OT: not a merry Christmas

On 12/24/2021 6:19 AM, Don Y wrote:
> On 12/24/2021 4:22 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> I have news from Japan where the number of Covid cases is "high" for them at 
>> 500/day (mostly centred around and on US bases) and my friends say it is 
>> fairly safe there but boring. They envy the UK's apparent freedom and having 
>> life as "normal" (that is how it is reported on TV).
> 
> I'm not sure *anyone* has got the "messaging" correct.
> 
> The northern part of the US is apparently seeing a surge -- attributed
> to moving indoors with the colder weather.  If that's the case, then
> explaining our increase infection rate would need another cause
> as there's no need to be indoors (when it's 25+C outdoors).  The
> influz of winter visitors is likely to blame as is the lack of
> masks (amusing to see couples in the stores:  she masked, he without!
> Does she really think she's protected if she shares a home/bed with
> him?)
> 
> At 3K cases per day (in a state of just 6M souls), its not hard
> to see our 1.3M cases eventually cover all residents!
> 
> There is an emphasis on at-home test kits (our libraries are
> giving them out, free of charge).  But, no one stressing that
> the kit just gives you your *approximate* status -- at a
> single point in time!  And, says nothing about "tomorrow",
> etc.
> 
> It seems akin to publishing detailed pans for building in-home
> bomb shelters (cold war) and totally glossing over the fact that
> the effort expended will amount to naught!

[The tie in with your above statement:]

But, life is largely "normal" (non-boring), here!
[OTOH, it's been basically that way from the beginning,
trading lives and illness for normalcy]   :-/

On 24/12/2021 13:19, Don Y wrote:
> On 12/24/2021 4:22 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> I have news from Japan where the number of Covid cases is "high" for 
>> them at 500/day (mostly centred around and on US bases) and my friends 
>> say it is fairly safe there but boring. They envy the UK's apparent 
>> freedom and having life as "normal" (that is how it is reported on TV).
> 
> I'm not sure *anyone* has got the "messaging" correct.
> 
> The northern part of the US is apparently seeing a surge -- attributed
> to moving indoors with the colder weather.  If that's the case, then
> explaining our increase infection rate would need another cause
> as there's no need to be indoors (when it's 25+C outdoors).  The
> influz of winter visitors is likely to blame as is the lack of
> masks (amusing to see couples in the stores:  she masked, he without!
> Does she really think she's protected if she shares a home/bed with
> him?)

What choice does she have? Anyway for the most part simple masks as worn 
by the public protect the environment from them being infected not the 
other way around (although a small benefit has been shown).

What puzzles me about the US stats is that CDC are claiming Omicron is 
now at 90% of all cases in some Eastern states and 70% overall.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/omicron-accounts-for-90percent-of-covid-cases-in-some-parts-of-the-us-cdc-director-says.html

This seems impossibly high to me - UK is seeing about 70% of omicron 
cases at present and close to 90% in London where it has really got a 
hold and we should be in advance of you. How did the US spread Omicron 
so fast or are they being sloppy in the testing and confusing a high 
level of residual Alpha with Omega (both are S-gene dropouts).

Their sequencing data shows about 12% (of what?) truly Omicron. The 
reporting of data over there is incredibly confusing. UK sequences a 
fairly high proportion of suspected Omicron (or rather they did).
> 
> At 3K cases per day (in a state of just 6M souls), its not hard
> to see our 1.3M cases eventually cover all residents!

That isn't too bad really. UK has been twice that level since July and 
we are now headed for 5x your level of infection (maybe higher still).

It is the nature of pandemics to burn out on a timescale of 3-5 years - 
by then most people have either had it and recovered or are dead.

> There is an emphasis on at-home test kits (our libraries are
> giving them out, free of charge).  But, no one stressing that
> the kit just gives you your *approximate* status -- at a
> single point in time!  And, says nothing about "tomorrow",
> etc.

