Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion
- Thread starter Sasaferrato
- Start date
StoneRoad
heckling from the back!
I keep half an eye on the Manx plague situation, as I'm due a business visit over there "soon" ...
The main hospital has just re-opened their second covid ward & one of the main care home providers has closed their facilities to visitors.
All signs of an infection wave, one with potentially serious-ish results for the vulnerable, despite vaccinations etc.
At the same time, the Manx government has discarded all masking & social distancing restrictions. A move that mirrors the UK, but likewise to the reaction here, has been greeted with mixed feelings / reviews.
And no sign of cancelling the TT this year, although the normally excessively crowded & noisy "funfair" has been deleted from the scene.
The main hospital has just re-opened their second covid ward & one of the main care home providers has closed their facilities to visitors.
All signs of an infection wave, one with potentially serious-ish results for the vulnerable, despite vaccinations etc.
At the same time, the Manx government has discarded all masking & social distancing restrictions. A move that mirrors the UK, but likewise to the reaction here, has been greeted with mixed feelings / reviews.
And no sign of cancelling the TT this year, although the normally excessively crowded & noisy "funfair" has been deleted from the scene.
2hats
Dust.
Final round (8-31 March) of Imperial REACT as the plug is pulled on funding (report PDF).
1 in 16 across England testing positive, which is the highest recorded since the study began in March 2020. 94.7% of the samples were BA.2, with XE and XL recombinants also detected. Highest rates seen in 5-11 year olds (1 in 10 infected) though that was starting to fall. Cases in 55+ year olds were rising. Data suggested vaccination in secondary school children is helping to reduce infections in that age cohort.
www.imperial.ac.uk
1 in 16 across England testing positive, which is the highest recorded since the study began in March 2020. 94.7% of the samples were BA.2, with XE and XL recombinants also detected. Highest rates seen in 5-11 year olds (1 in 10 infected) though that was starting to fall. Cases in 55+ year olds were rising. Data suggested vaccination in secondary school children is helping to reduce infections in that age cohort.
1 in 16 infected with the coronavirus as REACT study records highest rates yet | Imperial News | Imperial College London
Coronavirus infections in England have climbed to a record level as the REACT programme reports the highest prevalence since it began in May 2020.
www.imperial.ac.uk
Last edited:
Hellsbells
World's best procrastinator
We do still have restrictions in all Health & social care settings in the isle of man though, so there's something. Masks, LFTs etc. Anyone who works in these settings also has to continue isolating if they test positive. Well, they have to isolate from their place of work, they're free to go to the pub or cinema.& spread a bit of covid there ....
StoneRoad
heckling from the back!
Ah, thank you - the info I was given didn't mention those details ...
elbows
Well-Known Member
Final round (8-31 March) of Imperial REACT as the plug is pulled on funding (report PDF).
1 in 16 across England testing positive, which is the highest recorded since the study began in March 2020. 94.7% of the samples were BA.2, with XE and XL recombinants also detected. Highest rates seen in 5-11 year olds (1 in 10 infected) though that was starting to fall. Cases in 55+ year olds were rising. Data suggested vaccination in secondary school children is helping to reduce infections in that age cohort.
View attachment 317370
1 in 16 infected with the coronavirus as REACT study records highest rates yet | Imperial News | Imperial College London
Coronavirus infections in England have climbed to a record level as the REACT programme reports the highest prevalence since it began in May 2020.
BBC article about both of those things:
Covid: React study finds latest wave 'may have peaked' in young
But the final React study found "worrying" signs that infections are still rising in those over 55.
www.bbc.co.uk
I'll take a look at hospitalisations by age group later this week.
Buddy Bradley
Pantheistic solipsist
How exactly is Test & Trace going to function now that we are buying our own LFT packs from the shops, which don't have the QR/reference codes on for reporting? There's literally no way to report a positive test now as far as I can see - even the gov.uk site states:
Buddy Bradley
Pantheistic solipsist
So is the assumption then that there's never going to be any kind of new variant that requires a return to stricter control measures?
StoneRoad
heckling from the back!
