Omicron variant and the measures implemented in response to it

[yorkie]

Actually, reading some posts on here, I sense deep denial at work. Risk analysis requires analysis, not wilful ignoral.

Who is denying what?

I think those who refuse to accept that the endgame is endemic equilibrium are in denial.

 

[brad465]

The COVID Bedwetter Daily Mail is up to its usual tricks with a screaming headline about UK MAY NEED LOCKDOWN BEFORE DECEMBER 25TH and COVID INFECTIONS TOP 80,000 FOR THE FOURTH TIME SINCE START OF THE PANDEMIC

When you read the story, it says that "...Sajid Javid refused to rule out a lockdown before December 25th...", which is actually quite a different thing from saying that there will be, or that there is likely to be, a pre Christmas lockdown.

Except that Sajid Javid didn't actually say "..I refuse to rule out a lockdown before Christmas...".

What he actually said was "...There are no guarantees in this pandemic, I don't think. At this point we just have to keep everything under review..." and "..we do have to challenge data and underlying assumptions, I think that is appropriate, and take into account a broader set of facts..."

Which is actually quite encouraging, because it would imply that the government is prepared to challenge the doom laden predictions emanating from SAGE, and also take into account the wider economic, social and mental health implications of any new restrictions.

So although SAGE may demand a closure of indoor hospitality and a ban on household mixing, the actual level of restrictions may be less than that, such as indoor hospitality remaining open under the rules that existed between 17th May and 18th July this year, and strengthened guidance to reduce household mixing rather than an outright ban.

I also believe it is getting too late to announce a ban on household mixing for Christmas.

A lot of people have already travelled to the place they will be spending Christmas, if Euston station on Friday was anything to go by.

Others will have spent money on food for the people they are expecting, and are likely to stick two fingers up to any government order that they should not have any relatives round, especially after "Partygate".

The Daily Mail is all over the place on covid opinions, it's reported both sides of the argument as if it supports either one of them.

As for the Christmas household mixing matter, IIRC it was a year ago today that the Christmas mixing ban/tightening was introduced, and they haven't done so today, so yes I think it is possible there won't be any follow up. Even Wales' latest tightening doesn't start till the 27th.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Who is denying what?

I think those who refuse to accept that the endgame is endemic equilibrium are in denial.

Things is are we delaying getting to the endemic state by all our fiddling?

 

[kez19]

Who is denying what?

I think those who refuse to accept that the endgame is endemic equilibrium are in denial.

I wouldn't mind (not at you), what the actual endgame is as it just seems we are on this ride that never ends but we must hold on regardless.

Why can't politicians/SAGE/media be honest with the public than carrying on like this? Lives are at risk regardless be COVID or non-COVID related but it just feels its the blind leading the blind.

 

[brad465]

Things is are we delaying getting to the endemic state by all our fiddling?

Do you mean fiddling as in bringing in restrictions to suppress/delay infection onset? If so we've probably helped things along with infections running at a high level since June/July. Even in Brazil where things were disastrous at first, they've had very low infections for a while now, certainly helped by a recent vaccination drive, but I wouldn't be surprised if the long period of infections they had before then also helped with building immunity.

 

[farleigh]

Actually, reading some posts on here, I sense deep denial at work. Risk analysis requires analysis, not wilful ignoral.

Where is denial?

 

[Freightmaster]

The Daily Mail is all over the place on covid opinions, it's reported both sides of the argument as if it supports either one of them.

The Daily Mail Covid sub-editor earlier today:

(image shows the Mayor from Tim Burton's Nightmare before Christmas)

 

[Whistler40145]

Personally I don't take much notice of what The Daily Mail publishes

 

[eastdyke]

Gauteng:

Brief summary:
The initial wave of Omicron in Gauteng peaked around 8th December (reported 9th), both for new cases and 7 day average. The anomalous/spurious/suspicious figure reported on 12th December was originally 16716 cases higher and was attributed to reporting issues with the comment of more to come. This number was subsequently removed and has not reappeared, increased or been reallocated. If it was real, and all cases occurred in a single 7 day period, then the highest 7 day case rate could have been 2388 higher than in the table. That would of course now show the decline in cases to be even more rapid.

