Covid - coming out of Lockdown 3 - no politics, less opinion and more facts and information.

[Nearholmer]

When a news organ puts anything in ‘…….’ That usually implies that they coined the term themselves. If they put proper quotation marks, it usually implies that it is traceable to some other source.

 

Having been written by medical professionals, I don’t think that document, which is the one Dr Campbell analysed in his video, contains either term.

 

The way the news is conveyed is journalism.

 

The Chief Medic of Scotland gave a long interview on The World at One, and he gave several reasons why it is necessary to wait for further work to be completed before forming a judgement on the likely affect of omicron in the U.K., the one that stuck in my mind being that the U.K. and SA demographics are very different. SA has a very young population*, and he was concerned that the affect of omicron on older people didn’t yet seem to be understood.

 

We just have to be patient, and hopefully not patients.
 

* SA: mean age 27; median lifespan 64. U.K. mean 40; median lifespan 83.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Andy Kirkham]

15 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

When a news organ puts anything in ‘…….’ That usually implies that they coined the term themselves. If they put proper quotation marks, it usually implies that it is traceable to some other source.

 

Well that is a convention I had no idea about. I thought the article was claiming that the WHO or some other authority had used the exact words   "super mild" to characterise Omicron.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Andy Kirkham

[Nearholmer]

When you Google “omicron super mild”, it brings up several uses of the term by newspapers and news websites, but no ink to the WHO, whose most recent bulletin on omicron is over a week old, and couched in very dry, cautious language.

 

Somebody must have said it first, or written it first, but I can’t work out who (no, not WHO).

 

I wonder if it is a paraphrasing of something from this interview https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/world/live-news/omicron-covid-19-variant-11-30-21/index.html because this is the doctor whose name seems to get linked with it.

 

Interestingly, a couple of websites that specialise in trying to understand the facts behind headline phrases have also been trying to find how it arose, and they put it down to out of context use of bits of what Dr Coutzee said shortly after she spotted an emerging issue.

 

Perils of the internet, with newspapers and websites all effectively quoting one another, rather than going back to source, I suspect.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Nearholmer

[monkeysarefun]

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

When you Google “omicron super mild”,  it brings up several uses of the term by newspapers and news websites  but no link to the WHO

Hey, when you google " first ashes test" it brings up  heaps of stories about Rory Burns getting bowled first ball!

Edited December 8, 2021 by monkeysarefun

[Dunsignalling]

There's possibly [!] a certain amount of journalistic wishful thinking and providing their readers (and advertisers*) with what they want to hear, going on at the moment. The daily print media looking for good news is something to which we are almost wholly unaccustomed; how worried should that make us? 

 

There is also a desperately terrified world-wide travel/tourism sector* anxious to propagate any fragment of positivity that might lead to an easing of international restrictions that present an existential threat to it. 

 

The people who should know, and in due course will, are properly being far more reticent.  

 

John

 

* especially in the Sunday editions

Edited December 8, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Nearholmer]

6 hours ago, monkeysarefun said:

Hey, when you google " first ashes test" it brings up  heaps of stories about Rory Burns getting bowled first ball!

You really are missing the whole point of cricket: it exists only as a vehicle by which people can bring shame upon themselves by turning a blind eye to persistent racism. (This may not make much sense given your distance from Yorkshire).

[Nearholmer]

Andy

 

Heres an article about the single and double quotation mark business: https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-times-curious-use-of-quotation-marks-in-headlines-46952.html

 

(no partisanship intended, it’s just that this chap seems to have spotted it and winkled into it quite deeply)

 

K

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Nearholmer

[monkeysarefun]

38 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

You really are missing the whole point of cricket: it exists only as a vehicle by which people can bring shame upon themselves by turning a blind eye to persistent racism. (This may not make much sense given your distance from Yorkshire).

No, we had a  rule that if you hit the ball over the neighbours fence it was 6 and out, but missed that one. 

[Oldddudders]

47 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

You really are missing the whole point of cricket: it exists only as a vehicle by which people can bring shame upon themselves by turning a blind eye to persistent racism. (This may not make much sense given your distance from Yorkshire).

I'd always been under the impression that Oz was traditionally pretty racist - white caucasians welcome, all others to provide a barrow-load of justification. 

[Nearholmer]

This could go badly.

 

Apologies for ever mentioning the R word.

[Bernard Lamb]

50 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

You really are missing the whole point of cricket: it exists only as a vehicle by which people can bring shame upon themselves by turning a blind eye to persistent racism. (This may not make much sense given your distance from Yorkshire).

On one side of The Pennines that might well be so, but over in Lancashire players of Asian origin have been welcomed and indeed encouraged to play for Lancashire League teams since the first of them arrived in the UK. Look at the top players in all categories for the last season.

Bernard

[Neil]

Had to chuckle at the Times front page this morning. 