Didn't
Someone I used to work with rang me up to query how their phone was pinged by T&T on 2nd April to tell them that on Monday 28th March they were a close contact [15mins within 2m of a positive case] ... and what should they do ?
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
I suspect it will depend on how noticeable any increase in hospitalisation and deaths becomes now that infection has replaced boosters.
muscovyduck
Good IT skills and food hygiene competent
Isn't that the tracking system not the test and trace system? Glad to know that's still limping on though
wtfftw
melting like a toastie
They're just going to see if it turns up in the hospital data. Because acting early has no benefit.
gentlegreen
I hummus, therefore I am ...
This leaves me in a dilemma.
My go-to's are Victor Racaniello and Amy Rosenfeld. I skimmed their weekly session last night.
Amy still has 2024 pencilled-in for being on top of the virus (sub 1 case per 100k) depending on how vaccination takes off elsewhere ...
Victor - who is 60-something pointedly states that he doesn't mask up in NY wherever the mandates have been lifted - thanks to vaccination - and that the only group where he recommends masking is young children for whom vaccination isn't an option. I suppose I should make an effort to get on the live chat and ask the question - but my focus is elsewhere at the moment - perhaps virology fatigue has set in ...
So with my social isolation, if I continue to strive to never get infected by masking in shops, 1 year from now, with the virus still going around, will I be back substantially nearer to where I was pre-vaccination ?
Am I wilfully not accepting the new "vaccination strategy" ?
I felt I was getting dirty looks yesterday when I bought compost in a spacious drive-to homestore and was waiting behind an unmasked younger middle-aged couple buying just one pack of fancy toilet paper on a rainy day.
I suspect I get written off as a terrified pensioner these days ... my 85 year old mother is probably boosted as she spends time with the three other generations and is relatively sensible.
That said, the staff were mostly masked.
Last edited:
teuchter
je suis teuchter
I've never been clear about exactly how the app is connected to the test and trace system.
Test and trace is definitely closed though.
How to avoid catching and spreading COVID-19 infection.
Read NHS advice about how to reduce your risk of catching and spreading COVID-19 infection, and ease your symptoms at home.
www.nhs.uk
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
I've been really rather surprised at the number of people wearing masks in situations where they aren't obliged to. And people I've spoken to (generally older ones) are very much of the view that they're wearing masks to protect themselves and others, not because they are obliged to.
But I will (metaphorically) bite the head off anyone who gives me grief about wearing a mask.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Infection has not completely replaced boosters. There is a new booster campaign now, although it targets a much narrower group and there are questions about what uptake will be like and whether it will be expanded in the coming months. It is also expected that a broader booster campaign will feature again later, although the authorities probably want to try and make this a yearly event rather than every 6 months.
As for your follow up question, assuming you were speaking of being back to square one in terms of risk of severe disease, hospitalisation and death, this question is complicated and requires much more data that can only emerge with the passage of time. There will be assumptions that protection continues to wane over time, but the immune system has many parts and there will be big questions about how low the level of protection (expressed as reduced risk relative to being unvaccinated) will actually fall down to on average. And our risks in any given period also depend on the properties of the virus in circulation at the time.
elbows
Well-Known Member
I should probably also have said that the assumption is that we never really go all the way back to square one, because the reason a pandemic gets called a pandemic in the first place is total population immune naivety to the virus. And that naive immune situation cannot persist, especially when vaccines are added to the mix.
But thats not quite the same thing as public perceptions, where a certain level of future hospitalisation and death could still generate the impression that we were back to square one, or at least a sense of 'here we go again'.
But thats not quite the same thing as public perceptions, where a certain level of future hospitalisation and death could still generate the impression that we were back to square one, or at least a sense of 'here we go again'.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Even though testing is still in place for some scenarios, such as hospitalised patients, the testing changes are still going to have an affect on the quality of a broad range of data, and in some cases are being used to justify no longer publishing certain data.
For example on a good number of occasions I tried to demonstrate the realities of the vaccinated versus unvaccinated burden on the NHS by posting data showing number of people who were hospitalised or died by age group and vaccine status, data that more recently also included booster doses. However upon looking at this weeks vaccine surveillance report, I see the publication of this data has now ceased.
