Omicron
- Thread starter HarryVegas
- Start date
Laughing
Well-known member
The wave numbers are pretty consistent over the age groups, with a blip in the 70-79. Difficult to argue with numbers. We may well fare a bit better as well as we have higher vaccination rates.
Andy_W
Well-known member
Anti-vaxers are completely misunderstanding the above, as they think it's far weaker, but there's next to no evidence of that.
Of course there will be less hospitalisations and deaths as a percentage of cases in this wave, everyone agrees with this, but it's because they've been previously infected or vaccinated, and they're both good for reducing 90% of hospitalisations and deaths. Plus, we've already killed 150k of the most vulnerable.
Had they not been previously infected or vaccinated this omicron wave would have been much, much worse (and much worse than any delta wave), as it spreads much quicker, so more chance of overwhelming healthcare, which decreases quality of outcome.
There are very little signs it's "weaker" though:
Had we had this back in December 20, we would have been registering 10k deaths per day at the peak.
Andy_W
Well-known member
75% of their population have had Delta though, and they're 25% vax, with some crossover.
We're 25% infection, and 75% vax, with some crossover.
The results may be similar, but for different reasons.
The only reason it's down 90% though, is because of vaccination/ infection.
Admissions in London have doubled already, and we're not even at the peak, or anywhere near through the lag yet (probably two weeks away or so).
Majority of cases is in 20-29, 30-39 etc, 70+ is by far the lowest, then 60-69, but they're on their way up, the below is a log chart too, steepening lines like that on log charts isn't ever good:
Last edited:
dooderooni
Well-known member
Why is it seemingly so hard to just accept the middle ground of some restrictions being needed? Omicron looks like it'll be less deadly, but if a few restrictions stop a flood of cases hitting the NHS all at once then surely everyone will be a winner in the long run?
And another thing, with Covid passports, surely one of the benefits will be that more people will have a reason to be tested and as a result we should pick up more asymptomatic cases. If the vast majority of them act responsibly then that'll drive down case numbers and we'll all benefit from that.
And another thing, with Covid passports, surely one of the benefits will be that more people will have a reason to be tested and as a result we should pick up more asymptomatic cases. If the vast majority of them act responsibly then that'll drive down case numbers and we'll all benefit from that.
That's all well and good but Whitty is getting his information off the expert on here, who wouldn't.Cmon Randy you know the experts from SA don’t know what they’re talking about, Chris Whitty said so
Laughing
Well-known member
I would argue, Andy, that the research that that refers to, a UK study, would conclude there is "No evidence that omicron is less severe than delta" It's based only on UK cases. It would be more accurate to say "There is no evidence based on uk infections, one way or the other"
Laughing
Well-known member
We don't know the reason it is down 90% though Andy. For example, what vaccinations have been given in SA? I don't know but astra is performing less well than pfizer with omicron. We also don't know the infection rates, i suspect. We can draw conclusions from testing, but that isn't evidence of much, and I don't know how much testing they did and do in SA.
Jonny_Rondos_Disco_pants
Well-known member
‘No evidence’ Omicron less severe than Delta, say UK researchers
Weekend emergency meeting of ministers set to look at ‘pretty bleak’ data after third record day of new cases
on.ft.com
sorry, can’t find the full thread so there’s just a bit of a headline.
no idea what to think until we see actual graph data
it’s on Eric ‘Excitable’ Dings timeline. I’ll look later after everyone has piled in with opinion
Last edited:
Laughing
Well-known member
My point was Jonny, that we haven't had omicron long enough in the UK to draw conclusions from and the research was based solely on UK infections. The headline is misleading. It could equally say "No evidence that Omicron is more deadly than delta" and still be true.‘No evidence’ Omicron less severe than Delta, say UK researchers
Weekend emergency meeting of ministers set to look at ‘pretty bleak’ data after third record day of new cases
SA is further down the omicron road than us so any study based on SA infections would give a clearer picture, whatever that picture might be.
JM14
Well-known member
Does that study specify if people are being admitted due to covid, or other reasons but happen to have tested positive? Would assume with the current levels of the virus, plus the level of testing in hospitals there might be quite a bit of crossover between the two, and it may not be as alarming as this seems
Andy_W
Well-known member
No, Whitty is just an expert, and listening to and understanding other experts. If there's one person to listen to, it's him. Even better if you can understand what he means, but he's good at explaining and very careful with his words.
Andy_W
Well-known member
I think for us they had it down as 75% are coming in with covid, but the 25% that are catching covid in hospital (or coming in with other reasons) are certainly not going to be helped by it either. i.e catching covid whilst you're in a coma, or after a heart attack could be the thing which tips people over the edge.
Key thing to keep an eye on is the ICU numbers, but there will be more lag in those, then even more in deaths.
Last edited:
Andy_W
Well-known member
We do need more time, that's for sure. But banking on it being "milder" is quite careless, if we don't know, airing on the side of caution is likely the best move.
I think from our data they can probably already tell if it's milder or not, it just will have wider error bars, which will tighten by the day, especially if they just use London data for the time being.
They will get good data from the number of unvaxed in London too, which is quite a lot!
Hard to use SA data though, as it's not going to be as good, as relevant and not the same age groups etc. We won't know which cases have had delta, when, or if they've been vaccinated etc. None of them are boosted for example.
Jonny_Rondos_Disco_pants
Well-known member
Reading a few things about hospital transmission. It’s already putting pressure on some hospital shifts as staff are testing positive and having to isolate.
Andy_W
Well-known member
Exactly, it's just another thing with high transmission, not sure how the doctors and nurses are meant to avoid it, unless they're suited up all day every day at work and at home, which is unreasonable.
Laughing
Well-known member
I agree Andy, however, either accidentally or intentionally the headline was misleading. "No evidence to suggest" suggests there is evidence to suggest the counter. An example, There is no evidence to suggest he is not guilty, conjures the impression that they are guilty as sin.
it's the headline I have the problem with.
Andy_W
Well-known member
I think that headline is to counter the "Omicron is less deadly" headlines, and it's in no way as dangerous or as misleading as those headlines.
They're not saying it's more deadly either (for comparative infection), nobody is. They're just adopting the "it looks the same as delta" approach, which it does. If we overwhelm healthcare it would be more comparatively deadly though. There's seemingly more potential for it to be worse, than better.
Vaccines will wipe out 90% of what hospitalisations we would have had though, so unless cases end up 10x of the Alpha/ Delta peaks, we should not top previous hospitalisation records.
I've read the article now and they've based their preliminary findings on 15k Omicron cases in the UK, and compared that to what 100k of Delta would do (for comparative previous infection), so it's a decent number (more than I thought), and their results are not plucked out of thin air. Obviously since they done that, two days later they will have had double the data to use.
Laughing
Well-known member
I am going to respectfully disagree that the headline was used to counter the alternative. The headline should have reflected the findings, along wth the limited amount of data used to come to those findings. 15,000 omicron cases isn't a decent amount either Andy.
I wouldn't dismiss the research, nor what it is trying to achieve, the researchers didn't pick the headline, the FT did, or whomever they purchased the story from.
You can't clobber Randy for looking for good news then put that article up as a counter argument. "We'll all be fine" is as bad as "We're all doomed". To be fair I don't know that you have clobbered Randy, i can't remember which posters were.
Randy
Well-known member
I hope Andy hasn't labelled me and anti vaxxer with his initial response to that post. Sure sounded like it. If I was an anti vaxxer why would I have two jabs and the booster jab booked in for Monday morning?