Problem with the quick home test lateral flow tests is that they give 
false negatives too often to be helpful if used on people without 
symptoms as a permission to do something risky.

They were designed to test people with plausible symptoms where they 
stand a much better chance of working but even then the gold standard 
test can fail up to 20% of the time! Positive means danger but a 
negative result does not mean safe - that is a big problem with how they 
are now being used by the public (encouraged by the politicians).

> It seems akin to publishing detailed pans for building in-home
> bomb shelters (cold war) and totally glossing over the fact that
> the effort expended will amount to naught!

Being seen to be doing something is part of it.

UK has different policies in England (crazy free for all), with 
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all being more sensible.

It remains to be seen who if anyone has called it right.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 12/24/2021 6:51 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 24/12/2021 13:19, Don Y wrote:
>> On 12/24/2021 4:22 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> I have news from Japan where the number of Covid cases is "high" for them at 
>>> 500/day (mostly centred around and on US bases) and my friends say it is 
>>> fairly safe there but boring. They envy the UK's apparent freedom and having 
>>> life as "normal" (that is how it is reported on TV).
>>
>> I'm not sure *anyone* has got the "messaging" correct.
>>
>> The northern part of the US is apparently seeing a surge -- attributed
>> to moving indoors with the colder weather.  If that's the case, then
>> explaining our increase infection rate would need another cause
>> as there's no need to be indoors (when it's 25+C outdoors).  The
>> influz of winter visitors is likely to blame as is the lack of
>> masks (amusing to see couples in the stores:  she masked, he without!
>> Does she really think she's protected if she shares a home/bed with
>> him?)
> 
> What choice does she have?

Unless you've hooked up with a "doormat", I've never known women to
be shy about expressing their displeasure in certain behaviors!
I bake biscotti every 2 weeks for SWMBO.  And, leave the kitchen
in essentially the same (clean) state that it was in when I began
(though the pots, pans, cooling racks, etc. will be stacked in the
drainer to air dry).

*But*, I never give the counter a "once over" to clean up any
crumbs that have been generated when slicing them!  (I just
don't think about that issue).

She reminds me of this each time I bake them.  And, I have
no problem forgetting about it two weeks hence!  (I figure
I've got some leverage as the easiest way to keep the counter
clean is simply NOT to bake *her* biscotti!)

I would assume if prophylactic measures were important to
you ("her", in my initial statement), you would take a more
forceful stand with "him".

SWMBO is a higher covid risk than I so I do *all* of the
shopping, etc.  Not only is she medically more at risk
but, also, less "situationally aware" than I am.  She'd
be the type who would notice the store didn't have X on the
shelf and would think about alternatives -- IN THE STORE
(whereas I'll come home and put an alternative on the list
for my next visit!)

> Anyway for the most part simple masks as worn by the 
> public protect the environment from them being infected not the other way 
> around (although a small benefit has been shown).

N95 masks are now pretty readily available.  And, they tend to
inherently fit better than cloth/surgical masks.  So, even if your
concern is solely for your own health, there are options available
to *you*, even if those around you are covidiots.

> What puzzles me about the US stats is that CDC are claiming Omicron is now at 
> 90% of all cases in some Eastern states and 70% overall.
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/omicron-accounts-for-90percent-of-covid-cases-in-some-parts-of-the-us-cdc-director-says.html 

I wouldn't put too much faith in the testing numbers.  I don't hear
of widespread genomic testing being in place -- despite having several
friends working in various parts of the healthcare system.

> This seems impossibly high to me - UK is seeing about 70% of omicron cases at 
> present and close to 90% in London where it has really got a hold and we should 
> be in advance of you. How did the US spread Omicron so fast or are they being 
> sloppy in the testing and confusing a high level of residual Alpha with Omega 
> (both are S-gene dropouts).
> 
> Their sequencing data shows about 12% (of what?) truly Omicron. The reporting 
> of data over there is incredibly confusing. UK sequences a fairly high 
> proportion of suspected Omicron (or rather they did).

