Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

[4LEX]

I'm never going to say it's an overreaction, because I'm no expert... Just a guy with an opinion, but, I look at the ONS data for total deaths in UK from 1990 to 2020 and despite the pandemic, total deaths are only marginally up....despite total population being approximately 9 million larger.

This whole situation hasn't felt right or smelt right since day 1 to me.

So the entire world and nations who are at the point of a proxy war against each other have agreed it's real and a serious threat. Yet someone like you with no idea on the issue have felt it was wrong and a load of lies. What compelling evidence we have before us

 

[theoneandonly]

I'm never going to say it's an overreaction, because I'm no expert... Just a guy with an opinion, but, I look at the ONS data for total deaths in UK from 1990 to 2020 and despite the pandemic, total deaths are only marginally up....despite total population being approximately 9 million larger.

This whole situation hasn't felt right or smelt right since day 1 to me.

Maybe you have Covid.

 

[SaintHacker]

Feel like absolute crap this morning, not sure if thats the booster, the 3am alarm, or a combination of the two!

 

[Foxholer]

I'm never going to say it's an overreaction, because I'm no expert... Just a guy with an opinion, but, I look at the ONS data for total deaths in UK from 1990 to 2020 and despite the pandemic, total deaths are only marginally up....despite total population being approximately 9 million larger.

This whole situation hasn't felt right or smelt right since day 1 to me.

That's probably because the ability to save lives from 'normal' conditions/diseases has improved markedly in that period.
This doc https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/tran...mofinformationfoi/deathsintheukfrom1990to2020 demonstrates that pretty clearly. Death rates dropped from 1100/1400 (Crude/Age Standardised) in 1990 to 900/960 (ish) before Covid numbers from 2020 pushed that back up to 1016/1043.

Remember, it's important to look at the right data!

FWIW..Crude Rate makes no adjustment of age, so is a simple total of deaths; Age Standardised adjusts the numbers (I'm not sure how, but it's calc as per a set of WHO rules) so that any year or country can be compared properly - crudely comparable to an adjustment for inflation in other stats.

 

[SteveW86]

Managed to book a booster last night for this afternoon.

Supposed to be playing tomorrow, so hopefully it doesn’t affect me too much.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Had my booster yesterday evening and all good so far - only a rather sore arm.

Strange thing though is that I had the 2 x AZ earlier in the year and last night they said that I would be having the Moderna booster.
When I got to the front of the Moderna queue, a rather lovely nurse approached me and asked if I'd like to have Pfizer instead - I really wasn't bothered which one I had, but they did give me Pfizer in the end.
The nurse administering the job said that lots of people of asking for Pfizer and aren't happy when they are given Moderna.

Did she say why they were asking for Pfizer? Why unhappy with Moderna? I've not heard of that before so intrigued as to the thinking, if there is any.

 

[AmandaJR]

Did she say why they were asking for Pfizer? Why unhappy with Moderna? I've not heard of that before so intrigued as to the thinking, if there is any.

There was anecdotal evidence doing the rounds in the Ladies section at golf regarding an adverse reaction to Moderna and suddenly they all wanted Pfizer...and even walked out un-boosted when Moderna was all that was on offer

 

[Ethan]

People should consider that with Covid, there could have been a few times when, to use an analogy, the plane almost fell out of the sky, but was just saved by prompt action and/or good luck, and the pilot breezily said on the cabin tannoy 'Just a little bit or turbulence, folks. Should be plain sailing from now. Sit back and enjoy the flight', while actually sweating buckets and needing a new change of underwear.

I know from numerous reports on doctors social media that we almost hit such a moment in February when AZ vaccine supply fell perilously close to running out while vax was going like the clappers, and Pfizer had to be sourced urgently to cover the shortfall.

That is the context in which policy is sometimes made. Nobody thanks you if the bad thing doesn't happen and they don't know that it was close to happening.

