Omicron variant and the measures implemented in response to it

[brad465]

That is insane. I can kind of see if no jabs at all (however I don't agree with that), but a 20/30/40yr old could have had two jabs and COVID, and would have a perfectly set up immune system for it, yet be denied access to these things. And it makes not a blind bit of difference to transmission and outcomes.

Surely this is not a good use of NHS resources?

It's been discussed to death here of course, but repeated doses makes vaccine passports untenable, regardless of their effectiveness in reducing transmission. If the WHO do declare the pandemic over and they or any other measure are still in place, then not only has Covid won, but anyone labelled as a conspiracy theorist for criticising passports has also won.

The go to solution when things don't work seems to be to "do more of it", rather than "maybe we're not above nature after all and have limits". This was the case with covid restrictions, now it's the case with vaccines.

A small part of me wishes a vaccine still hadn't been discovered/deployed yet, or had been found but took until at least Delta had emerged to do so. While they're beneficial, waiting longer without a vaccine would have led to more questions about the sustainability of our pandemic strategy, and a third lockdown in the UK and much of Europe would have been very hard to take in. This would also have prevented/greatly delayed the ability to put all the blame on those who've not taken a vaccine, even though in this country it's less than 10% of the eligible population.

 

[hst43102]

Ah, the term 'refuseniks' now referring to those with 'only' 2 jabs!

Yet again entirely as predicted by the 'conspiracy theorists' - if you don't get as many as the government have told you to (and number 4 will be here soon enough), you'll be treated exactly the same as those of us who never started on the treadmill in the first place.

Although it's a terrible position to be in, I now find myself saying "I told you so..." to all the younger people who went out and got a vaccine "so we can return to normal quicker".

 

[NSEFAN]

Although it's a terrible position to be in, I now find myself saying "I told you so..." to all the younger people who went out and got a vaccine "so we can return to normal quicker".

We will see how things look in a few weeks with the cases-deaths ratio for Omicron, but certainly for the second wave this ratio was a lot better, in part due to good uptake of the jab. Hopefully the same will be true with omicron as well. I wonder if we would have had such a good uptake of the vaccine had there not been the threat of taking away things like clubs, mass gatherings etc?

 

[MikeWM]

I wonder if we would have had such a good uptake of the vaccine had there not been the threat of taking away things like clubs, mass gatherings etc?

Looking at the uptake figures by date, I don't think it makes much difference. There's no notable inflection on the '1st vaccination' update graph at points where 'vaccine passports' were proposed and/or introduced.

In other words, we broke some of the most fundamental principles of medicine and public health, by trying to coerce/threaten people to take a medical intervention rather than staying committed to the 'informed consent' route - and it didn't achieve much if anything anyway.

 

[DustyBin]

We will see how things look in a few weeks with the cases-deaths ratio for Omicron, but certainly for the second wave this ratio was a lot better, in part due to good uptake of the jab. Hopefully the same will be true with omicron as well. I wonder if we would have had such a good uptake of the vaccine had there not been the threat of taking away things like clubs, mass gatherings etc?

I honestly don’t think I’ve spoken to a single person under the age of 40 who cited health reasons as their primary motive for getting vaccinated. In fact in most cases health reasons didn’t come into it. That doesn’t sit comfortably with me to be honest.

 

[Eyersey468]

I honestly don’t think I’ve spoken to a single person under the age of 40 who cited health reasons as their primary motive for getting vaccinated. In fact in most cases health reasons didn’t come into it. That doesn’t sit comfortably with me to be honest.

To be honest the primary reason I had the jabs was to allow travel abroad especially with having a trip to Auschwitz booked for next year

 

[bramling]

I honestly don’t think I’ve spoken to a single person under the age of 40 who cited health reasons as their primary motive for getting vaccinated. In fact in most cases health reasons didn’t come into it. That doesn’t sit comfortably with me to be honest.

I wouldn't say universally, but likewise when discussed with many such people the general theme does seem to be "so I'm not barred from things", or "so I can go abroad".

This hardly demonstrates confidence and trust in the government, nor for that matter the NHS. Hardly surprising when there's been so many false promises from Johnson and others - "we can send this packing in 12 weeks". Likewise it doesn't help that GPs have pulled down the shutters, so any younger person attempting to use the NHS for anything else is highly likely to meet with obstruction. These are serious issues which are going to take years to resolve.