Deaths are rising slowly and need to be watched but numbers are still very low in a population of just over 15million, nothing like the numbers seen in Gauteng in previous waves. I am not sure of the with/from [Covid] conundrum in the reporting.

When Whitty stood in No.10 and pointed to the 'exponential rise' in Omicron cases in Gauteng he was very happy to use the data full on. Now everything he mentions about Gauteng is couched in terms of caution, even denial.

Gauteng is now not seeing the highest Provincial case rate in South Africa, the bare numbers in KwaZulu Natal are higher.

Comment:
This shift will no doubt be repeated across areas of the UK. The highest UK increases in case rates now seem to be London centric, whilst rates are still falling in many other parts. [eg Lambeth shows cases hugely up on 7 days ago whilst for Carlisle cases are slightly down] **

Data extracted from various pages here [E&OE]:

Coronavirus South Africa Overview | Covid-19 South Africa

This site serves as a monitoring tool for the development of the coronavirus in South Africa.

www.covid19sa.org

Order of columns:
Reported date (for day previous)|New cases (day)|New cases (7 day ave)|New deaths|New deaths (7 day ave)

23/11/21​	605​	​	0​	​	​
24/11/21​	1018​	​	2​	​	​
25/11/21​	1953​	​	3​	​	​
26/11/21​	2174​	​	6​	​	​
27/11/21​	2640​	​	4​	​	​
28/11/21​	2308​	​	1​	​	*​
29/11/21​	1910​	1802​	4​	3​	*​
30/11/21​	3143​	2164​	7​	4​	​
01/12/21​	6156​	2898​	11​	6​	​
02/12/21​	8281​	3802​	3​	6​	​
03/12/21​	11554​	5142​	6​	6​	​
04/12/21​	11625​	6426​	11​	7​	​
05/12/21​	7931​	7229​	1​	7​	*​
06/12/21​	4501​	7599​	5​	7​	*​
07/12/21​	8449​	8357​	13​	8​	​
08/12/21​	11703​	9150​	13​	8​	​
09/12/21​	11791​	9651​	7​	8​	​
10/12/21​	9250​	9321​	8​	9​	​
11/12/21​	8529​	8880​	18​	10​	​
12/12/21​	7488​	8816​	13​	11​	*​
13/12/21​	6216​	9061​	2​	11​	*​
14/12/21​	8658​	9091​	12​	11​	​
15/12/21​	7576​	8502​	21​	12​	​
16/12/21​	6748​	7781​	11​	13​	​
17/12/21​	5855​	7296​	24​	15​	​
18/12/21​	3468​	6573​	21​	15​	​
19/12/21​	3583​	6015​	1​	14​	*​

* Weekend - reported Sunday/Monday for Saturday/Sunday

Footnote:
I enjoyed my time, away from most of this, in Worcester. Many places to eat and drink.
I watched with bemused incredulity people eating in restaurants put a mask on to walk the few feet to the counter to order/pay.

Waylands Yard was a favourite for an alternative [to full English] breakfast.

Locations

We are located in Worcester and Birmingham. Serving up speciality coffee, freshly cooked breakfast, brunch, lunch & cakes to the good people of the Midlands.

www.waylandsyard.com

https://www.waylandsyard.com/s/WY-MENU-worc.pdf
eg

Eggy Crumpets (V) 8.0
Egg dipped crumpets, halloumi, chilli
jam, ketchup, chilli, herbs

** Edited to remove example UK data having discovered conflicts in the UK Coronavirus Dashboard.

 

[DustyBin]

Actually, reading some posts on here, I sense deep denial at work. Risk analysis requires analysis, not wilful ignoral.