Each state has its own rules for testing.  *Imagine the Mayor of London
being able to declare how testing is done (in which instances) on ALL
cases in London -- and the Mayor of Manchester having an entirely
different idea on that subject.  How would your NIH reconcile the
differences?

>> At 3K cases per day (in a state of just 6M souls), its not hard
>> to see our 1.3M cases eventually cover all residents!
> 
> That isn't too bad really. UK has been twice that level since July and we are 
> now headed for 5x your level of infection (maybe higher still).

England has 10X the population.  Or, have you normalized per unit-population?

> It is the nature of pandemics to burn out on a timescale of 3-5 years - by then 
> most people have either had it and recovered or are dead.
> 
>> There is an emphasis on at-home test kits (our libraries are
>> giving them out, free of charge).  But, no one stressing that
>> the kit just gives you your *approximate* status -- at a
>> single point in time!  And, says nothing about "tomorrow",
>> etc.
> 
> Problem with the quick home test lateral flow tests is that they give false 
> negatives too often to be helpful if used on people without symptoms as a 
> permission to do something risky.

Test kits contain two tests -- suggested "per individual".  So, you
could, theoretically, test yourself earlier and then later (closer to
your scheduled event).  But, it still tells you very little about
your risk to others (and practically NOTHING about others' risks
to *you*!)

As the approach was hastily thrown together, there is no systematic
data collection involved.  Fill out a form, get a test kit.  No
check as to the validity (or uniqueness) of your information.  And,
if it is suspect, then how can the gummit drive the collection from
THEIR end (you are expected to self-report your results).

> They were designed to test people with plausible symptoms where they stand a 
> much better chance of working but even then the gold standard test can fail up 
> to 20% of the time! Positive means danger but a negative result does not mean 
> safe - that is a big problem with how they are now being used by the public 
> (encouraged by the politicians).

In our case, we put the test kits on a shelf as a hook to clue us
in on any *suspected* exposure.  Having to engage with the healthcare
system when you *think* you may have been exposed/develop symptoms
is likely too late for any low cost/risk remedy.

We've chatted with our providers as to our own states of health
and risk factors and have put in place mechanisms to, hopefully,
jumpstart a response to a possible infection before it takes
hold (e.g., laying in medications in anticipation of needing
them) -- and before you can get an appointment to SEE the provider!

>> It seems akin to publishing detailed pans for building in-home
>> bomb shelters (cold war) and totally glossing over the fact that
>> the effort expended will amount to naught!
> 
> Being seen to be doing something is part of it.

Of course!  By the same token, folks queuing to get tested
gives them some peace of mind that they've "done something"...
even if what they've done is effectively meaningless.

E.g., the bomb shelter analogy.

> UK has different policies in England (crazy free for all), with Scotland, Wales 
> and Northern Ireland all being more sensible.
> 
> It remains to be seen who if anyone has called it right.

Reporting, here, downplays the extent of the problem.  If
you simply look at the numbers (and talk to hospital staff),
you'd have far more cause for concern.

[SWMBO worked for a VP at one of the larger local hospitals so
has many friends/contacts with The Inside Dope.  Add to that,
friends and neighbors who are part of that industry and
what you hear is considerably more alarming than how it
is being reported -- likely because advertisers don't
want to spook potential customers!  :-/ ]

My concern isn't the immediacy of the problem (though I
worry about having to be hospitalized for some OTHER
need and finding beds full of covidiots).  Rather, I
am concerned with what we'll discover years down the road
regarding long-term damage to vital organs... and possible
health/quality of life consequences (evident only after
you've been deprived of a chance to DO something about it!)

Or, we'll discover that folks are reluctant to enter that field
having seen/heard horror stories of the conditions those
providers faced.  What do you do when there aren't enough doctors
and nurses to address the population?  (Import more Pakistani doctors?)