I'd have thought there would be scope for Starmer to make some serious political capital out of GP access, particularly for younger people. Unfortunately the snag is that it would be seen to be criticising the sacred NHS.

 

[Eyersey468]

Goalposts moved again, along with an implicit threat of what happens if we don’t go along with it.

Why doesn't that surprise me?

 

[MikeWM]

I honestly don’t think I’ve spoken to a single person under the age of 40 who cited health reasons as their primary motive for getting vaccinated. In fact in most cases health reasons didn’t come into it. That doesn’t sit comfortably with me to be honest.

I should probably correct in my above post that I was referring to the specifics of the 'vaccine passports' as they are now (announced on July 19th, re-announced early September, then part of 'plan B', etc.)

That doesn't mean that there wasn't an effect, possibly significant, on those who went out to be vaccinated in the first half of the year. Indeed the vaccine passport possibility had been floated all through 2021, with a rather more wide-ranging set of possible venues than those we're currently lumbered with.

To be honest the primary reason I had the jabs was to allow travel abroad especially with having a trip to Auschwitz booked for next year

Well, I could comment on the irony of the government requiring you to have medical treatment (that you don't think is necessary) in order to visit *Auschwitz*, of all places, but I think we're way past irony by now.

 

[kristiang85]

To be honest the primary reason I had the jabs was to allow travel abroad especially with having a trip to Auschwitz booked for next year

The sole reason I'm getting my booster is so I have no issues with international travel.

Immunity-wise, I'm absolutely fine.

 

[greyman42]

Of course, Sky managed to find someone on the street saying “I think there should be another lockdown.” I can’t help but find this extremely infuriating, firstly that people seem to want it without actually knowing what deliverable they want to achieve from it, but also the fact that people like Sky fail to challenge people, at the very least they should be asking such people *why* they want a lockdown, and really probing into their reasoning.

If Sky ask enough people they are bound to find some one who agrees with their agenda. The ones who don't just end up on the cutting room floor.
They are never going to ask "why" because the lack of a decent answer does their case no good.

 

[bleeder4]

I held out from getting jabbed for ages due to my extreme fear of needles. Finally had my first jab on 12th December as I was forced to by society. We are creating a two tier society where only those with jabs can access normal society functions. There will be a forgotten underclass society of people who haven't had the jabs and end up not being able to go anywhere or do anything. That was the only reason I got mine, not for medical reasons but for fear of being locked out of the world. It took 4 nurses to hold me down at the centre mind you. Although they did a good job of hiding the needle from me, just the thought of what was about to happen to me triggered my fight or flight instinct. Not looking forward to going back end of Feb for my second.

 

[Aaron1]

I am 25 years old, I have many friends who's ages range from 17 to 30, absolutely none of them have been vaccinated to protect their health, they have only been vaccinated purely to keep their jobs or to qualify for the vaccine passports, some of them haven't been vaccinated yet and I have friends who simply fake LFT tests to get into these places, as for myself I have only been vaccinated to protect my job as I work in health and social care.

The entire thing that our freedom to go places rely on us getting a vaccine is disgusting, and whilst many are getting the vaccine, not all of them(as evidenced by myself or my friends) have been vaccinated for the reason why it was deployed in the first place.

 

[Eyersey468]

I am 25 years old, I have many friends who's ages range from 17 to 30, absolutely none of them have been vaccinated to protect their health, they have only been vaccinated purely to keep their jobs or to qualify for the vaccine passports, some of them haven't been vaccinated yet and I have friends who simply fake LFT tests to get into these places, as for myself I have only been vaccinated to protect my job as I work in health and social care.

The entire thing that our freedom to go places rely on us getting a vaccine is disgusting, and whilst many are getting the vaccine, not all of them(as evidenced by myself or my friends) have been vaccinated for the reason why it was deployed in the first place.

I also think it is disgusting that we should have freedom curtailed if we don't have a jab, especially if we are expected to get booster after booster, which I personally feel would be a complete waste of time and effort

 

[DustyBin]

I should probably correct in my above post that I was referring to the specifics of the 'vaccine passports' as they are now (announced on July 19th, re-announced early September, then part of 'plan B', etc.)

That doesn't mean that there wasn't an effect, possibly significant, on those who went out to be vaccinated in the first half of the year. Indeed the vaccine passport possibility had been floated all through 2021, with a rather more wide-ranging set of possible venues than those we're currently lumbered with.

