Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

[GB72]

Out of interest, and this may be a totally naive view on things, but has Omicron started to make the use of the term 'with covid' as far as admissions and deaths are concerned an issue. We know Omicron spreads quickly and is going through the UK like wildfire. There is also reports (right or wrong) that it is a milder form of Covid. Does that mean that, statistically, there is a much higher chance of any person being admitted to hospital having covid but a reduced chance that the cause of the admission or, sadly, death is statistically less likely to be as a result of the covid infection.

Again, not belittling any situation nor am i making a stance on any side, just looking at it objectively as these are the stats that the general public look at most.

 

[Ethan]

I wasn't shocked, I must say. It has been "an inconvenient truth " ever since the start of this thing, that people indoors in ordinary ventilated rooms, as in most places- bars , restaurants, etc, breathing each other's expelled air, is what is readily spreading this virus. To be in such a place without a mask is quite risky. If it isn't necessary to do it....then ...???

I think that was kinda known all along. The application of the Rule of 6 inside and outside, the nonsense of harassing people walking on the windswept Derbyshire hills started, limiting outdoor exercise, even not being able to touch the flagstick on golf courses were all unnecessary.

 

[Billysboots]

If folk need to be in hospital, that, to me, takes priority over 'being bold'!
To me, the 'balance' (actually, 'priority') has to be limiting excess deaths #1; protecting the NHS (well, hospitals) #2; economy #3. My reasoning is that #1 is an absolute must, #2 can be managed - and is essential for #1 and #3 economy will recover in due course.
I can't believe anyone is considering different priorities, though planning for when they can is acceptable - and expected.

But at what point do you start to think you’ve done enough? When there is nobody in hospital with Covid? A couple of hundred? Or when excess deaths are down to three figures, or two?

Covid is here to stay, so it must follow that hospital admissions and deaths will be a consequence. But we can’t always have restrictions because of it. There must come a time when self isolation with no symptoms is done away with, and we’re told to stay at home if we’re ill. And Welsh football fans are allowed back in grounds. In short, there has to be a time when life returns to something like the normal we used to know.

Until someone somewhere decides that can happen then prioritising, striking a balance or whatever we want to call it, has to continue and must be proportionate to the ongoing threat.

All of which brings me back to my original point, that being that, in the face of the current numbers in hospital and on ventilators in the context of the sky high numbers of daily infections, maybe the balance/priorities have been accurately assessed after all.

 

[Ethan]

Out of interest, and this may be a totally naive view on things, but has Omicron started to make the use of the term 'with covid' as far as admissions and deaths are concerned an issue. We know Omicron spreads quickly and is going through the UK like wildfire. There is also reports (right or wrong) that it is a milder form of Covid. Does that mean that, statistically, there is a much higher chance of any person being admitted to hospital having covid but a reduced chance that the cause of the admission or, sadly, death is statistically less likely to be as a result of the covid infection.

Again, not belittling any situation nor am i making a stance on any side, just looking at it objectively as these are the stats that the general public look at most.

So-called "Incidental Covid" has been a factor all along. It is debatable what it really means anyway. It would not be uncommon for an older person to be admitted with vague symptoms and just having gone off their feet or are more confused. They get into hospital and have a range of clinical signs, funny looking chest X-ray, a bit of anaemia and then they test positive for Covid. Are they a Covid case or not? Probably a mix of things.

We also know that people catch Covid in hospital. If you were admitted to have your appendix removed and caught Covid in hospital when a pretty nurse coughed on you, but you needed treatment for that case of Covid, then you are still a Covid case as far as I am concerned.

 

[Foxholer]

But at what point do you start to think you’ve done enough? When there is nobody in hospital with Covid? A couple of hundred? Or when excess deaths are down to three figures, or two?

I'm pretty sure there are folk considering (or at least getting around to considering) this sort of question already.

...
Covid is here to stay, so it must follow that hospital admissions and deaths will be a consequence. But we can’t always have restrictions because of it. There must come a time when self isolation with no symptoms is done away with, and we’re told to stay at home if we’re ill. And Welsh football fans are allowed back in grounds. In short, there has to be a time when life returns to something like the normal we used to know.

Until someone somewhere decides that can happen then prioritising, striking a balance or whatever we want to call it, has to continue and must be proportionate to the ongoing threat.

All of which brings me back to my original point, that being that, in the face of the current numbers in hospital and on ventilators in the context of the sky high numbers of daily infections, maybe the balance/priorities have been accurately assessed after all.

I agree

 

[GB72]

So-called "Incidental Covid" has been a factor all along. It is debatable what it really means anyway. It would not be uncommon for an older person to be admitted with vague symptoms and just having gone off their feet or are more confused. They get into hospital and have a range of clinical signs, funny looking chest X-ray, a bit of anaemia and then they test positive for Covid. Are they a Covid case or not? Probably a mix of things.

We also know that people catch Covid in hospital. If you were admitted to have your appendix removed and caught Covid in hospital when a pretty nurse coughed on you, but you needed treatment for Covid, then you are still a Covid case as far as I am concerned.

I agree, it has been an issue all along but was just looking as to whether it is swung to a degree as to make the figures significantly less relevant with a far higher chance of having covid on admission but a lower chance (Possibly) of covid being the cause of that admission.

 

[road2ruin]

We also know that people catch Covid in hospital. If you were admitted to have your appendix removed and caught Covid in hospital when a pretty nurse coughed on you, but you needed treatment for Covid, then you are still a Covid case as far as I am concerned.

