Coronavirus: General discussion (see opening post for rules)

[Ditto]

Just look at the viral load at day 5. WTF are they thinking?

I do understand the apprehension, but a few things in relation to the graph.

• Assuming positivity is as a result of a LFT, that'll be Day 3 already so the 5 day rule would get you to Day 8. Whilst not as low as Day 10, or more depending on the start of counting, that's a viral load of what is shown for Day 5 on the chart.
  
• Is the chart to scale - I've no idea?
  
• Also, the chart is pre-Omicron variant, indeed probably pre-Delta as the chart I believe comes from an article written in November 2020.
  

 

For a more scientific understanding on why 5 days is now thought appropriate, it's worth reading the CDC article https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s1227-isolation-quarantine-guidance.html

 

So whilst initial the 5 day proposal sounds counter-intuitive there really is science behind it and I don't think it is right to just assume it driven by political desire 'to send the masses back to work'. If I were to be critical of YNW, I would suggest there should be much more emphasis on 'strict mask wearing' post 5 days for a period as suggested in the CDC paper.

[Ditto]

22% of UK known to have been infected so far, highest of all large countries.

For my interest what is the source for the 22% figure.

 

As it's known cases, I guess the true figure is much higher. I find it tricky to decide how to interpret the figure - is it a bad thing that suggests we have not had the virus under some sort of control. Or is it not so bad thing, meaning we will move to some kind of herd immunity sooner. I guess ones view could depend on whether you believe, with a mixture of science and behavioural change, we can dodge the virus indefinitely, or whether we believe we will move to 'living with it' like we do with the common flu.

 

Personally I'm torn between the two viewpoints.

[LeMarchand]

Looks like all restrictions apart from self-isolation ones are set to be scrapped on the 26th.

[jmak]

Looks like all restrictions apart from self-isolation ones are set to be scrapped on the 26th.

I think we should have a party [emoji12]

[mikeprice]

3 relatives have tested positive

 

1 is a real mystery - she went to her boyfriend's parents for a New Year's Eve party

it is rather strange but after that is seems like nearly everyone there has tested positive - clearly just a coincicidence!!

Anyway - she has had to do her quarantine at her boyfriend's parents house with him (sounds like a trial!!) and rang today to say she has tested negative and can come home

and was told not to bother as her brother has just tested positive!

 

on top of this grandson and his Dad have come down positive - as they test regularly the other kids are negative (so far!) and daughter-in-law is as wel - but as she had Covid a few weeks ago and is fully jabbed she was probably not vulnerable

 

so - yup - lots of people no longer taking it seriously - and this one spreads faster

 

but the numbers seem to be dropping - maybe

 

we shall see

 

we are just keeping the drawbridge pulled up!!

[kennysarmy]

I still haven't recovered from the last time. Nobody I know has had it 'mild'.

 

Nobody I play golf with is bad at golf, small samples eh?

[Rob_D]

Nobody I play golf with is bad at golf, small samples eh?

I find that hard to believe, every time my parents talk about golf, it's about how bad they and their friends are.

 

Anyway, back on topic. We finally got a new shipment of LFD's yesterday. So maybe the shortage is easing and testing will start to go up again.

[paulkerton]

Just look at the viral load at day 5. WTF are they thinking?

 

They're thinking "Operation Save BIG DAWWWGGGG"

[jmak]

The chart shows expected viral load at day 5 (or 8 depending on how you count), but the rule is 5 full days after first positive test AND two negative LFTs, so if your viral load hasn't gone below the threshold, you still have to isolate. For now...

 

Couldn't comment here on why I think they've made the change... Or why they're proposing completely dropping the requirement to isolate while hundreds of people per day are dying. But the risk of reducing isolation time the way they have currently isn't necessarily as bad as initial reading of the chart might suggest.

[malware]

The chart shows expected viral load at day 5 (or 8 depending on how you count), but the rule is 5 full days after first positive test AND two negative LFTs, so if your viral load hasn't gone below the threshold, you still have to isolate. For now...

 

Couldn't comment here on why I think they've made the change... Or why they're proposing completely dropping the requirement to isolate while hundreds of people per day are dying. But the risk of reducing isolation time the way they have currently isn't necessarily as bad as initial reading of the chart might suggest.