Sorry yes, to be clear I knew what you meant. The actual introduction of VPs doesn’t appear to have achieved a great deal, but many people feared they were coming 6 months ago and that was enough.

 

[takno]

I also think it is disgusting that we should have freedom curtailed if we don't have a jab, especially if we are expected to get booster after booster, which I personally feel would be a complete waste of time and effort

I'm not even bothered about having the jab. I just find it disgusting that I'm expected to mess around with paperwork to do basic things. Anecdotally I know a fair number of people up here who haven't bothered with the booster jab either because the sudden about-turn on vaccine passports annoyed them in first place or because they are being pestered almost every day via SMS to get one.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Sorry yes, to be clear I knew what you meant. The actual introduction of VPs doesn’t appear to have achieved a great deal, but many people feared they were coming 6 months ago and that was enough.

Introduction of VP's, and their widespread acceptance, has put us well down the path to being a society where seeking and receiving permission first is the norm, rather than being free to do whatever unless expressly forbidden in law.

As is being seen with other measures, things are very difficult to roll back once they are introduced. Someone, somewhere will demand evidence that the removal of the masks mandate does not cause any greater risk (however slight), that removal of VP's does not cause any risk. Or that the measures shouldn't be retained, just in case, of an unspecified risk or new variant.

 

[hst43102]

The thing that I don't understand about all this coercion into getting younger people (under 40?) vaccinated is a very basic question - why?
What do governments get out of this - other than forcing people into a two-tier "papers please" society?
Furthermore - why do we get called conspiracy theorists or "mumbo jumbo" for stating the obvious?

 

[Baxenden Bank]

The thing that I don't understand about all this coercion into getting younger people (under 40?) vaccinated is a very basic question - why?
What do governments get out of this - other than forcing people into a two-tier "papers please" society?
Furthermore - why do we get called conspiracy theorists or "mumbo jumbo" for stating the obvious?

A culture of compliance / obedience and control over people's lives.
You become a part of the machine, which then means you accept that you are disposable 'for the greater good'. Human Resources Department rather than Personnel Department. Use them, abuse them, throw them out when finished. Simply bring in a replacement as and when necessary.

 

[DustyBin]

Introduction of VP's, and their widespread acceptance, has put us well down the path to being a society where seeking and receiving permission first is the norm, rather than being free to do whatever unless expressly forbidden in law.

As is being seen with other measures, things are very difficult to roll back once they are introduced. Someone, somewhere will demand evidence that the removal of the masks mandate does not cause any greater risk (however slight), that removal of VP's does not cause any risk. Or that the measures shouldn't be retained, just in case, of an unspecified risk or new variant.

In my opinion this marks a fundamental shift in the relationship between the state and the population. Others disagree or simply don’t see the issue. I think we’ll know sooner rather than later whether the end of the pandemic sees a return to normal (with a few inevitable changes) or the advent of a new normal.

How anybody can’t see the danger here is beyond me. Those who “know best” have never held such control over our everyday lives since WWII and now have an unprecedented opportunity to create a “better” world in their vision; will they really pass it up? They may, I don’t know, but to dismiss the idea out of hand is extremely blinkered IMO.

 

[Eyersey468]

In my opinion this marks a fundamental shift in the relationship between the state and the population. Others disagree or simply don’t see the issue. I think we’ll know sooner rather than later whether the end of the pandemic sees a return to normal (with a few inevitable changes) or the advent of a new normal.

How anybody can’t see the danger here is beyond me. Those who “know best” have never held such control over our everyday lives since WWII and now have an unprecedented opportunity to create a “better” world in their vision; will they really pass it up? They may, I don’t know, but to dismiss the idea out of hand is extremely blinkered IMO.

How people can't see the danger is beyond me too

 

[21C101]

Introduction of VP's, and their widespread acceptance, has put us well down the path to being a society where seeking and receiving permission first is the norm, rather than being free to do whatever unless expressly forbidden in law.

As is being seen with other measures, things are very difficult to roll back once they are introduced. Someone, somewhere will demand evidence that the removal of the masks mandate does not cause any greater risk (however slight), that removal of VP's does not cause any risk. Or that the measures shouldn't be retained, just in case, of an unspecified risk or new variant.

Joining the EU and 50 years of working towards being in a federal state with countries with the napoleonic code, where you cannot do anything unless the state grants you the right to did far more to advance that cause (most EU directives are framed around that principle. All is henceforth banned except where you provide evidence that you are proceeding in a way we permit)

Thats why rights matter so much to the EU states and their fellow travellers. Without them, you can do nothing.