But there are an awful lot of people who went in to have their appendix removed, caught Covid and didn't need any treatment for the Covid part who are still lumped into the Covid numbers. That's why they need to be taken with a pinch of salt IMO.

 

[Foxholer]

But there are an awful lot of people who went in to have their appendix removed, caught Covid and didn't need any treatment for the Covid part who are still lumped into the Covid numbers. That's why they need to be taken with a pinch of salt IMO.

Are there? Can you point to somewhere showing those numbers?

 

[ExRabbit]

Just over 1 million new cases in the last 6 days - and I guess we haven't had the full impact from NYE yet.

Should we be worried?

 

[road2ruin]

Are there? Can you point to somewhere showing those numbers?

It's been readily reported over the last few weeks that a lot (30-40%) of Covid admissions are people that went in with another ailment and were then tested positive for Covid. They weren't there for Covid, didn't need treatment for Covid however are included within the hospital admissions as a Covid number.

 

[Foxholer]

It's been readily reported over the last few weeks that a lot (30-40%) of Covid admissions are people that went in with another ailment and were then tested positive for Covid. They weren't there for Covid, didn't need treatment for Covid however are included within the hospital admissions as a Covid number.

I'm not doubting that that's happening. I'm simply challenging the veracity of the claimed numbers!
It's easy for someone with an 'alternative narrative' to simply invent numbers to support their story!
I'd like to see those cases listed separately from 'because of Covid', but it might be too late.

 

[GB72]

I'm not doubting that that's happening. I'm simply challenging the veracity of the claimed numbers!
It's easy for someone with an 'alternative narrative' to simply invent numbers to support their story!

My point was not based on a narrative but rather on probablity. If omicron is more infectious and more people have it then there is more chance of having it on admission but if (and a big if) it is milder, it is less likely to be the reason for going to hospital. Maybe now the figure needs to be hosital admissions due to covid and not with covid.

 

[D-S]

I'm not doubting that that's happening. I'm simply challenging the veracity of the claimed numbers!
It's easy for someone with an 'alternative narrative' to simply invent numbers to support their story!
I'd like to see those cases listed separately from 'because of Covid', but it might be too late.

There is a graph on admissions split 'with Covid' and 'for Covid' separately but can't find it at the moment. The other term I believe used is 'incidental Covid admissions' - if you search for this you might be able to find the split.

 

[Hobbit]

Surely all Covid cases need to be counted? It gives a more accurate R number and aids with planning.

 

[Ethan]

It's been readily reported over the last few weeks that a lot (30-40%) of Covid admissions are people that went in with another ailment and were then tested positive for Covid. They weren't there for Covid, didn't need treatment for Covid however are included within the hospital admissions as a Covid number.

It has been reported that a minority of patients tested positive in hospital and that wasn't the primary reason for their admission. I did not see data saying that none of them then needed treatment for Covid. I doubt that is true for all of them. For that observation to have any real value, though, we would need to see data that the proportion of "incidental Covid" has risen significantly.

 

[road2ruin]

I'm not doubting that that's happening. I'm simply challenging the veracity of the claimed numbers!
It's easy for someone with an 'alternative narrative' to simply invent numbers to support their story!
I'd like to see those cases listed separately from 'because of Covid', but it might be too late.

The article included an interview with Chris Hopson (chief executive of NHS Providers) who was talking about being careful about looking at hospital admissions alone, I can't find the exact numbers but it was around the 30% mark of all admissions where not for Covid but with.

 

[drdel]

If folk need to be in hospital, that, to me, takes priority over 'being bold'!
To me, the 'balance' (actually, 'priority') has to be limiting excess deaths #1; protecting the NHS (well, hospitals) #2; economy #3. My reasoning is that #1 is an absolute must, #2 can be managed - and is essential for #1 and #3 economy will recover in due course.
I can't believe anyone is considering different priorities, though planning for when they can is acceptable - and expected.

I tend to agree but your criteria aren't mutually exclusive which complicates a national policy. Poor economic activity is connected with poor health : the time lag being somewhat variable.

 

[Foxholer]

There is a graph on admissions split 'with Covid' and 'for Covid' separately but can't find it at the moment. The other term I believe used is 'incidental Covid admissions' - if you search for this you might be able to find the split.

Yeah, I think I found that in the doc set I quoted for another reason earlier in the thread.
Depending on an assumption (not been able to check yet, but will) that 'Total Beds' is normal ward plus ICU beds, the incidental count seems quite small (about 200 out of 9.5k), so nowhere near the 30-40%, at least for the day I checked. More like 3-4%! But I will try to confirm when I've dug further.
Edit. Given percentages quoted elsewhere, 25-30% seems to be the accepted value.

 

[Ethan]

The article included an interview with Chris Hopson (chief executive of NHS Providers) who was talking about being careful about looking at hospital admissions alone, I can't find the exact numbers but it was around the 30% mark of all admissions where not for Covid but with.

There were reports of a 33% rate of incidental Covid, which was higher than in early December. But in early December, there were a lot fewer patients in hospital with or because of Covid, so there are two separate factors changing. I think that we could see that number change further as the demographics of Omicron cases change, with more older and middle aged people getting it.

I think there is too much inference being applied to this issue.

Edit: Graphic from the Daily Wail. I am not seeing an onbbvious separation of the two lines. I suspect it changes a bit with the rate of transmission, but not seeing a dramatic effect.

 

[Foxholer]

I tend to agree but your criteria aren't mutually exclusive which complicates a national policy. Poor economic activity is connected with poor health : the time lag being somewhat variable.

Agreed. But the word I used was 'Priority', not the phrase 'forsaking everything else'!