 

[Ethan]

I’m sure I’m not alone in having a rising sense of anger at how this is all playing out, and the fact that opinion amongst so-called experts is so divided that us mere mortals have no hope whatsoever of knowing whether we’re staring into an abyss or if this is all being blown ridiculously out of proportion.

I’m quite sure Neil Ferguson’s views are now treated with suspicion by many, but even he seems to be getting confused if recent reports of his comments are accurate. Days ago he was, allegedly, saying that if we didn’t act fast we could be looking at 5000 deaths each day. Now today, he says vaccines or previous infection are likely to mean most infected with Omicron won’t have anything more than a mild illness. I absolutely accept this is media reporting and that his actual words need to be viewed in context, but those two statements are at opposite ends of the spectrum so how are the rest of us supposed to know what to believe?

And I wholeheartedly agree that the decision to impose future lockdowns cannot be guided by infections alone. Omicron infections have apparently tripled in the last 24 hours, whilst deaths WITH it (note, not necessarily because of it - that old chestnut) stand at seven. Just seven. Even allowing for a lag between infection and hospitalisation and death, something doesn’t stack up.

Virtually every report I am still seeing coming out of South Africa still suggests we have totally lost the plot. Yet the Welsh are so concerned that they are re-imposing stricter controls, including the closure of nightclubs. Yes, so concerned are the Welsh that they decided on 15 December to impose these measures. But not until 27 December. Excuse me? You’re either viewing this as a catastrophic situation or you’re not. What message does that decision send to anyone? It’s so wishy washy it’s laughable.

I will say for clarity, and before certain forumers leap down my throat and impose their expertise on me that I am but a mere pleb. I do not claim any true level of understanding about viruses, how they mutate, how they evolve and how they are ultimately brought under control. But I can read. And what I read is so vastly conflicting that I am beginning to lose patience with those who seek to impose their views on us, politicians and medics alike. And if I’m like that, you can bet your last pound so are others.

Just at a time when we are really needed to be on side with what others are striving to achieve during this mess, too many, myself included, are tiring of the conflict amongst those who profess to have the answers.

I am sure Ferguson's views (well forecasts, really) are now treated with a lack of understanding of what they mean by many.

Changing forecasts based on changed assumptions is fine, and more politicians should do it rather than double down on their original view.

All data on Covid outcomes has been done the same way. It is quite unlikely that many people are dying with it rather than because of it, because the background death rate over any 28 day period is very low, even for older people. This is only a chestnut for deniers and sceptics. It is important to gather the data the same way so that trends can be observed.

 

[Billysboots]

I am sure Ferguson's views (well forecasts, really) are now treated with a lack of understanding of what they mean by many.

Changing forecasts based on changed assumptions is fine, and more politicians should do it rather than double down on their original view.

All data on Covid outcomes has been done the same way. It is quite unlikely that many people are dying with it rather than because of it, because the background death rate over any 28 day period is very low, even for older people. This is only a chestnut for deniers and sceptics. It is important to gather the data the same way so that trends can be observed.

My point is that within two days, Ferguson’s reported forecasts ranged from 5000 deaths per day to Omicron being no worse than a sniffle for the majority. Now I absolutely accept that it all depends on the context in which those comments were made, and how they are represented in the press/media, but how is that helpful?

Not everyone is blessed with your expertise, and I’m sure I’m not alone in having neither the time nor the inclination to read medical journals and published studies and data which appear online. I read the papers, watch the news, and listen to politicians and medical people (well, those allowed to speak publicly anyway), and in the main what I read, see and hear is so contradictory that the man and woman in the street have little hope of ever unraveling it all and getting to the bare truth.

I’m neither a denier nor a sceptic, not least because I have had Covid. I am merely a fella who, thanks largely to how the pandemic has been reported since Day One, no longer knows his Covid arse from his Covid elbow. And I’m sick of the confusion. It’s all around us - I see it here, I hear it at the golf club and in the pub.

 

[road2ruin]

My point is that within two days, Ferguson’s reported forecasts ranged from 5000 deaths per day to Omicron being no worse than a sniffle for the majority. Now I absolutely accept that it all depends on the context in which those comments were made, and how they are represented in the press/media, but how is that helpful?