I agree, there is indeed deep denial at work. There’s also evidence of a complete lack of analysis (not just risk analysis, analysis in general) in some posts. And critical thinking. All from those advocating restrictions……

 

[brad465]

The Daily Mail Covid sub-editor earlier today:

(image shows the Mayor from Tim Burton's Nightmare before Christmas)

And as if by magic, this is their front page tomorrow/today, covering the opposite view to the above article:

Tomorrow's Papers Today - UK Front Pages - Latest Newspaper Headlines

All of UK's Tomorrow's Front Pages ✅ Updated Daily between 7PM - 11pm ✅ The Mail, Express, Times, Guardian and many more Proudly supporting #buyapaper

www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk

 

[backontrack]

The Torygraft is reporting that Boris has been issued an ultimatum of three options:

1. Guidance - advice against indoor contacts, but no regulation
2. Cursory measures - household mixing curbed, social distancing brought back, no pub/restaurants after 8pm
3. "Full lockdown" - which was something I didn't know was back on the table at this point

They obviously can't justify a complete national lockdown given the fact that we've had an intense programme of vaccinations for some time (something we didn't have in 2020), Omicron looks milder, and now we're onto boosters. Public goodwill is thinner than Dominic Cummings' hair at this point in time and after seeing the party pictures, people won't take kindly to having their Christmases (and New Years) cancelled.

A cabinet minister says that Whitty and Vallance briefed cabinet, and the cabinet response was reportedly scathing. Only Gove and Javid apparently support lockdown. There's pressure on Johnson from Sunak, too, with the Chancellor having given him a day to give assent to a new wave of financial support for the hospitality industry.

Reportedly, Johnson favours the first option: guidance. The Scottish Government are currently recommending a maximum of three households bubble for Christmas, and this recommendation would be duplicated in England in that scenario. However, that's highly unlikely to flatten the peak while everyone waits for their boosters to kick in, so I'm a little sceptical of it merely because it seems like the best-possible-pathway to a January lockdown, as Whitty and Vallence won't be satisfied. And also, Johnson is but malleable clay. Toxic, highly problematic clay, but indeed malleable.

To be quite honest, at the moment, I think I'd take the second option if it were announced - simply because it's not the third. That's the only reason, really. I hope it's the first.

Here's the full article:
Boris Johnson considers plea to limit household mixing at Christmas (telegraph.co.uk)

Boris Johnson is considering urging the public to limit household mixing over Christmas, as he risks a new row with his Cabinet.

The Telegraph understands that the Prime Minister has been presented with three options drawn up by officials for further restrictions to curb the spread of omicron.
The lowest level of intervention would see families asked to limit indoor contacts, without legal enforcement.

However, Mr Johnson is also weighing up option two, which would mandate curbs on household mixing, the return of social distancing and an 8pm curfew on pubs and restaurants. Option three is the return to full lockdown.

However, Cabinet ministers warned on Sunday that such regulations would not be "stomached" by ministers.

The Prime Minister has already suffered the loss of Lord Frost, the Brexit negotiator, over the Plan B Covid measures. The Telegraph has been told one other Cabinet minister would be willing to follow him and quit if lockdown was reimposed.

The moves also risk a backlash from business, as Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor, was warned on Sunday that he has 24 hours to commit to a package of support or risk the permanent closure of 10,000 pubs and restaurants. The industry is already suffering owing to a dramatic fall in bookings and a surge in cancellations.

It comes as there were 82,886 new daily Covid cases, the third day in a row the number of confirmed infections was over 80,000.

However, there were also a record 904,598 booster jabs given on Saturday, according to the latest data.

Sajid Javid: ‘No guarantees in this pandemic’​

On Sunday, Sajid Javid refused to rule out further restrictions before Christmas.
The Health Secretary told the BBC's Andrew Marr Show: “There are no guarantees in this pandemic, I don’t think. At this point we just have to keep everything under review.”
He said it was time for people to act more cautiously, adding: “We know this thing is spreading rapidly. We know already now that in London, it’s around 80 per cent of infections, in England it’s around 60 per cent of infections.”
Mr Javid added he would be cutting down on hugs from his mother if he visits her over Christmas. “If I’m going to see my mum, for example, who’s elderly, like most very old people, she’s more vulnerable than younger people,” he said.
His comments came after the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) warned the number of infections could reach two million by the end of the month without tougher restrictions.