On Friday, December 24, 2021 at 8:51:17 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 24/12/2021 13:19, Don Y wrote: 
> > On 12/24/2021 4:22 AM, Martin Brown wrote: 
> >> I have news from Japan where the number of Covid cases is "high" for 
> >> them at 500/day (mostly centred around and on US bases) and my friends 
> >> say it is fairly safe there but boring. They envy the UK's apparent 
> >> freedom and having life as "normal" (that is how it is reported on TV). 
> > 
> > I'm not sure *anyone* has got the "messaging" correct. 
> > 
> > The northern part of the US is apparently seeing a surge -- attributed 
> > to moving indoors with the colder weather.  If that's the case, then 
> > explaining our increase infection rate would need another cause 
> > as there's no need to be indoors (when it's 25+C outdoors).  The 
> > influz of winter visitors is likely to blame as is the lack of 
> > masks (amusing to see couples in the stores:  she masked, he without! 
> > Does she really think she's protected if she shares a home/bed with 
> > him?)
> What choice does she have? Anyway for the most part simple masks as worn 
> by the public protect the environment from them being infected not the 
> other way around (although a small benefit has been shown). 
> 
> What puzzles me about the US stats is that CDC are claiming Omicron is 
> now at 90% of all cases in some Eastern states and 70% overall. 
> 
> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/omicron-accounts-for-90percent-of-covid-cases-in-some-parts-of-the-us-cdc-director-says.html 
> 
> This seems impossibly high to me - UK is seeing about 70% of omicron 
> cases at present and close to 90% in London where it has really got a 
> hold and we should be in advance of you. How did the US spread Omicron 
> so fast or are they being sloppy in the testing and confusing a high 
> level of residual Alpha with Omega (both are S-gene dropouts). 

I don't get what you don't understand.  By all accounts the Omicron variant spreads VERY rapidly.  While the initial detections came a bit later in the US, the virus has spread widely in the same time frame as in the UK.  So I would expect the infection ratios to be about the same.  


> Their sequencing data shows about 12% (of what?) truly Omicron. The 
> reporting of data over there is incredibly confusing. UK sequences a 
> fairly high proportion of suspected Omicron (or rather they did).

I don't understand what you are saying here.  What is 12%???  What does "truly Omicron" mean???  I didn't know there was any way of detecting variants other than by sequencing the virus. 


> > At 3K cases per day (in a state of just 6M souls), its not hard 
> > to see our 1.3M cases eventually cover all residents!
> That isn't too bad really. UK has been twice that level since July and 
> we are now headed for 5x your level of infection (maybe higher still). 

You are talking total daily infection rate?  I think the two countries are within a factor of two.  Both are headed up very steeply.  


> It is the nature of pandemics to burn out on a timescale of 3-5 years - 
> by then most people have either had it and recovered or are dead. 

We will see.  The vaccine has the potential for ending it much sooner, but we need to get it to the rest of the world.  New variants 

> > There is an emphasis on at-home test kits (our libraries are 
> > giving them out, free of charge).  But, no one stressing that 
> > the kit just gives you your *approximate* status -- at a 
> > single point in time!  And, says nothing about "tomorrow", 
> > etc.
> Problem with the quick home test lateral flow tests is that they give 
> false negatives too often to be helpful if used on people without 
> symptoms as a permission to do something risky. 
> 
> They were designed to test people with plausible symptoms where they 
> stand a much better chance of working but even then the gold standard 
> test can fail up to 20% of the time! Positive means danger but a 
> negative result does not mean safe - that is a big problem with how they 
> are now being used by the public (encouraged by the politicians).
> > It seems akin to publishing detailed pans for building in-home 
> > bomb shelters (cold war) and totally glossing over the fact that 
> > the effort expended will amount to naught!
> Being seen to be doing something is part of it. 