Not everyone is blessed with your expertise, and I’m sure I’m not alone in having neither the time nor the inclination to read medical journals and published studies and data which appear online. I read the papers, watch the news, and listen to politicians and medical people (well, those allowed to speak publicly anyway), and in the main what I read, see and hear is so contradictory that the man and woman in the street have little hope of ever unraveling it all and getting to the bare truth.

I’m neither a denier nor a sceptic, not least because I have had Covid. I am merely a fella who, thanks largely to how the pandemic has been reported since Day One, no longer knows his Covid arse from his Covid elbow. And I’m sick of the confusion. It’s all around us - I see it here, I hear it at the golf club and in the pub.

I think one of the issues is that Ferguson and his ilk have been given a public platform and for some have relished the opportunity to be in front of the media, it’s boosted their ego’s no end. Personally I feel that they shouldn’t have been given this opportunity, it should have all be fed back behind closed doors and decisions made and announcements made through the PM, Chris Whitty, Van Tam etc etc. Then we we wouldn’t get these massive scare stories that, after a while, the public get bored of as they never come true. I appreciate, as Ethan has pointed out, that they are what could happen however I think there is a general tiredness of hearing them amongst the public. If they were moderated and then publicly used then I think people would understand better and more likely to listen to. Remember, Ferguson is amongst those who were telling us how bad things were going to be whilst disappearing off during lockdown to sow his wild oats!!

Obviously easer said than done with regards keeping a lid on what the modellers are saying but I just think it should have been more contained.

 

[drdel]

My point is that within two days, Ferguson’s reported forecasts ranged from 5000 deaths per day to Omicron being no worse than a sniffle for the majority. Now I absolutely accept that it all depends on the context in which those comments were made, and how they are represented in the press/media, but how is that helpful?

Not everyone is blessed with your expertise, and I’m sure I’m not alone in having neither the time nor the inclination to read medical journals and published studies and data which appear online. I read the papers, watch the news, and listen to politicians and medical people (well, those allowed to speak publicly anyway), and in the main what I read, see and hear is so contradictory that the man and woman in the street have little hope of ever unraveling it all and getting to the bare truth.

I’m neither a denier nor a sceptic, not least because I have had Covid. I am merely a fella who, thanks largely to how the pandemic has been reported since Day One, no longer knows his Covid arse from his Covid elbow. And I’m sick of the confusion. It’s all around us - I see it here, I hear it at the golf club and in the pub.

We need to be careful. While it's is possible that the Omicron variant 'may' have lower mortality its 'curve' is probably 'flatter'. Consequently fewer may die but proportionately many more could be ill and not be able to work. Such an outcome would reduce the capacity across the workforce!

 

[PNWokingham]

Well summed up by Daniel Hannan, that awful man writing in that awful paper owned by those awful people!!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...ocial-economic-disaster-please-boris-dont-do/

 

[Crazyface]

The wife "booked" our appointments for a booster ages ago, it's now due 21st Dec. Can she remember the times? Nope. Can she access the web to find out? Nope. Has she had any email or text to confirm? Nope. Have we just had words? .................

 

[DanFST]

There are 10% less people in intensive care than this time last month.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

My point is that within two days, Ferguson’s reported forecasts ranged from 5000 deaths per day to Omicron being no worse than a sniffle for the majority. Now I absolutely accept that it all depends on the context in which those comments were made, and how they are represented in the press/media, but how is that helpful?

Not everyone is blessed with your expertise, and I’m sure I’m not alone in having neither the time nor the inclination to read medical journals and published studies and data which appear online. I read the papers, watch the news, and listen to politicians and medical people (well, those allowed to speak publicly anyway), and in the main what I read, see and hear is so contradictory that the man and woman in the street have little hope of ever unraveling it all and getting to the bare truth

I’m neither a denier nor a sceptic, not least because I have had Covid. I am merely a fella who, thanks largely to how the pandemic has been reported since Day One, no longer knows his Covid arse from his Covid elbow. And I’m sick of the confusion. It’s all around us - I see it here, I hear it at the golf club and in the pub.

