.

As for taking the PM seriously - that is far too late now. A PM should do this when taking up the post.

As for those cited was not defence of the realm the basis for prosecution?

 

[Yew]

One thing I would have done if PM would have to have forbidden SAGE from going directly to the press. Everything would have to be approved by HMG before release.
Any deviation and dismissal would follow.
Same would apply to government employees and ministers.
Would seal up the leaks fairly effectively as there has been too much leaking and posturing without official sanction.

Stamping the words “OFFICIAL SENSITIVE” on the top would sort it out nicely.

 

[kez19]

For SAGE, dismissal from an unpaid post? As for ministers, why would they take such a ban from this PM seriously?

The best way for a government to give unwanted stories credibility is to sack or prosecute the leaker - just think about cases like Clive Ponting, Sarah Tisdall or Peter Wright.

I was under the impression that even though (and listed on the website), I thought the likes of SAGE were paid? I stand corrected here if need be but I can't find the info: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...f-participants-of-sage-and-related-sub-groups

 

[John Luxton]

I was under the impression that even though (and listed on the website), I thought the likes of SAGE were paid? I stand corrected here if need be but I can't find the info: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...f-participants-of-sage-and-related-sub-groups

Whitty and Valance would be paid and they are members of SAGE are they not?

 

[kez19]

Whitty and Valance would be paid and they are members of SAGE are they not?

I would assume so? (i'm only using the GOV site as evidence unless someone else can provide another link?)

 

[big_rig]

The thing I find amazing about SAGE’s modellers (SPI-M etc) is that many of them complain that they have their University day jobs to do and that they work on their modelling after dinner once they’re done with work for the day. One of them in an interview on UnHerd who admitted this, and I’ve seen various ones on Twitter say so as well. Their work is so important in that it literally defines whether the people of this country will be locked up or not, yet it is also so unimportant that the business of teaching at the University of Whatever takes priority over it. This doesn’t stop them from spending half the day on TV mind, which no other civil servants in the country have licence to do. I would be sacked if I was going round on TV saying the governments lack of invest in rail was killing people.

 

[21C101]

Yesterday will be marked down as when govt policy changed from trying to manage the consequences of Covid to the start of how we learn to live with it and adapt ourselves as necessary to find a middle path through this. It will take a while to see the change and the path won't be smooth. Nicola Sturgeon showed the way.....

That post was going so well until the last bit that hasn't aged very well.

 

[35B]

I wasn't aware that SAGE was completely unremunerated. For an unpaid job they appear to put in a hell of a lot of effort. Perhaps leaking could be removal from their professional body for a period of 10 years. That may restrict their ability to find work.

As for taking the PM seriously - that is far too late now. A PM should do this when taking up the post.

As for those cited was not defence of the realm the basis for prosecution?

It was - and my point about those prosecutions was that they had the effect of drawing attention to what the government was trying to keep quiet. As was said of Watergate, it wasn't the crime that caused the problem, but the cover up.

As for sanctions, those would need to be a matter of law - and any law that barred leaking (by the way, how do you define leaking?) would be rendered virtually irrelevant by a mixture of freedom of information law and the legal protections that apply to "protected disclosures" (whistleblowing in more common parlance).

I was under the impression that even though (and listed on the website), I thought the likes of SAGE were paid? I stand corrected here if need be but I can't find the info: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...f-participants-of-sage-and-related-sub-groups

Whitty and Valance would be paid and they are members of SAGE are they not?

They are, because they are Chief Medical Officer and Chief Scientific Advisor respectively. Jobs which, among other things, give them an independent authority to talk publicly - as was demonstrated in the reaction to the idiot MP who accused Whitty of going against government policy.

Stamping the words “OFFICIAL SENSITIVE” on the top would sort it out nicely.

Catnip to a journalist who found it. I used to handle stuff classified as "Restricted" - very mundane stuff, but to read what journalists would say about it, you'd think it was the crown jewels.

 

[brad465]

Yesterday will be marked down as when govt policy changed from trying to manage the consequences of Covid to the start of how we learn to live with it and adapt ourselves as necessary to find a middle path through this. It will take a while to see the change and the path won't be smooth. Nicola Sturgeon showed the way and maybe more of convert to the philosophy of giving out the information and guiding people how to plot a course through the situation that limits the need for legal regulations.

That post was going so well until the last bit that hasn't aged very well.