However, Mr Johnson was warned on Sunday he would face a Cabinet backlash if he adopted a ban on households mixing and closure of non-essential shops.
"The Cabinet aren’t stomaching any more restrictions right now,” said one Cabinet minister. “Apart from the fanatics, Michael Gove and Sajid Javid, the rest of them are pretty sensible, including the PM.”
The Cabinet was briefed on Saturday by Professor Chris Whitty, England’s chief medical officer, and Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief scientific adviser, who were "trying to soften us up for what [restrictions] were to come next," said a Cabinet minister.
The two scientists echoed Sage advisers in saying more measures were urgently required to stop hospital admissions soaring above 3,000 a day in England but the Cabinet minister claimed: "Their data was just trashed by the Cabinet. We tore them apart.
"There will be no more restrictions brought in by the backdoor. That would be fatal. More guidelines rather than restrictions are entirely possible.”

Guidance, rather than regulations, believed to be the most favoured option​

Mr Johnson is understood to favour the most 'light touch' option presented to him.
“It is guidance but not regulations on household mixing,” said a Government source - similar to the Scottish Government’s advice which currently urges families to limit gatherings to three households except on Christmas Day.
However, the source added: “The third tier is the heaviest covering everything up to and including lockdown. On the basis of the data, there are some who believe we could quite easily justify locking down before Christmas."
On Tuesday, Mr Johnson suffered the biggest rebellion of his premiership and was forced to rely on Labour votes to pass his Plan B regulations in the Commons.
Mr Javid reaffirmed that Parliament would be recalled if the Government sought to introduce more restrictions. He suggested ministers may need to act even if the data on omicron was still not clear. “If we wait until the data is perfect, it may be too late,” he said.
A government source said: “We have a plan in place which is Plan B, which we only introduced last week and we have the massive acceleration of the booster programme. We are looking at the impact of those.”

 

[duncanp]

The Torygraft is reporting that Boris has been issued an ultimatum of three options:

1. Guidance - advice against indoor contacts, but no regulation
2. Cursory measures - household mixing curbed, social distancing brought back, no pub/restaurants after 8pm
3. "Full lockdown" - which was something I didn't know was back on the table at this point

They obviously can't justify a complete national lockdown given the fact that we've had an intense programme of vaccinations for some time (something we didn't have in 2020), Omicron looks milder, and now we're onto boosters. Public goodwill is thinner than Dominic Cummings' hair at this point in time and after seeing the party pictures, people won't take kindly to having their Christmases (and New Years) cancelled.

A cabinet minister says that Whitty and Vallance briefed cabinet, and the cabinet response was reportedly scathing. Only Gove and Javid apparently support lockdown. There's pressure on Johnson from Sunak, too, with the Chancellor having given him a day to give assent to a new wave of financial support for the hospitality industry.

Reportedly, Johnson favours the first option: guidance. The Scottish Government are currently recommending a maximum of three households bubble for Christmas, and this recommendation would be duplicated in England in that scenario. However, that's highly unlikely to flatten the peak while everyone waits for their boosters to kick in, so I'm a little sceptical of it merely because it seems like the best-possible-pathway to a January lockdown, as Whitty and Vallence won't be satisfied. And also, Johnson is but malleable clay. Toxic, highly problematic clay, but indeed malleable.

To be quite honest, at the moment, I think I'd take the second option if it were announced - simply because it's not the third. That's the only reason, really. I hope it's the first.

Here's the full article:
Boris Johnson considers plea to limit household mixing at Christmas (telegraph.co.uk)

I posted this article in the support conversation thread, as I think it is quite significant.

I think you can discount the option of a full lockdown at the moment. All but two cabinet ministers are against it, and if a full lockdown were imposed there would be resignations from the government and a massive revolt within the parliamentart Conservative party.

It is also highly unlikely that there would be a lot of support for the second option. We know from last year that the 10pm closing time for pubs did not have much of an effect. If pubs were to close at 8pm, people would pile into the pub from lunchtime onwards (or Wetherspoons from 9am) and they would become progressively more crowded as the afternoon wears on. This is the exact opposite of what you want to happen. Closing at 8pm would also hurt pubs economically, and people would just go back and socialise at home afterwards anyway.

I think the first option is most likely, firstly because Boris Johnson is in favour of it himself, and also it doesn't require a politically difficult recall of parliament. MPs would not be in a good mood if they had to interrupt their Christmas holidays to vote on measures that would be highly unpopular with their constituents. If parliament were recalled, it is not out of the question that there could be a vote of no confidence in the government, and with the mood of Conservative backbenchers at the moment, there is no guarantee that the government would win such a vote.