[beast66606]

2 minutes ago, Neil said:

Had to chuckle at the Times front page this morning. 

 

Biden threatens Putin with gas embargo ? - the thought of windy Joe threatening anyone is funny I'll give you that.

[RJS1977]

1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

 

There is also a desperately terrified world-wide travel/tourism sector* anxious to propagate any fragment of positivity that might lead to an easing of international restrictions that present an existential threat to it. 

 

 

I'm afraid I have very little sympathy for the travel sector. Every time we appear to be making progress against the virus, they (through their chums in the media) DEMAND an easing of restrictions, and when those restrictions are lifted, within weeks we get a new variant that puts us straight back to square one again.

 

Remember that daily new cases were down to single figures in early summer 2020 before the first travel restrictions were lifted.

[EddieB]

36 minutes ago, monkeysarefun said:

No, we had a  rule that if you hit the ball over the neighbours fence it was 6 and out, but missed that one. 

Wasn't there an Aussie song "I scored a hundred in the back yard at mum's" (and another about taking a wicket)?

 

Ashes - it would have been a good score if England were playing snooker!

 

[Sorry to stray off topic].

[hayfield]

Back on topic

 

18 months ago the world was in a very bleak place, a new virus killing a lot of those infected and seemingly unstoppable

 

12 months ago the first vaccine was given to a patient, we were in a dark place but starting to see light at the end of the tunnel  

 

Now most over 12 have had the ability of having a vaccine, whether its 1, 2 or in some cases 3 doses, later this month a pill to help defeat the virus will be available for home use

 

We have mega levels of infection, but we are being repeatedly told the majority of the most seriously ill in hospital have not been vaccinated, therefore most of these serious infections were avoidable.

 

We have a new strain, far more vigorous than its predecessors, early reports are its a weaker strain. Let's hope so

 

The downside is we are seeing real issues still in many parts of Europe, its looking like the measures the UK have taken again (coming out of lockdown earlier than others as well as our vaccine campaigns) are starting to pay off. And we still have levels of high vaccine hesitancy in some areas

 

Last year we doubted we would be where we are today. 

[Not Jeremy]

Regarding "Moronic" not being quite as "Omicron" than "Delta", or whatever, I rather think the notion that it might be less harmful came from the factual reporting of what it had and had not "done" to those who had it from the Doctor who reported it to the world from South Africa.

 

Really, who gives a fig about some headline or other or where it came from, its the facts that ought to be considered.

 

Listening to the radio yesterday, it is astonishing (to me) that all the experts I heard being asked about it could not bring themelves to even slightly articulate or agree that it might not be as bad as the doomsday scenarios you lot are so fond of. I don't mean they shouldn't have expressed caution or given caveats (which they all did in spades), just admit the possibility that the outcome or prospect we face might possibly be better rather than worse. Crackers.

 

Time will tell, of course.

 

And please don't anyone tell me that South Africa is a different country or that it has a different age demographic, as I already know that, thank you very much.

 

So it seems we're either Fraser: "We're Doomed!"

 

Or Jones, "Dont Panic!" (Mr Mainwaring)

 

I'm with the Joneses myself.

[beast66606]

22 minutes ago, hayfield said:

We have mega levels of infection, but we are being repeatedly told the majority of the most seriously ill in hospital have not been vaccinated, therefore most of these serious infections were avoidable.

 

We are being told wrong, Dr Hilary repeated this on Lorraine the other day when he claimed 90% of patients in hospital are not vaccinated (he sort of added "Covid") which is a downright lie, it seems that lies on the "scared" side of the discussion are ok though - the figure is 35%. Table 9 in the linked document

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1037987/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-48.pdf

[boxbrownie]

14 hours ago, adb968008 said:

 

I trust very little that either of that pair say.

Really?  

[Andy Kirkham]

10 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

Really, who gives a fig about some headline or other or where it came from, its the facts that ought to be considered.

I think it could matter because knowing where a quote comes from enables us to judge whether it is is based on a fact or on speculation. If it had been the WHO that had characterised Omicron as "super mild", we could be fairly confident that this was based on adequate evidence, and could be regarded as a fact. If, as seems likely, it was an editorial paraphrase, then we can't draw any extra comfort from it.

 

On the other hand, the fact that not a single death has yet been attributed to Omicron does seem to be reason for optimism.

 

[Dunsignalling]

27 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

Regarding "Moronic" not being quite as "Omicron" than "Delta", or whatever, I rather think the notion that it might be less harmful came from the factual reporting of what it had and had not "done" to those who had it from the Doctor who reported it to the world from South Africa.

 

Really, who gives a fig about some headline or other or where it came from, its the facts that ought to be considered.

 

Listening to the radio yesterday, it is astonishing (to me) that all the experts I heard being asked about it could not bring themelves to even slightly articulate or agree that it might not be as bad as the doomsday scenarios you lot are so fond of. I don't mean they shouldn't have expressed caution or given caveats (which they all did in spades), just admit the possibility that the outcome or prospect we face might possibly be better rather than worse. Crackers.