This is the final report where it was published:
For example on a good number of occasions I tried to demonstrate the realities of the vaccinated versus unvaccinated burden on the NHS by posting data showing number of people who were hospitalised or died by age group and vaccine status, data that more recently also included booster doses. However upon looking at this weeks vaccine surveillance report, I see the publication of this data has now ceased.
This is the final report where it was published:
elbows
Well-Known Member
The peak of the current wave in England looks like it happened long enough ago that it now shows up in daily hospital admissions/diagnoses, but not yet for total numbers in hospital beds. The admissions rises in the oldest age groups were quite bad in this wave, and the 85+ groups daily admissions are only just at what I could identify as a peak, so I retain a bit more caution about claiming a peak in that age group just in cases rises there resume. But expect more reports such as the ONS infection survey to identify a peak.
elbows
Well-Known Member
As expected:
Covid infections show signs of plateauing in UK
Nearly 4.9 million people would test positive for coronavirus, according to the ONS.
www.bbc.co.uk
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
That is what I was told (as union rep) by our university management. They admit they have 1000s of the things but they are only t one used in emergencies (serious local outbreak) as they going to be returned to the Health bodies.
FWIW I don't think management are spinning us a line on this, whatever failings they make they've been happy to distribute tests, so this is from UKSHA (or whoever).
elbows
Well-Known Member
There are lots of ways we are not encouraged to think about those numbers, and the media usually do their bit to go along with that.
To give another example, 42,452 deaths within 28 days of a positive test in the last year in the UK. A year that featured vaccines and treatments, but also a reopening agenda. Doesnt compare favourably to Vallances '20,000 would be a good result' comments near the start of the pandemic.
But of course ways have been found to muddy the waters these days. People who are satisfied with the current state of affairs will as ever point to the age of victims, and these days also to ideas such as plenty of those psitive case deaths being 'incidental'. And we might also expect availability of testing and attitudes towards covid to have further effects on both perceptions and data in future. For example the ONS version of the death stats relies on death certificate info, and the perceptions of those who fill in death certificates does vary over time.
All I can really do is repeat various points I make on this subject, and from time to time present various different versions of the data.
For example, for England the aforementioned period featured about 35,509 recorded deaths within 28 days of a positive test. But England also gives figures for deaths within 60 days of a positive test, and for that period the total is 46,923. If I use a years worth of ONS death certificate deaths for England instead, the number is 30,391.
There is quite a big difference between those numbers, for a number of reasons, and peoples attitudes will influence which number they consider to be most fair. There are strengths and weaknesses to all of them, some of which change over time, and also some forms of later death which dont show up much in the figures at all. And unlike the first two waves, we cannot gain as much insight from overall all-cause excess deaths, especially given far fewer influenza deaths than usual. Personally I end up using all of the above numbers to form a sense of the plausible range of likely covid deaths, rather than settling on a single number.
In terms of the number which the current UK political pandemic strategy would most prefer society to use as a guide, in order to continue to enable traditional establishment thinking and priorities to prevail, I expect the following ONS breakdown is where its at for them. Because for England and Wales figures are available which attempt to differentiate between 'Deaths involving COVID-19' and 'Deaths due to COVID-19'. And the difference between those two sets of numbers is not so small these days.
For example here are those ONS numbers for England and Wales in 2022 so far:
Giving 2022 totals of 12,767 for 'involving' and 8,753 for 'due to'. Its hard to make a 100% fair direct comparison to dashboard '28 day deaths' due to different reporting lag considerations, but approximately 16,785 would be the equivalent dashboard number for England and Wales.
elbows
Well-Known Member
When it comes to the death statistics, ongoing hospital testing means that its still a relevant metric. There have always been some community and sudden deaths, and reduced testing means we may expect some more of those to be missed going forwards, so I wont claim that the changes to testing have no impact on the death figures at all. But a lot of the deaths happen in the hospital setting so there are still plenty of opportunities for 'deaths within 28 days of a positive test' to feature.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Although if this sort of horror story is repeated across the country, I'll end up having to further tone down what I said in my last post:
www.independent.co.uk
For fucks sake, we seem determined to travel all the way back to square one in this country in terms of throwing away the most fundamental lessons learnt and establishment attitudes towards testing.