And why the whole human rights business grates here. Human rights replace liberties (ie restraints on the state) with the state granting permission. And what is granted can be granted selectively and can be taken away.

As to the vaccine passport. I expect it to be consigned to history in the UK rapidly. It was never implemented much and even then could be circumvented by self reported lateral flow test that is taken in private with no evidence required of the result, or even that the test was done at all.

I think this has, after 18 months of hypnotic travel, woken a lot of people up to the fact that Lanbour, the SNP and their fellow travellers, would be delighted if we became "a society where seeking and receiving permission first is the norm, rather than being free to do whatever unless expressly forbidden in law."

Also a good chunk of the tories (Gove & fellow travellers I'm looking at you) but there are enough tories who take the opposite view to prevail in this government and they have finally stood up to be counted after giving our health experts the benefit of the doubt for too long.

I hope the climate change experts and their similar doom fantasies models, will now come under similar scrutiny, before we end up with regular power cuts, extortionate electricity prices and economic ruin.

 

[brad465]

I hope the climate change experts and their similar doom fantasies models, will now come under similar scrutiny, before we end up with regular power cuts, extortionate electricity prices and economic ruin.

Many of those who've supported action on climate change have gone off that mindset with our covid response: importing loads of tests, masks and other rubbish from China, all the materials involved pollute the environment physically and through production and transport emissions. They also haven't batted an eyelid to all the discouragement of public transport in favour of cars because of covid "concerns". It amazes me how much covid dogma has made people forget whatever else they believed in/supported before covid.

 

[MikeWM]

Introduction of VP's, and their widespread acceptance, has put us well down the path to being a society where seeking and receiving permission first is the norm, rather than being free to do whatever unless expressly forbidden in law.

Precisely.

If it continues, it represents by far the biggest change in the relationship between the government and the individual in a century (excluding World War 2, which was a proper crisis - and even then the government wasn't trying to stop people going to the pub or the cinema or 'non-essential' shops).

It is a massive and negative change for *everyone*. Obviously it is even worse if you don't satisfy whatever criteria the government requires in order to gain their permission - which is already expanding from 2 vaccines to 3, but this is just the very beginning of what may be required - but even assuming you manage to continue to satisfy whatever those criteria are, you still have to obtain it, renew it on a regular basis, and be prepared to display it all over the place.

 

[brad465]

The WHO are at it again, telling us not to call Omicron mild as it is killing people. I'm sure there are many other conditions that the overwhelming majority of experiences are mild but for some unlucky folk will be fatal, but that's life and there's not much we can do about that. That's of course before getting onto the fact there'll be many who happen to have this variant at the time of their deaths, but that doesn't mean it was what killed them:

Covid: Deadly Omicron should not be called mild, warns WHO

The WHO cautions that just like previous variants, Omicron is hospitalising and killing people.

www.bbc.co.uk

The World Health Organization (WHO) has warned against describing the Omicron variant as mild, saying it is killing people across the world.
Recent studies suggest that Omicron is less likely to make people seriously ill than previous Covid variants.
But the record number of people catching it has left health systems under severe pressure, said WHO chief Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
On Monday, the US recorded more than one million Covid cases in 24 hours.
The WHO - the UN's health agency - said the number of global cases has increased by 71% in the last week, and in the Americas by 100%. It said that among severe cases worldwide, 90% were unvaccinated.
"While Omicron does appear to be less severe compared to Delta, especially in those vaccinated, it does not mean it should be categorised as mild," Dr Tedros told a press conference on Thursday.
"Just like previous variants, Omicron is hospitalising people and it is killing people.
"In fact, the tsunami of cases is so huge and quick, that it is overwhelming health systems around the world."
Omicron is highly contagious and can infect people even if they are fully vaccinated. However, vaccines are still pivotal as they help protect against severe disease that could put you in hospital.

On Thursday, the UK reported 179,756 cases and 231 Covid-related deaths. A number of hospitals have declared "critical" incidents due to staff absence and rising pressures due to Covid.
Elsewhere, hospital numbers are also rising. France's health minister Olivier Veran warned this week that January would be tough for hospitals.
He added that Omicron patients were taking up "conventional" beds in hospitals while Delta was putting a strain on ICU departments. France on Thursday reported 261,000 cases.