 

Time will tell, of course.

 

And please don't anyone tell me that South Africa is a different country or that it has a different age demographic, as I already know that, thank you very much.

 

So it seems we're either Fraser: "We're Doomed!"

 

Or Jones, "Dont Panic!" (Mr Mainwaring)

 

I'm with the Joneses myself.

What was coming out of SA was (to paraphrase) "this looks as if it may be generating milder symptoms than earlier strains, but, it'll be several weeks before we can be certain."

 

I'm with neither on this one, but I won't be relaxing my guard until I know it's justified. 

 

John 

 

 

[Nearholmer]

See my previous post about Table 9.

 

It has to be read with a bit of care, because it tells you what it tells you, and not what it doesn't.

 

It tells you the proportions of admissions vaccinated vs not (and Table 10 tells you the proportion of deaths similarly), but what it doesnt tell you explicitly is anything about proportions of those who are most seriously ill, or proportions of those occupying ICU capacity.

 

It may be true that "vast majority of those most seriously ill in hospital with Covid are un-vaccinated", or it may not. Tables 9 and 10 taken together hint that that is not the case. They strongly hint that most the majority of the most seriously ill are frail elderly people who have been vaccinated. But, the tables simply don't contain the information that demonstrates conclusively one way or another.

 

I suspect (no figures to prove one way or the other, 'cos I still can't find any, despite wasting lots of time hunting) that the headline message that is both true, and needs to be shouted loud and clear, is that younger and middle-aged adults who have declined vaccination are consuming a hugely disproportionate amount of resource, occupying ICU beds for long periods etc..

 

I did find one solid indicator, in that at a point about six weeks ago 1:6 ICU beds occupied by Covid patients was occupied by un-vaccinated pregnant women, so younger women. In that case whether they had chosen to remain un-vaccinated or not is I think a bit complicated, because some will be young enough that they were only offered vaccination in the summer, after they had become pregnant, and they may have been caught in the early un-clarity about whether vaccination was a good idea or not for pregnant women.

 

As I've said before: I do wish that the "powers that be" would marshall solid facts, and use them to give the important messages clearly and honestly, whereas my impression is that the messaging is deliberately kept a bit opaque, for fear that clarity will provoke unhelpful responses (younger people consciously deciding not to get vaccinated, or take much care about acting as spreaders, because they deide that old people dying a few years earlier than otherwise really doesnt matter). The trouble with treating people like infants is that it encourages them to behave like infants.

[Nearholmer]

56 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

Really, who gives a fig about some headline or other or where it came from, its the facts that ought to be considered.

 

That's the very point isnt it: a quotation from an authoritative source is likely to contain facts, or at least well-thought-through opinion; a "quote" that is either a clumsy paraphrasing by a journalist, words randomly selected out of context, or just plain made-up is far less likely to contain facts or well-thought-through opinion. It may actually contain either lies, or serious distortions of the truth. And, people read headlines, and can easily mistake a 'quote' for a "quote", and form opinions, which inform their actions, based upon it.

 

It boils down to the same question that goes with having a nagging pain in the abdomen for weeks on end: is it wiser to take the advice of a qualified medical practitioner; or, the advice of that jovial boke who delivers the post every day?

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Dunsignalling]

Only [!] his personal experience, but the (very frustrated) doctor interviewed a week or so ago stated that of the Covid patients occupying ICU beds in the hospital where he worked, 90% were unvaccinated.

 

John

 

 

[Andy Hayter]

For all of the encouraging data coming out of South Africa we should remain circumspect - as indeed the real experts are being.

 

1.  As already said several times, the age profile of South Africans is rather different to N Europeans and younger people are are less susceptible to the virus and possibly this variant as well.  Equally vaccine uptake is different as well.

2.  Looking at the Tschwane graph it is clear that there are differences in the death rates and death propagation versus peak infection for different variants.  Delta shows the death and infection rates providing peaks very close to one another but for Beta there is a lag between the death rate peak and the infection peak.  How will it work with omicron?  Too soon to tell.  Their graphs do not show a peak for infection yet.

3.  Just because it is more mild does not mean we are out of the woods.  It certainly does seem to be more infectious.  So if it were three times more infectious but only half the number of people needed hospital treatment, that would cause a rise in hospitalisations or 50% over a very short period = health service chaos.

4.  If the variant runs wild and people have to isolate, what happens to our civilisation when there is a shortage of nurses, delivery drivers, supermarket shelf stackers and so on?

 

So let's be glad that the data so far suggests the omicron variant is showing some encouraging traits but equally let's not fool ourselves that this means it will be all over by Christmas - indeed we may be in the thick of it by Christmas.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Andy Hayter
typo and clarification