I do see where you are coming from. The fact is, there are too many sources of so called "Official" information about this situation than is good for the Country.
Imagine if we had just the P.M briefing we have all seen on television, which would have been the case years ago. That, and the newspapers.
Now, everybody including me is able to impart their opinions , views, and facts to so many people, it's bound to become a 'mare to sort the wheat from the chaff.
And that would be so if the motives were all honourable?
We seem to have fallen into the trap of too many official sources. Without intending to, yes, they can confuse.
E.g. This , from a local official website
"The number of people in hospital with COVID-19 is currently (xx).There is not enough data to be certain about the severity of the Omicron variant, but even if it is less severe than Delta, we expect to see more people needing hospital treatment due to the increased transmissibility of this variant leading to many more people potentially becoming infected."

This may or may not be completely true, but it does seem to be at odds with what the recent daily figures suggest ( accepting that they are correct).
I quote them in a recent post 23314, which shows that the present infections are overwhelmingly Delta variants, as are the deaths.
And , by extrapolation,as are the recent explosive increase in cases.

So, is the latest data pointing to Omicron being less severe , or not.? Or don't know?

The figures suggest not. This advice suggests it will be.

I think the advice should go with the figures. We need to get a grip on infections from Delta, and Omicron both.

A lot of confusion at the moment seems to be because some are saying it's all going to be a big Omicron problem, whilst others are saying "Nothing in this Omicron scare, so no need to do much"

The truth is Delta is having a right go at us, and most have forgotten about it.!
It doesn't matter what name it is. Just try not to get it or spread it.

 

[Brads]

Spent the last 24 hours in bed thinking I might die after my booster yesterday

 

[Ethan]

My point is that within two days, Ferguson’s reported forecasts ranged from 5000 deaths per day to Omicron being no worse than a sniffle for the majority. Now I absolutely accept that it all depends on the context in which those comments were made, and how they are represented in the press/media, but how is that helpful?

Not everyone is blessed with your expertise, and I’m sure I’m not alone in having neither the time nor the inclination to read medical journals and published studies and data which appear online. I read the papers, watch the news, and listen to politicians and medical people (well, those allowed to speak publicly anyway), and in the main what I read, see and hear is so contradictory that the man and woman in the street have little hope of ever unraveling it all and getting to the bare truth.

I’m neither a denier nor a sceptic, not least because I have had Covid. I am merely a fella who, thanks largely to how the pandemic has been reported since Day One, no longer knows his Covid arse from his Covid elbow. And I’m sick of the confusion. It’s all around us - I see it here, I hear it at the golf club and in the pub.

I have no particular brief for Ferguson and I prefer solid data to forecasts too. Ferguson probably does not generate the data on which the forecasts are based, so I guess what happened is that the data he was provided with justified a pessimistic assumption, but then as more data came ion, it changed. The problem is that data tends to change, although gets better with time. It often starts closer to one extreme on the optimistic-pessimistic spectrum, then shifts to the other end, but gradually centralises around the "true" answer with time. Probably best not to keep changing the model output in the early stages as the data bounces around looking for more accurate answers.

The question of which data set is true/accurate and which is the proper basis for policy decisions is a trickier one. There is a principle in public health called the precautionary principle, which basically says that you should assume the worst as it is easier to course-correct from there than from assuming the best and having to scrabble to increase activities. So it is wise to have a margin for error and if you think there will be 1000 deaths, plan for 5000 instead. The effects of getting these things wrong tend to occur on an exponential scale.

 

[SteveW86]

Booster appointment at 2 this afternoon (booked it at 10pm last night), arrived at 1:45, back out the door a couple of minutes later. A very efficient process.

If the amount of empty pizza boxes around was anything to go by, the local dominos is doing very well!

 

[D-S]

Over a million jabs in arms yesterday, good to see one element working well at least.