 

[kristiang85]

Some positive news/analysis from Andrew Lilico: https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1479430962010329092 (click the link for the graphs)

Interesting to see how large the rise in incidental covid admissions was in London (three times as high a proportion as in mid-November, at peak) & also the way it has now dropped back. Also interesting to see how much systematically lower London tends to be than England overall. https://t.co/Ks8CqtiTh8

If we bear in mind a baseline of delta hospitalisations, it's probably reasonable to say, from the graph above, that about half of omicron patients in hospital in London weren't there primarily because of omicron. I mean, look at that. It's hard to see why there should be much fuss at all, tbh. https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1479410265938710528

If we were going to see the omicron wave do anything big in the way of hospitalisations, we should have seen it by now - at the very least for London. The lags since Christmas are long enough. It just never did anything. Looks to me like it was even milder than billed.

Same graph as above - now with cases added on the right-hand axis: https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1479427825035849730

One way to think of this: Virtually everyone who had covid at the London omicron wave peak is now out of isolation. That's how long it's been. Yet London hospitalisations hv only risen a bit & the number of those in hospital for (as vs with) covid are <40% of their Jan-21 peak.

And, by the way, the latest ONS Infection Survey data should put to bed the thought that the cases data can't be relied upon in indicating that London infections have actually peaked (eg cos of non-testing ahead of Christmas).

 

[jfollows]

Guardian reporting (https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ital-coronavirus-boris-johnson-latest-updates) that nearly 40% of Covid hospital cases were admitted and are being treated for something else. The article points out that the daily figures for people in hospital with Covid-19 don't make this distinction.

Nearly 40% of Covid hospital cases in England now patients primarily being treated for something else, latest figures show

NHS England has this morning published its latest “primary diagnosis” supplement. This is a dataset that shows how many of the daily Covid hospital cases are patients being treated in hospital for Covid, and how many are patients with Covid being treated primary for something else.

The hospital figures that are published daily do not make this distinction

The latest figure is for Tuesday 4 January and it shows that in England 13,045 patients were in hospital with Covid on that day, but only 8,200 for Covid. That means only 63% of Covid cases were in hospital primary because of Covid.

This figures has been drifting down. The equivalent figure for the previous Tuesday, when total Covid cases were 8,321, was 67%, and the Tuesday before that, when overall cases were 6,245, 71% of them were people being treated primary for Covid. At the start of December the figure was 74%.

As PA Media reports, the number of patients being treated primarily for Covid rose from 5,578 on 28 December to 8,200 a week later (a jump of 47%), while those with Covid but being treated primarily for something else rose from 2,743 to 4,845 (a jump of 77%).

The figures cover acute hospital admissions only.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Guardian reporting (https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ital-coronavirus-boris-johnson-latest-updates) that nearly 40% of Covid hospital cases were admitted and are being treated for something else. The article point out that the daily figures for people in hospital with Covid-19 don't make this distinction.

It is interesting what people take from the same numbers.
To me the important part of those numbers is that over 60% (and thus the vast majority) of cases are being treated specifically for covid and not something else.

And of course, there is a degree of it doesn't really matter too. If someone is in hospital and has covid then that will be a much greater strain on the hospital and staff than if they didn't have covid because of the need to take precautions around the spread from that patient (unless you want to make the staffing situation worse with even more staff being off due to either illness or isolation).

 

[brad465]

It is interesting what people take from the same numbers.
To me the important part of those numbers is that over 60% (and thus the vast majority) of cases are being treated specifically for covid and not something else.

That might be the case, but what many will think when they see hospital stats is an assumption almost all of them are caused by covid, rather than knowing how many exactly are those with covid but in hospital for something else.

 

[kristiang85]

It is interesting what people take from the same numbers.
To me the important part of those numbers is that over 60% (and thus the vast majority) of cases are being treated specifically for covid and not something else.

And of course, there is a degree of it doesn't really matter too. If someone is in hospital and has covid then that will be a much greater strain on the hospital and staff than if they didn't have covid because of the need to take precautions around the spread from that patient (unless you want to make the staffing situation worse with even more staff being off due to either illness or isolation).

Well, it means that of the ~2,000 people admitted nationally yesterday, then 1,200 were actually due to COVID. And given there are 1,200 hospitals in the UK, it really isn't that terrible (obviously it's not one per hospital in reality, but it does give some perspective).

And I guess many of these would have been admitted in an influenza season for the same reasons.