Not really.  Masking is far from perfect, but has real impact.  Distancing is even more effective if properly done.  Standing 6 feet apart in the skyway leading to an airplane is pointless really, especially when you consider you will end up on the plane surrounded by up to 8 people all just two feet away for some hours!  Yet that's a situation where you will end up being arrested if you don't follow the rules. 


> UK has different policies in England (crazy free for all), with 
> Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all being more sensible. 
> 
> It remains to be seen who if anyone has called it right. 

The main issue is this new variant seems to be so much more infectious.  Australia was doing very well until the Delta variant hit.  Now Omicron is really running away.  I suppose it spreads so easily that track and trace may not be able to keep up with it.  This really may not stop until each country actually reaches herd immunity!  In the US that's probably is only another 50 million infections among the unvaccinated.  So maybe half a million more deaths.  

-- 

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 Desperate LIAR wrote:
====================
>
> Looky! Phil Allison is talking about himself again! 

**  FFS    IEEE Bill is talking of himself -   narcissistically as always.  

> > He says...
>
> > ** " Time wounds all heels. "

> Nope. 

**   Yep.   It's a famous saying  -  fuckhead. 

> > ( How dare this narcissistic POS expect any sympathy here )

> The narcissistic total piece of shit ... 

**   Precisely what I am not and  YOU  are. 

    

On Saturday, December 25, 2021 at 11:15:55 AM UTC+11, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
> Decadent Linux User Numero Uno wrote: 
> ====================
> > 
> > Looky! Phil Allison is talking about himself again!

<snip>

> ** Precisely what I am not and YOU are.

Nobody is all that good as assessing how they present to other people, and Phil may well be less good at it than most. His use of the word "precisely" is inappropriate - it is clearly wishful thinking of the most obvious sort.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

IEEE Bill has no shame or brain    bill....@ieee.org wrote:
======================================

> > > Looky! Phil Allison is talking about himself again!
> <snip>

 ** Missing context ?? 
     Where the heck did it go ??? 
     Maybe went for a Tosca .... 


> > ** Precisely what I am not and YOU are.

> Nobody is all that good as assessing how they present to other people,

** Massive,  autistic narcissists top that list. 
 
  Then IEEE Bill tops it once again. 
>
> His use of the word "precisely" is inappropriate 

**  ROTFL. 

    

......  Phil 

On Saturday, December 25, 2021 at 12:04:34 PM UTC+11, palli...@gmail.com wrote:
> bill....@ieee.org wrote: 
> ======================================
> > > > Looky! Phil Allison is talking about himself again! 
> > <snip>
> ** Missing context ?? 
> Where the heck did it go ??? 

Where most of your inane babbling goes - it got snipped as irrelevant.

> Maybe went for a Tosca ....

Whatever that might be in this context.

> > > ** Precisely what I am not and YOU are. 
> 
> > Nobody is all that good as assessing how they present to other people,
>
> ** Massive, autistic narcissists top that list. 
> 
> Then IEEE Bill tops it once again.

If - and only if - Phil knows enough about autism to know how autistic people behave - which seems unlikely, because he imagines that many more people suffer from autism than the experts in the area.

The propositions that I am either autistic or a narcissist both strike me as unlikely, so I am inclined think that Phil is just using his standard insults, rather than  saying anything meaningful.

> > His use of the word "precisely" is inappropriate.
>
> ** ROTFL. 

Anybody sane would find the proposition that Phil could produce a precise pyschotheraputic diagnosis - as opposed to fatuous abuse - a trifle implausible.