They've made the change because a sizable amount of people will test negative on the 5th day (whether it be because they took longer to test initially, or because of their immune system), I don't know a single person that thinks this is a bad idea unless they just like to hate the government for the sake of it.

 

As you say, 2 negative LFTs are still required!

[jmak]

They've made the change because a sizable amount of people will test negative on the 5th day (whether it be because they took longer to test initially, or because of their immune system), I don't know a single person that thinks this is a bad idea unless they just like to hate the government for the sake of it.

 

As you say, 2 negative LFTs are still required!

I know some people who work in a hospital where they're still admitting increasing numbers of patients with covid every day and have cancelled all non-urgent theatre lists because staff absence due to covid means that theatre staff have been redeployed to care for covid patients who don't think it's a brilliant idea...

 

They may be wrong, because their view isn't necessarily balanced by seeing the (undeniable) harm occurring in other areas for to the restrictions. That's probably because they've spent the last two years being unable to provide what they consider safe care for their patients due to the combined effects of the pandemic as well as watching a lot of patients become seriously ill and die from covid and haven't had time to participate in the test of society.

[malware]

I know some people who work in a hospital where they're still admitting increasing numbers of patients with covid every day and have cancelled all non-urgent theatre lists because staff absence due to covid means that theatre staff have been redeployed to care for covid patients who don't think it's a brilliant idea...

 

They may be wrong, because their view isn't necessarily balanced by seeing the (undeniable) harm occurring in other areas for to the restrictions. That's probably because they've spent the last two years being unable to provide what they consider safe care for their patients due to the combined effects of the pandemic as well as watching a lot of patients become seriously ill and die from covid and haven't had time to participate in the test of society.

Our main concern should be staff absences, reducing this to 5 days if they test negative on day 4 and 5 is vitally important.

 

I have noticed a lot of doomsayers on this forum, I, along with many of us, also have family that work on the covid wards and they each seem to have their own anecdotal experiences based on community transmission etc, I live in the Midlands, all I have heard is Omicron is a blessing in disguise.

[mavhc]

For my interest what is the source for the 22% figure.

 

As it's known cases, I guess the true figure is much higher. I find it tricky to decide how to interpret the figure - is it a bad thing that suggests we have not had the virus under some sort of control. Or is it not so bad thing, meaning we will move to some kind of herd immunity sooner. I guess ones view could depend on whether you believe, with a mixture of science and behavioural change, we can dodge the virus indefinitely, or whether we believe we will move to 'living with it' like we do with the common flu.

 

Personally I'm torn between the two viewpoints.

 

15305410/67200000 = 0.22775907738

 

The higher the R_0 number, the higher the Herd Immunity Threshold is, eg Covid 19 Alpha: R = 4-5, HIT = 75%-80%

Flu: 1.3, 23%

Measles: 12-18, 92-94%

 

Omicron somewhere between 5 and 10, so HIT is 80%-90%

[Ditto]

15305410/67200000 = 0.22775907738

 

The higher the R_0 number, the higher the Herd Immunity Threshold is, eg Covid 19 Alpha: R = 4-5, HIT = 75%-80%

Flu: 1.3, 23%

Measles: 12-18, 92-94%

 

Omicron somewhere between 5 and 10, so HIT is 80%-90%

The true figure is widely understood to be much higher though. I've not seen a figure that is really reliably convincing, but a Cambridge Uni study suggested 30-40% and that was before Omicron took off. In terms of immunity levels, it wouldn't provide much insight though, I think you need to consider both those who have had covid and those with varying degrees immunisation. ONS suggest over 96% of all adults in all UK countries have antibodies (source). With current infection numbers in adults, whilst it has a significant impact on severe disease, case numbers are clearly very high. In terms of the broad concept of herd immunity, I don't think covid is comparable with some other diseases, in part due to the frequency of breakthrough infection.

 

I think care needs to be taken when comparing R naught values too. Historically R0 would have related to a diseases 'spreadability' without other actions, including societal behaviour changes. For much of the time Covid has been we us, a good chunk of society has changed it's behaviour. I suspect Omicron is way up there with other highly contagious diseases.

I'm remain interested in your thoughts on percentages of covid infections though. Is it inevitable that over time it will sweep through the majority of the population, or can it be dodged?