The other significant point in the article is that the cabinet are questioning the dodgy scaremongering data presented to them by SAGE, Whitty and Vallance.

The two scientists echoed Sage advisers in saying more measures were urgently required to stop hospital admissions soaring above 3,000 a day in England but the Cabinet minister claimed: "Their data was just trashed by the Cabinet. We tore them apart.

This is very welcome, and about two years overdue.

 

[Pete_uk]

Ooh I would like to have been a fly on the wall!

 

[yorksrob]

According to the news on Radio 4, a good number of the cabinet want to see some real data befote assenting to any measures, rather than Ferguson's fantasy number-wang, so that's encouraging.

As others have mentioned, kerfews on hospitality and anything else are a completely pointless non-measure and designed to look as though you're doing something.

 

[Dent]

The Torygraft is reporting that Boris has been issued an ultimatum of three options:

Issued an ultimatum by whom, and what authority do they have to subject the prime minister to an ultimatum?

 

[Aaron1]

It's so good to see that the data is being challenged by the Cabinet, SAGE and Ferguson has been repeatedly wrong all throughout this pandemic with things never getting as bad as what they claim will happen, even when all restrictions were lifted it still never got as bad as what SAGE and Ferguson claimed, remember the 100,000 casesa day by the end of August, we didn't even get half of that.

 

[adc82140]

Issued an ultimatum by whom, and what authority do they have to subject the prime minister to an ultimatum?

That's journalese for "civil servants have drawn up a range of options"

 

[21C101]

I see Fraser Nelsons twitter debate is now being reported by him in the Teiegraph.

He also reports that several ministers have since contacted him and are none too happy with what he found.

I wonder if there is any connection between this and the recent cabinet meeting, led by one of Fraser Nelsons predecessors as editor of the Spectator "trashing" Whitty and Vallances data?

 

[Smidster]

You get the sense that today is going to be the big day - If there are going to be more restrictions then I would think the Press Conference would be this afternoon.

I think the guidance option is sensible - it is true that levels of illness are high at the moment so it does make sense to warn people that are particularly vulnerable that they may wish to take that into account but that ultimately it is the publics decision about the level of risk they are willing to accept.

That being said I fully expect them to go for Option B - For me Johnson does not have the authority to be seen to be going against "the Science" and he will calculate that restrictions command majority support.

A nervous 24 / 48 hours awaits!

 

[adc82140]

You get the sense that today is going to be the big day - If there are going to be more restrictions then I would think the Press Conference would be this afternoon.

I think the guidance option is sensible - it is true that levels of illness are high at the moment so it does make sense to warn people that are particularly vulnerable that they may wish to take that into account but that ultimately it is the publics decision about the level of risk they are willing to accept.

That being said I fully expect them to go for Option B - For me Johnson does not have the authority to be seen to be going against "the Science" and he will calculate that restrictions command majority support.

A nervous 24 / 48 hours awaits!

If they change any rules today, they will have outdone themselves compared to last year when they gave 6 days notice of the cancellation of Christmas. I don't expect that. For starters, by now many people will already be at the place they expect to be at Christmas. Travel tickets will have been bought. Food will have been bought. The government is inept, but not completely stupid.

It's also becoming clear that many members of the cabinet, including the holders of the big Offices of State like Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak are starting to get rather fed up with the "numberwanging" of SAGE. With each day that passes, it gets more difficult to justify restrictions based on the predicted hospitalisation rate when we are pushing way past the lag time, and admissions where Covid is the primary reason are flat.

 

[21C101]

It's also becoming clear that many members of the cabinet, including the holders of the big Offices of State like Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak are starting to get rather fed up with the "numberwanging" of SAGE. With each day that passes, it gets more difficult to justify restrictions based on the predicted hospitalisation rate when we are pushing way past the lag time, and admissions where Covid is the primary reason are flat.

I think we have Fraser Nelson to thank for the sudden re-emergence of backbones in cabinet.

On Saturday afternoon and Sunday morning all the usual pre lockdown announcement choreography was being put in place in the media.

 

[duncanp]

You get the sense that today is going to be the big day - If there are going to be more restrictions then I would think the Press Conference would be this afternoon.