Phil doesn't seem to be all that sane - or at least he isn't when he has been irritated by a sceptical response - so his reaction isn't that useful.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney

On 24/12/2021 23:34, Rick C wrote:
> On Friday, December 24, 2021 at 8:51:17 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown
> wrote:
>> On 24/12/2021 13:19, Don Y wrote:
>>> On 12/24/2021 4:22 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>> I have news from Japan where the number of Covid cases is
>>>> "high" for them at 500/day (mostly centred around and on US
>>>> bases) and my friends say it is fairly safe there but boring.
>>>> They envy the UK's apparent freedom and having life as "normal"
>>>> (that is how it is reported on TV).
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure *anyone* has got the "messaging" correct.
>>> 
>>> The northern part of the US is apparently seeing a surge --
>>> attributed to moving indoors with the colder weather.  If that's
>>> the case, then explaining our increase infection rate would need
>>> another cause as there's no need to be indoors (when it's 25+C
>>> outdoors).  The influz of winter visitors is likely to blame as
>>> is the lack of masks (amusing to see couples in the stores:  she
>>> masked, he without! Does she really think she's protected if she
>>> shares a home/bed with him?)
>> What choice does she have? Anyway for the most part simple masks as
>> worn by the public protect the environment from them being infected
>> not the other way around (although a small benefit has been
>> shown).
>> 
>> What puzzles me about the US stats is that CDC are claiming Omicron
>> is now at 90% of all cases in some Eastern states and 70% overall.
>> 
>> https://www.cnbc.com/2021/12/22/omicron-accounts-for-90percent-of-covid-cases-in-some-parts-of-the-us-cdc-director-says.html
>>
>>
>> 
This seems impossibly high to me - UK is seeing about 70% of omicron
>> cases at present and close to 90% in London where it has really got
>> a hold and we should be in advance of you. How did the US spread
>> Omicron so fast or are they being sloppy in the testing and
>> confusing a high level of residual Alpha with Omega (both are
>> S-gene dropouts).
> 
> I don't get what you don't understand.  By all accounts the Omicron
> variant spreads VERY rapidly.  While the initial detections came a
> bit later in the US, the virus has spread widely in the same time
> frame as in the UK.  So I would expect the infection ratios to be
> about the same.

But in the UK the Omicron variant has really only got hold of London, 
Glasgow and Edinburgh (and the Scots are doing a much better job of 
containing it). London hospital admissions have doubled in the past 3 
weeks due to rampant Omicron ~3% of Londoners have active Covid at the 
moment according to the latest ONS survey!

Omicron spreading to the rest of the UK only really started a month 
later when university students went home for Xmas. It still hasn't shown 
up in the hospital admission statistics outside of London (unlike last 
year when Alpha took off before Xmas in regions with pubs still open).

>> Their sequencing data shows about 12% (of what?) truly Omicron.
>> The reporting of data over there is incredibly confusing. UK
>> sequences a fairly high proportion of suspected Omicron (or rather
>> they did).
> 
> I don't understand what you are saying here.  What is 12%???  What
> does "truly Omicron" mean???  I didn't know there was any way of
> detecting variants other than by sequencing the virus.

The PCR test uses three loci. Wild strain and Delta give clear hits on 
all three, but Alpha and Omicron fail on the S-gene. They use this as an 
indicator that full sequencing is required to confirm Omicron in the UK.
(now that Omicron is totally dominant the sequencing is redundant apart 
from random samples to look for any further mutations gaining ground)

Sloppy analysis will incorrectly allocate Alpha to Omicron unless a 
confirmatory sequencing test is done.

>>> At 3K cases per day (in a state of just 6M souls), its not hard 
>>> to see our 1.3M cases eventually cover all residents!
>> That isn't too bad really. UK has been twice that level since July
>> and we are now headed for 5x your level of infection (maybe higher
>> still).
> 
> You are talking total daily infection rate?  I think the two
> countries are within a factor of two.  Both are headed up very
> steeply.

London has insanely high levels of mostly Omicron infection.

The rest of the country will likely end up in the same position but 
delayed by about 3 weeks or so. The rise in number of cases is 
frighteningly fast (some sampling effects too since people are 
deliberately not getting tested to avoid isolating for Xmas). The case 
doubling time where Omicron is most rampant is about 2-3 days.