I know I never stop going on about hospital-acquired Covid, but it relly is important stuff and if I had one wish about the public inquiry, it would be that it could focus properly on this area in a ways that permanently changes attitudes. I dont think its likely though, it runs contrary to management thinking and deep-seated calculations in this country. Easier to write hollow articles earlier in the pandemic, pondering why we do so badly in this country without genuinely seeking answers to the question or any changes that would prevent a future repeat.
Further quotes in that article do cover the difficult balancing act involved, and I can appreciate some of those complexities. However its that sort of balancing act that I know is used to justify cold calculations in this country, and to settle for unacceptable results. Plus I always suspect that stuff brought in at moments of the greatest pressure, drastic, less than ideal stuff done to cope in the short term with a tragic lack of capacity, then become the norm in later times when actually we could go back to handling this stuff properly.
One more set of quotes since I take these issues so seriously:
‘Brutal’ NHS pressures stop Covid testing
Exclusive: ‘Things really are a mess right now ... you can’t treat anything if you don’t have beds,’ senior hospital worker says
www.independent.co.uk
For fucks sake, we seem determined to travel all the way back to square one in this country in terms of throwing away the most fundamental lessons learnt and establishment attitudes towards testing.
I know I never stop going on about hospital-acquired Covid, but it relly is important stuff and if I had one wish about the public inquiry, it would be that it could focus properly on this area in a ways that permanently changes attitudes. I dont think its likely though, it runs contrary to management thinking and deep-seated calculations in this country. Easier to write hollow articles earlier in the pandemic, pondering why we do so badly in this country without genuinely seeking answers to the question or any changes that would prevent a future repeat.
Further quotes in that article do cover the difficult balancing act involved, and I can appreciate some of those complexities. However its that sort of balancing act that I know is used to justify cold calculations in this country, and to settle for unacceptable results. Plus I always suspect that stuff brought in at moments of the greatest pressure, drastic, less than ideal stuff done to cope in the short term with a tragic lack of capacity, then become the norm in later times when actually we could go back to handling this stuff properly.
One more set of quotes since I take these issues so seriously:
Last edited:
elbows
Well-Known Member
Actually the later part of that article also deserves quoting, staff protection via PPE failings on display once again:
I'd go as far as to say that overall COVID-19 data for the North East has long implied to me that this part of the country does even worse than the rest in terms of hospital infections, a region that still sticks out even though there are plenty of other terrible examples elsewhere to choose from. But then I would say that because I believe hospital infections have been a major pandemic driver all the way along. One that deserves to be a much larger part of our perceptions about each wave we've faced here, and how far we've had to go in terms of restrictions in other settings in order to compensate for how the infection has spread in hospitals. And of course I cannot conclusively prove this without being able to compare our viral wave dynamics to places that do better, and properly measure all of this stuff, and are then prepared to have an open and honest discussion about it. And I'm powerless to affect this, I just hope that anyone who cares to think back on my pandemic output in years to come very much remembers how much I have always sought to emphasise this angle, and how distressed I am that it still seems to only occupy niche territory in the overall pandemic narratives.
I'd go as far as to say that overall COVID-19 data for the North East has long implied to me that this part of the country does even worse than the rest in terms of hospital infections, a region that still sticks out even though there are plenty of other terrible examples elsewhere to choose from. But then I would say that because I believe hospital infections have been a major pandemic driver all the way along. One that deserves to be a much larger part of our perceptions about each wave we've faced here, and how far we've had to go in terms of restrictions in other settings in order to compensate for how the infection has spread in hospitals. And of course I cannot conclusively prove this without being able to compare our viral wave dynamics to places that do better, and properly measure all of this stuff, and are then prepared to have an open and honest discussion about it. And I'm powerless to affect this, I just hope that anyone who cares to think back on my pandemic output in years to come very much remembers how much I have always sought to emphasise this angle, and how distressed I am that it still seems to only occupy niche territory in the overall pandemic narratives.
Similar threads