Yes Sturgeon clearly hasn't changed course. As for whether England govt policy has, I'll wait and see what happens tomorrow before concluding whether a change has happened there or not.

 

[21C101]

Total new cases today (Tuesday) 90,629, compared to 91,743 yesterday (Monday).

I seem to recall Tuesdays normally have a disproportionally high number after weekend reporting lags get corrected.

Not exactly doubling every three days is it?

Tick Tock, for sage, communist independent sage and the rest of the alarmists "These Scaremongering Quacks" in the words of todays Daily Mail editorial, the bell will soon toll.

 

[Dent]

Total new cases today (Tuesday) 90,629, compared to 91,743 yesterday (Monday).

The relevant comparison is with the same day last week, comparing consecutive days is not a like for like comparison due to weekly fluctuations in testing.

 

[brad465]

Apparently BBC Radio Scotland had Fraser Nelson on this morning where he talked about his discovery this weekend. It's resulting in him trending on Twitter with dominant criticism aimed his way. The question though is how many listened and took it on board, which will include many not on Twitter?

 

[greyman42]

One thing I would have done if PM would have to have forbidden SAGE from going directly to the press. Everything would have to be approved by HMG before release.
Any deviation and dismissal would follow.
Same would apply to government employees and ministers.
Would seal up the leaks fairly effectively as there has been too much leaking and posturing without official sanction.

If you worked for a private company and go to the media leaking information and airing your own opinions about your company, then you would be down the road.

 

[21C101]

The relevant comparison is with the same day last week, comparing consecutive days is not a like for like comparison due to weekly fluctuations in testing.

I noted you didn't think it necessary to mention the rest of my post

That Tuesdays figures are normally significantly higher than Mondays due to late reporting from the weekend going in Tuesdays.

That the post was in the context of claims that cases would be doubling every three days.

 

[Harbon 1]

I noted you didn't think it necessary to mention the rest of my post

That Tuesdays figures are normally significantly higher than Mondays due to late reporting from the weekend going in Tuesdays.

That the post was in the context of claims that cases would be doubling every three days.

I seem to recall the case data isn't affected by weekends. If anything it increases throughout the week.

Death data is what is affected by weekends, with a much smaller number on a Monday, and a surge on a Tuesday due to the mass reporting of those that happened over the weekend that had no one there to publish the numbers.

 

[21C101]

Meanwhile Steven Swinford reports part of yesterdays cabinet meeting on twitter

"Rees-Mogg v critical of modelling, asked PM if he had read @FraserNelson article - said Govt should trust people"

 

[westv]

Meanwhile Steven Swinford reports part of yesterdays cabinet meeting on twitter

"Rees-Mogg v critical of modelling, asked PM if he had read @FraserNelson article - said Govt should trust people"

I'm surprised Rees-Mogg didn't say it in Latin.

 

[MikeWM]

I seem to recall the case data isn't affected by weekends. If anything it increases throughout the week.

Generally Tuesday is a little lower than Monday, because Tuesday's 'reports' are mostly made up from tests done on Sunday, and less tests are generally done on Sunday.

That's why it was notable last week when Tuesday's number was rather higher than Monday, as that implied Wednesday (which is mainly tests done on Monday) was going to show a big increase. As it indeed did.

So, inasmuch as we can deduce anything from one data point, today being slightly less than yesterday would imply cases are still rising - but *rather more slowly* than last week.

It is likely we'll be over 100k tomorrow (unless school holidays start to have an effect), be prepared for that.

 

[Harbon 1]

Generally Tuesday is a little lower than Monday, because Tuesday's 'reports' are mostly made up from tests done on Sunday, and less tests are generally done on Sunday.

That's why it was notable last week when Tuesday's number was rather higher than Monday, as that implied Wednesday (which is mainly tests done on Monday) was going to show a big increase. As it indeed did.

So, inasmuch as we can deduce anything from one data point, today being slightly less than yesterday would imply cases are still rising - but *rather more slowly* than last week.

It is likely we'll be over 100k tomorrow (unless school holidays start to have an effect), be prepared for that.

Oh yeah there are plenty of little quirks in the reporting data, poor weather for example.