I just don't see how it could spread quite so fast in America even 
allowing for the tendency of some to take no precautions at all. It is a 
big place.

>> It is the nature of pandemics to burn out on a timescale of 3-5
>> years - by then most people have either had it and recovered or are
>> dead.
> 
> We will see.  The vaccine has the potential for ending it much
> sooner, but we need to get it to the rest of the world.  New
> variants

It has already been demonstrated that the Pfizer booster is waning to 
75% efficacy on a timescale of 3 months. We are all going to have to 
catch it and recover on not within the next couple of years.

>>> There is an emphasis on at-home test kits (our libraries are 
>>> giving them out, free of charge).  But, no one stressing that the
>>> kit just gives you your *approximate* status -- at a single point
>>> in time!  And, says nothing about "tomorrow", etc.
>> Problem with the quick home test lateral flow tests is that they
>> give false negatives too often to be helpful if used on people
>> without symptoms as a permission to do something risky.
>> 
>> They were designed to test people with plausible symptoms where
>> they stand a much better chance of working but even then the gold
>> standard test can fail up to 20% of the time! Positive means danger
>> but a negative result does not mean safe - that is a big problem
>> with how they are now being used by the public (encouraged by the
>> politicians).
>>> It seems akin to publishing detailed pans for building in-home 
>>> bomb shelters (cold war) and totally glossing over the fact that 
>>> the effort expended will amount to naught!
>> Being seen to be doing something is part of it.
> 
> Not really.  Masking is far from perfect, but has real impact.

Mostly in preventing people with the infection from spreading it.

> Distancing is even more effective if properly done.  Standing 6 feet
> apart in the skyway leading to an airplane is pointless really,
> especially when you consider you will end up on the plane surrounded
> by up to 8 people all just two feet away for some hours!  Yet that's
> a situation where you will end up being arrested if you don't follow
> the rules.

Omicron is so effective at airborne transmission I'm not convinced.
I can smell a vaper or smoker from 10m so I am pretty sure that any 
virus they exhale would be there too.

>> UK has different policies in England (crazy free for all), with 
>> Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all being more sensible.
>> 
>> It remains to be seen who if anyone has called it right.
> 
> The main issue is this new variant seems to be so much more
> infectious.  Australia was doing very well until the Delta variant
> hit.  Now Omicron is really running away.  I suppose it spreads so
> easily that track and trace may not be able to keep up with it.  This
> really may not stop until each country actually reaches herd
> immunity!  In the US that's probably is only another 50 million
> infections among the unvaccinated.  So maybe half a million more
> deaths.

Omicron appears to be a factor of two less dangerous than Delta which 
puts it roughly on a par with the original wild strain and Alpha.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 24/12/2021 20:35, Don Y wrote:
> On 12/24/2021 6:51 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 24/12/2021 13:19, Don Y wrote:

>>> At 3K cases per day (in a state of just 6M souls), its not hard
>>> to see our 1.3M cases eventually cover all residents!
>>
>> That isn't too bad really. UK has been twice that level since July and 
>> we are now headed for 5x your level of infection (maybe higher still).
> 
> England has 10X the population.  Or, have you normalized per 
> unit-population?

Yes. We are at 120+k/day on a 60M population. It is likely even more 
than that since some selfish people are deliberately not getting tested. 
Many have deleted the contact tracing app from their phone.
>> Problem with the quick home test lateral flow tests is that they give 
>> false negatives too often to be helpful if used on people without 
>> symptoms as a permission to do something risky.
> 
> Test kits contain two tests -- suggested "per individual".  So, you
> could, theoretically, test yourself earlier and then later (closer to
> your scheduled event).  But, it still tells you very little about
> your risk to others (and practically NOTHING about others' risks
> to *you*!)
> 
> As the approach was hastily thrown together, there is no systematic
> data collection involved.  Fill out a form, get a test kit.  No
> check as to the validity (or uniqueness) of your information.  And,
> if it is suspect, then how can the gummit drive the collection from
> THEIR end (you are expected to self-report your results).

