Nobby_Barnes
Well-known member
Nice one Andy, interesting reading anyway
The 9am figures not disclosed yet?
- Thread starter bear66
- Start date
Borotommo
Well-known member
One of the highest risks, in my opinion, is not just the volume of hospitalisation, but the sheer volume of clinical staff who will catch this highly-transmissible variant, and therefore be forced to isolate. Demand rising as capacity falls. These lads and lasses are already stretched to breaking point. Fingers crossed this doesn’t pan out as badly as it could.
Andy_W
Well-known member
Yeah, one thing I've had in my mind is if they just decide/ ask covid positive staff to work on covid wards, it really could get that desperate as I don't see how they avoid it in their normal lives. It would be an incredibly drastic measure mind, albeit very short term. In reality they may just get forced to cut areas of care which they really would not want to do, which could cause major problems elsewhere short term. I hope it comes to neither though, but not sure what the chances are. I bet that's a "we'll cross that bridge if we come to it" scenario.
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
Some papers reporting in London, NE & Yorkshire cases are doubling every 1.5 days.
Billy Horner
Well-known member
Today's headline analysis:
• 91,743 new cases reported in 24-hour period, up from yesterday's 82,886
• 7-day average for new cases increases by 6.8% to 83,527 per day, following 6.6% increase yesterday (and 19th daily increase in the past 20 days)
• 7-day average for new cases is 60.8% higher than one week ago (from 51.9% higher yesterday) and 76.7% higher than two weeks ago (from 70.0% higher yesterday and 19.9% higher 7 days ago)
• 43 new deaths within 28 days of a positive test reported in 24-hour period, down from 45 yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths within 28 days of a positive test increases by 0.6% to 112.0 per day, following 0.9% decrease yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths within 28 days of a positive test is 5.7% lower than one week ago (from 6.6% lower yesterday) and 6.2% lower than two weeks ago (from 6.1% lower yesterday and 0.8% lower 7 days ago)
• 91,743 new cases reported in 24-hour period, up from yesterday's 82,886
• 7-day average for new cases increases by 6.8% to 83,527 per day, following 6.6% increase yesterday (and 19th daily increase in the past 20 days)
• 7-day average for new cases is 60.8% higher than one week ago (from 51.9% higher yesterday) and 76.7% higher than two weeks ago (from 70.0% higher yesterday and 19.9% higher 7 days ago)
• 43 new deaths within 28 days of a positive test reported in 24-hour period, down from 45 yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths within 28 days of a positive test increases by 0.6% to 112.0 per day, following 0.9% decrease yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths within 28 days of a positive test is 5.7% lower than one week ago (from 6.6% lower yesterday) and 6.2% lower than two weeks ago (from 6.1% lower yesterday and 0.8% lower 7 days ago)
NorthumberlandBoro
Well-known member
Is Omicron driving all of the growth in cases, or is Delta still growing?
If Omicron is less deadly than Delta is there potentially some benefit to it displacing Delta?
If Omicron is less deadly than Delta is there potentially some benefit to it displacing Delta?
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
If Omicron is doubling every 2 days these figures aren't helpful - they show that it's going up 10% a day. I don't know why the Government aren't clear with this.
Chris_Boro
Well-known member
Can getting Omicron results keep up though? There's surely a capacity to how many they can sequence on any given day and at 90k new cases per day, identifying each case is not going to happen.
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
That's the problem isn't it - so if the data doesn't give the correct number of infections it should be noted that this is the case and we should be given the best evidence / estimates out there as to the right figures.
Sky News announcing 8,044 new cases of Omicron. Hardly going to convince the public that there is 1,000,000 Omicron cases in the country now is it? We had 200,000 at the beginning of last week, with the 2 days doubling rate surely that should be the headlines?
Chris_Boro
Well-known member
The only caveat they gave was weekend reporting, but yes they should put more details out when reporting figures.
Andy_W
Well-known member
It's bad reporting, but the probably don't waant to use time epxlaining why, and likely not many would understand it anyway, or even care.
From the modelling, and S-Gene surveillance, Omicron is 90% of London, and over 50% for the UK now, these are the numbers to follow, and estimate from there. Also factor in for the 3-4x of infections which are missed.
Take the "Omicron Cases number" and throw it in the bin, they shouldn't even reporti it, as it's massively misleading, as that only represents the Covid infections which are then tested (around 1/4th to 1/5th), and an infection only becomes a case after a test of course. Then a small number of these tests are then sequenced, and confirmed Omicron. But, as we only sequence a small number of PCR's, and zero LFT's, that Omicron figure will always be way lower.
If we sequenced every PCR and it was found as Omicron, but we had twice as many user reported LFT's, then the max Omicron cases confirmed would be 33%.
Andy_W
Well-known member
They have it in the S-Gene dropout surveillance, or could work out an estimate, based on modelling the PCR results and extrapolating, rather than just using the "confirmed omicron case number", which is completely pointless on it's own.
Laughing
Well-known member
I don't doubt they do work out those numbers. Making them officially available to the public would be my preference.
I have wondered for a while whether Johnson is overplaying omicron so he can, a) look like he is acquiescing (spelling may be correct, or not) to the right wing of the party and b) to look like it is him that has allowed christmas to go ahead, and somehow try and leverage political capital from that.
Andy_W
Well-known member
The problem is they would be estimates, and people who don't get the numbers would think they've just been plucked out of thin air. They would be within 5% accuracy for confirmed cases I bet though, for the time they were done (which is good I think). Infections is harder, as we don't know whether we're 2x under or 5x under etc.
The daily Omicron number is probably 400% short of the actual number (around 50k) which should be from cases, and maybe 1600% down on the number of infections.
I think he's just been told to follow the science this time, rather than giving him a choice. He probably didn't want to do this, as it doesn't play well into the hands of the far right proppoing him up, but it will make him look better to the centrists, albeit the ship has sailed with them a long time ago.
We didn't know much two weeks ago, but we know more now, and they probably see a 2-3k hospitalisations (per day) peak as "as good as we can expect". I agree with that, but if it's looking like 4k then we will need to have a rethink. We may not even get 1-1.5k, and that would be great (a lot less bad even) considering we've had practically zero imposed restrictions.
Chris_Boro
Well-known member
Just heard the headlines on the radio, they just stated the confirmed number of Omicron cases and that it is down by a third. Nothing else, ridiculous reporting.
Laughing
Well-known member
I wasn't referring to estimates, but the actual percentage of positive tests. If that is going up, infections are going up, whether you do more or less tests daily.
I don't believe for a minute Johnson is following the science. He will do what he can get away with politically. If that aligns with SAGE advice then yes he is following the science, if not, then he won't. His position within the government is the only important thing for the man.
Andy_W
Well-known member
Ludicrous. It at least needs the following line: "this number is only a small proportion, as it's only based on PCR tests, and we only check 1/4 of these for Omicron", or whatever the number they do check is.
Andy_W
Well-known member
Yeah, they maybe could show that only as a percentage of the PCR's they sequence, but that would get skewed by locations too, as London is miles worse and NE miles better etc.
Yeah, maybe Boris has finally aligned with the centre, as due to less and less risk, the centre has moved more towards his stagnant position. If only he had been there (where the centreists/ Sage/ Whitty are) from the start, and then moved as the centre moved!