 

[dave87016]

So Boris has said no further restrictions before Christmas but “ can’t rule out further restrictions “ after Christmas come on Boris you know your going to implement further restrictions either from the 26th 27th or 28th so why don’t you just be honest and say so now so people can plan amend and prepare accordingly ….

sorry I forgot a politician being honest ??? I must have been at the sherry early lol

 

[Megafuss]

So Boris has said no further restrictions before Christmas but “ can’t rule out further restrictions “ after Christmas come on Boris you know your going to implement further restrictions either from the 26th 27th or 28th so why don’t you just be honest and say so now so people can plan amend and prepare accordingly ….

sorry I forgot a politician being honest ??? I must have been at the sherry early lol

It takes 48 hours to recall parliament. BoJo could do that on a Christmas Day ring round I suppose

 

[35B]

So Boris has said no further restrictions before Christmas but “ can’t rule out further restrictions “ after Christmas come on Boris you know your going to implement further restrictions either from the 26th 27th or 28th so why don’t you just be honest and say so now so people can plan amend and prepare accordingly ….

sorry I forgot a politician being honest ??? I must have been at the sherry early lol

Alternatively, he might just be saying that no decision has been taken yet - and mean it. Let's face it, it would be much easier for him to hide behind "this is the advice"; we should give the guy credit for doing the right thing.

But overall hospitalisations are now overwhelmingly those who are vaccinated, just as you’d expect with a disease that is only likely to be serious for the aged and/or infirm.

The article also makes clear that the ICU vaccine ratios were unclear at the time of publishing. And those who are so unwell as to end up in ICU must include a good number who are too ill to receive the vaccine at all…

Are there any up to date figures showing that unvaccinated people are taking up the majority of space in ICU?

Possibly not, but reading the whole of that article, I'd observe both (a) that the unvaccinated are disproportionately more likely to end up in hospital and (b) that the ICU figures that were available showed vastly greater risk to the unvaccinated.

 

[DustyBin]

Lorraine Kelly and her guests were wrong about Covid-19 patients - Full Fact

The majority of people in hospital with Covid are vaccinated—but early reports suggest that the majority in intensive care are unvaccinated.

fullfact.org

Statistic for ICU wards is stark when you consider the numbers of vaccinated v unvaccinated.

I very strongly suspect that there's also a stark contrast when you consider those with comorbidities versus those without. Take obese people for example, that's an avoidable condition and we know that they are significantly more vulnerable, should we deny them treatment? What about those who've let their Vitamin D levels drop, they're putting themselves at increased risk and it's not exactly difficult to pop a supplement once a day is it? Why should we treat these idiots?! Or how about we treat people according to how much they pay in via tax and national insurance? I pay a fortune, why should I be subsidising other peoples health care?

Can you see the issue here? It's a giant, ethically "challenging", can of worms.....

 

[35B]

I very strongly suspect that there's also a stark contrast when you consider those with comorbidities versus those without. Take obese people for example, that's an avoidable condition and we know that they are significantly more vulnerable, should we deny them treatment? What about those who've let their Vitamin D levels drop, they're putting themselves at increased risk and it's not exactly difficult to pop a supplement once a day is it? Why should we treat these idiots?! Or how about we treat people according to how much they pay in via tax and national insurance? I pay a fortune, why should I be subsidising other peoples health care?

Can you see the issue here? It's a giant, ethically "challenging", can of worms.....

There are degrees of avoidability, however.

 

[43066]

Possibly not, but reading the whole of that article, I'd observe both (a) that the unvaccinated are disproportionately more likely to end up in hospital and (b) that the ICU figures that were available showed vastly greater risk to the unvaccinated.

You are correct on both counts, of course, and that’s a compelling argument for getting vaccinated. However it most certainly isn’t the same thing as saying that the unvaccinated are “bringing down the NHS” as we are so often told.

That’s an absolutely crucial distinction - and indeed underpins why vaccine passports to get into nightclubs haven’t worked (in terms of reducing hospitalisations) wherever they’ve been tried. Unvaccinated young people are individually more likely to end up seriously ill but, with vaccine coverage as high as it is, they will always be outnumbered by vaccinated elderly/infirm people due to sheer weight of numbers.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But overall hospitalisations are now overwhelmingly those who are vaccinated, just as you’d expect with a disease that is only likely to be serious for the aged and/or infirm.

The article also makes clear that the ICU vaccine ratios were unclear at the time of publishing. And those who are so unwell as to end up in ICU must include a good number who are too ill to receive the vaccine at all…

Are there any up to date figures showing that unvaccinated people are taking up the majority of space in ICU?

Yes they are higher percentage in some age groups but the NHS weekly vaccination survey for last weeks is also crystal clear that non vaccinated are a higher proportion of younger people