UK ones have a unique QR code and you are supposed to register the 
result of any free tests done with the NHS central database. A fair 
proportion of people do not bother, but if you want a Covid pass to 
attend some mass event or nightclub then you need to do it.

This may be helping a bit in the cities. The swivel eyed loons in the 
Tory party tried to vote this measure down last week (and failed).

>> They were designed to test people with plausible symptoms where they 
>> stand a much better chance of working but even then the gold standard 
>> test can fail up to 20% of the time! Positive means danger but a 
>> negative result does not mean safe - that is a big problem with how 
>> they are now being used by the public (encouraged by the politicians).
> 
> In our case, we put the test kits on a shelf as a hook to clue us
> in on any *suspected* exposure.  Having to engage with the healthcare
> system when you *think* you may have been exposed/develop symptoms
> is likely too late for any low cost/risk remedy.

Almost everyone I know who has had it recovered OK after 2-3 weeks. 
Apart from one unlucky individual who has permanent lung scarring and 
other organ damage and is still struggling a 18 months on.

> We've chatted with our providers as to our own states of health
> and risk factors and have put in place mechanisms to, hopefully,
> jumpstart a response to a possible infection before it takes
> hold (e.g., laying in medications in anticipation of needing
> them) -- and before you can get an appointment to SEE the provider!

>>> It seems akin to publishing detailed pans for building in-home
>>> bomb shelters (cold war) and totally glossing over the fact that
>>> the effort expended will amount to naught!
>>
>> Being seen to be doing something is part of it.
> 
> Of course!  By the same token, folks queuing to get tested
> gives them some peace of mind that they've "done something"...
> even if what they've done is effectively meaningless.

One of the queues for being mass tested actually spread the disease in 
Liverpool earlier in the pandemic. Two medic friends got it that way!

> E.g., the bomb shelter analogy.
> 
>> UK has different policies in England (crazy free for all), with 
>> Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland all being more sensible.
>>
>> It remains to be seen who if anyone has called it right.
> 
> Reporting, here, downplays the extent of the problem.  If
> you simply look at the numbers (and talk to hospital staff),
> you'd have far more cause for concern.

Where I am the hospitals are fine but in London they really are losing 
it as demonstrated by various A list celebrities who should be fronting 
TV shows today having to self isolate with Covid.
> 
> [SWMBO worked for a VP at one of the larger local hospitals so
> has many friends/contacts with The Inside Dope.  Add to that,
> friends and neighbors who are part of that industry and
> what you hear is considerably more alarming than how it
> is being reported -- likely because advertisers don't
> want to spook potential customers!  :-/ ]
> 
> My concern isn't the immediacy of the problem (though I
> worry about having to be hospitalized for some OTHER
> need and finding beds full of covidiots).  Rather, I
> am concerned with what we'll discover years down the road
> regarding long-term damage to vital organs... and possible
> health/quality of life consequences (evident only after
> you've been deprived of a chance to DO something about it!)

It seems to be pot luck whether you have complications or not. Being 
poor and malnourished seems quite strongly correlated with bad Covid 
outcomes in the UK but that could be due to social factors. They tend to 
be in jobs where there is no prospect of working from home.

> Or, we'll discover that folks are reluctant to enter that field
> having seen/heard horror stories of the conditions those
> providers faced.  What do you do when there aren't enough doctors
> and nurses to address the population?  (Import more Pakistani doctors?)

UK may reach that stage soon in central London but for the moment they 
can export their sickest patients to other cities medical facilities. 
Where it gets very problematic is when too many medics have also caught 
the disease and the disease is widespread across the country.

We might get away with it if London has largely recovered again before 
the other major cities suffer catastrophic health service collapse.

-- 
Regards,
Martin Brown