Edited January 19, 2022 by Ditto

[sonofsanta]

8yo has just tested positive. Two years through a pandemic, and it's finally got to us

 

Now hoping he (a) doesn't pass it on to his 76 year old Nan who lives in the annexe (b) pass it on to his Mum who is just about to start immunosuppresant infusions (Tysabri) for MS, which wil undoubtedly be knocked back/threatened altogether by an infection © end up with any of the rather terrifying Long COVID symptoms. I've had post-viral fatigue before, it cost me a year, it ain't no fun at all.

 

If only the powers that be could see past the end of their balance sheets and just get the vaccines out as fast and as far as possible to stop all these bloody variants popping up, because we'll never be free of it so long as they're prioritising profits over actually ending this global pandemic.

[mavhc]

Everyone will have breathed in some virus, if you only got a few then you can easily fight it off, more and it's harder. So even saying that someone's been infected is hard to quantify

 

But do the antibodies they're testing for work with Omicron?, or COVID-21 as perhaps it should be called, new mutation, vaccines don't stop it, new symptoms, different transmissibility

 

On the antibody survey, they have 2 thresholds, at the bottom Antibodies by concentration threshold shows the difference between what's detectable and some higher number that's more relevant to the protection given I think.

 

It said they can tell the difference between infection and vaccine antibodies, but I don't see that data

 

Looks like about 3 million cases of Omicron in uk so far, guess it'll go back to rising faster now face masks are no longer magically required.

 

Problem isn't any one variant though, it's having so many hosts it has billions more chances to evolve, and the cycle continues. 10x fewer infected = 10x fewer mutations

[LeMarchand]

One of my schools has gone from <5 cases at the beginning of term to >30 now.

[Ditto]

On the topic on whether case numbers are truly falling, there's an interesting set of views shared. In time, the regular ONS random sampling will provide an indication of what has really happened in the time period in question. It'd be great if, when that time comes, we all post to say if each our expectations was right, wrong or somewhere in the middle.

With the latest ONS studies released https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/19january2022

it does indeed appear the case numbers did genuinely fall. From this, for me, it does dismiss the view it was to do with unavailability of tests or other factors.

 

What is additionally interesting is the ONS decided to publish earlier than usual with normal updates on Friday as usual.

[mavhc]

The cases have gone down more than the ONS numbers though

 

 

Edit as I cropped off the legend: orange is ONS percentage infected, blue is cases per day

Edited January 19, 2022 by mavhc

[Duranis]

With the latest ONS studies released https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/19january2022

it does indeed appear the case numbers did genuinely fall. From this, for me, it does dismiss the view it was to do with unavailability of tests or other factors.

 

What is additionally interesting is the ONS decided to publish earlier than usual with normal updates on Friday as usual.

 

Its reassuring that they are reporting a fall but the fall they are reporting is nowhere near what is being shown elsewhere. To me this is showing the exact opposite, the rapid fall is due mostly to other factors and is very little to do with an actual drop in the number of people infected.

 

Unless I'm completely misreading things? If the ONS study is showing a drop that isn't even half of what is shown elsewhere then surely there is something very wrong with at least one of these numbers? Especially as the ONS numbers up until the changes to testing and other malarky were generally a pretty close match?

[StevieM]

According to @mavhc's graph, the 3 big drops in infections were Christmas Day, New Year's Day and the first day of term. Hmmm...

[LeMarchand]

Czech singer dies after deliberately catching Covid. Apparently she thought that getting it and recovering naturally was better than vaccination... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60050996

[keyboards]

So students don't need to wear facemasks do staff still need to on is that down to the school.

[elsiegee40]

So students don't need to wear facemasks do staff still need to on is that down to the school.

 

All Plan B measures have been dropped. As Adults we are being trusted to wear them when necessary.

 

Your school could ask staff to continue to wear masks, but I suspect most will not as it would be difficult to enforce.

[DrBeaker]

All Plan B measures have been dropped. As Adults we are being trusted to wear them when necessary.

 

Your school could ask staff to continue to wear masks, but I suspect most will not as it would be difficult to enforce.

 

We've seen in only the 3rd week of the new term alone, the impact covid is currently having on staff, students etc. God knows what's going to happen know. We'll wait a few weeks term for the govt U-turn.