I think the guidance option is sensible - it is true that levels of illness are high at the moment so it does make sense to warn people that are particularly vulnerable that they may wish to take that into account but that ultimately it is the publics decision about the level of risk they are willing to accept.

That being said I fully expect them to go for Option B - For me Johnson does not have the authority to be seen to be going against "the Science" and he will calculate that restrictions command majority support.

A nervous 24 / 48 hours awaits!

Remember that for option B or C to be implemented, Boris Johnson will have to recall parliament.

It is quite likely that the size of the rebellion on the Conservative back benches would be at least as big as last week, if not bigger, which means that the government would have to rely on Labour support to get the measures through.

It isn't that Boris Johnson doesn't have the "authority" to go against what is laughingly called "the science".

It is more that he doesn't have the ability to question the data that is presented to him, which has allowed SAGE, Whitty and Vallance to run rings around himright throughout the whole pandemic.

I really think he will go for the first option, possibly with a review date early in the new year, when the actual level of hospitalisation, as opposed to the random numbers generated by SAGE, will become clearer.

 

[Class 33]

Just watching GMB for a bit just now. They announced the results of their poll. Should there be a national lockdown before Christmas? 17% YES, 83% NO!

 

[duncanp]

Just watching GMB for a bit just now. They announced the results of their poll. Should there be a national lockdown before Christmas? 17% YES, 83% NO!

That is a good indication of public willingness to comply with any pre Christmas restrictions.

No doubt Whitty and Vallance will be putting the screws on Boris, trying to frighten him into believing that restrictions are necessary.

But Boris Johnson will have to get any new restrictions through the cabinet and parliament, which will be difficult if not impossible, and will cause fatal damage to his personal and political reputation.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

How many on this website think that mention of the numbers of front line NHS staff said to be affected and therefore reducing the numbers of available staff in hospitals are untruths?

 

[kristiang85]

How many on this website think that mention of the numbers of front line NHS staff said to be affected and therefore reducing the numbers of available staff in hospitals are untruths?

A lot of this is a result of policy, not the virus.

 

[duncanp]

How many on this website think that mention of the numbers of front line NHS staff said to be affected and therefore reducing the numbers of available staff in hospitals are untruths?

It is difficult or impossible for us to judge.

I think that significant numbers of NHS staff are self isolating because they have been "pinged" by the App, or have tested positive for COVID themselves.

There are two issues with this:-

• How accurate is the App? Has it been set to be too sensitive, so that it identifies more people than is strictly necessary as close contacts of an infected person?
• Is it really necessary to self isolate for 10 days, and could a shorter period combined with regular testing be more appropriate?

Shortening the self isolation period is one measure that could be taken immediately. This would reduce staff shortages, and the consequent stress and pressure on the NHS and its staff.

 

[Spamcan81]

I agree, there is indeed deep denial at work. There’s also evidence of a complete lack of analysis (not just risk analysis, analysis in general) in some posts. And critical thinking. All from those advocating restrictions……

Both sides of the argument are in denial if you ask me. They only look at evidence that supports their own particular narrative and deride anything that doesn't. There is insufficient evidence of what Omicron is really like IMO - although I'm sure more will become available as time goes by - so in the meantime I will err on the side of caution.

 

[adc82140]

It is difficult or impossible for us to judge.

I think that significant numbers of NHS staff are self isolating because they have been "pinged" by the App, or have tested positive for COVID themselves.

There are two issues with this:-

• How accurate is the App? Has it been set to be too sensitive, so that it identifies more people than is strictly necessary as close contacts of an infected person?
• Is it really necessary to self isolate for 10 days, and could a shorter period combined with regular testing be more appropriate?

Shortening the self isolation period is one measure that could be taken immediately. This would reduce staff shortages, and the consequent stress and pressure on the NHS and its staff.

The President of South Africa is back in the office today, 7 days after testing positive. The scientists in SA obviously think this is OK. What is so special about is that we feel we need to wreck the health service and other parts of the economy by demanding 10 day quarantines? If my maths is right, by reducing the quarantine to 7 days, immediately the staffing crisis is dropped by 1/4. You could reduce it by more if it was said that you remained in quarantine only until you test negative on a LFT.