Start of third wave - what will this actually mean?

[Moonme]

With so many of the population vaccinated what do you think a third wave means? Will we need another lockdown? 😩

Covid-19: UK in early stages of third wave - scientist www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57304515

@awishes

The Indian variant particularly hits young people hard so that's why the hospitals will fill up as they have yet to be vaccinated.

Sources?

@SausageFrog

The problem is that lots of us haven’t had the first vaccine let alone the second. All the double vaccinated people keep forgetting that we’re not there YET.

The statistics are looking good and the vaccine rollout is going well but we’re still 3-4 months away from everyone being double vaccinated. It’s not over yet.

That's because younger people are low risk!

There has to be a point where the focus shifts to hospitalisations and deaths and not cases, there just has to be.

We opened up massively a few weeks ago, like....obviously cases are going to go up, this sort of end of days doom reporting makes it out like this is all going horribly wrong when in fact it was probably expected and planned for (albeit, given the decision making of the last year, I'm not so sure on that last bit!)

We've been conditioned to become so panicked by graphs and numbers it's quite scary, so SAGE members going on TV, sowing seeds of anxiety in people really doesn't help.

Hopefully when a report comes out in the next few weeks that shows a massive reduction in hospitalisations and deaths vs cases compared to last year, and proves that the vaccine effectively keeps people safe, then it'll not only open us back up, but will blow the candle out on the 15 minutes of fame for all the celebrity scientists!!

This will go on. The first world is only as safe as the third world. When you have massive numbers infections in places like India there will emerge new variants which may well be resistant to the vaccines we have.

@User1234123
Out if curiosity do you actually, genuinely think that scientists spend all those years studying and working because they want to be celebrities?
Are you clear on the difference between a scientist and an 'influencer'?

Scientists have an agenda - just like everyone else

@Reallybadidea

I work in ICU. We're just starting to see quite young people being admitted with covid again for the first time in months. It's quite upsetting, I'm not sure how any of us can bear to go through another surge again. I hope that won't happen, but also quite upsetting to see people say that they don't care

Where? Most areas have hospitalisations broken down by age and there hasn’t been a dramatic increase in young people in our hospitals and our icu figures are steadily dropping.

There has to be a point where the focus shifts to hospitalisations and deaths and not cases, there just has to be

I agree but I’d even like to see the hospitalisation stats split out more clearly if that makes sense.

What I mean is, a statement such as ‘more younger people are being admitted to hospital’ could seem scary. However, my theory is:

1. They’re more likely to be admitted now than in the last 2 waves as Covid wards are not under strain. The NHS are more likely to admit someone for observation now rather than waiting until they’re at deaths door. Which makes sense as they have capacity.

1. How many of those younger people admitted have been in and out and fully recovered, with little to no medical intervention? Anecdotal I know, but my cleaner is 27 - she was taken by ambulance to A&E the other week struggling with breathing. They kept her in for observation, discharged her the next day with an inhaler and she has now fully recovered and back working. Not a nice experience for her, obviously... but not one that would involve the need to lock down an entire country.

The point is, what is the definition of a ‘hospitalisation’??

[quote Sporranrummager]@User1234123
Out if curiosity do you actually, genuinely think that scientists spend all those years studying and working because they want to be celebrities?
Are you clear on the difference between a scientist and an 'influencer'?[/quote]
I wouldn't go as far as comparing Neil Ferguson with an Instagram influencer! Nor would I ever doubt their intellect, their capability or credentials, there's a reason they are advising after all.

What I'd say is that when they have an opinion, one that is speculation, even if it's on good grounds (take the guy who went on TV this morning saying he thinks we should delay 21st June), especially when they know it's going to cause a huge wave of anxiety, then there is a conscious decision as to whether to air that opinion in government meetings, or to go on national television.

For people saying they aren't concerned as long as deaths and admissions don't go up, are you concerned about the other "knock on effects" eg education and healthcare and food chain disruptions?

I don't mean that in a snarky way, it's a genuine question, as I think if large numbers of people and families have to self isolate, although they may not be admitted to hospital, it will affect us all in many ways.

I think it's a point worth considering. It's pointless saying well as long as I don't become ill or die I'm not arsed (again, a view I am actually sympathetic to!) because you may be arsed when your DCs' classes or teachers are all off, or if your Amazon deliveries don't turn up as their warehouse staff aren't in to prepare orders, or if there are long queues in supermarkets as staff are off, or if your smear test gets cancelled as the nurse is off...

(I don't have a solution to this but I worry about it...)

@Wherediditgo

There has to be a point where the focus shifts to hospitalisations and deaths and not cases, there just has to be

I agree but I’d even like to see the hospitalisation stats split out more clearly if that makes sense.

What I mean is, a statement such as ‘more younger people are being admitted to hospital’ could seem scary. However, my theory is:

1. They’re more likely to be admitted now than in the last 2 waves as Covid wards are not under strain. The NHS are more likely to admit someone for observation now rather than waiting until they’re at deaths door. Which makes sense as they have capacity.

1. How many of those younger people admitted have been in and out and fully recovered, with little to no medical intervention? Anecdotal I know, but my cleaner is 27 - she was taken by ambulance to A&E the other week struggling with breathing. They kept her in for observation, discharged her the next day with an inhaler and she has now fully recovered and back working. Not a nice experience for her, obviously... but not one that would involve the need to lock down an entire country.

The point is, what is the definition of a ‘hospitalisation’??

Also, are we talking about proportionally? If previously we were seeing 10 people admitted to hospital and 1 of those was a young person and now we’re seeing 4 people admitted to hospital and 1 is a young person then it looks worse as a percentage but is still actually the same.

Before Covid Lots of people got ill every year and had to take time off work. It’s not new.

I’m not concerned about disruption no. A lot of the time people don’t have symptoms. Vaccination will help. The school disruption needs to be addressed in another way.

I don't want many more people to die, I would be very concerned for NHS staff if the hospitals see more serious cases. They've been through enough.

With that said, I think the evidence already is that this wave is not going to be anything like the previous 2. There was never a future where no one died of Covid again, unfortunately. We are racing on with the vaccine, really every week that goes by people are increasingly protected. And also remember that May has been very wet and cold. It's warming up now - people are throwing open their windows and doing more outside. Respiratory viruses don't do nearly as well in the sunshine. I think we have to get our heads around Covid deaths being a part of life. We are already used to flu picking people off and it's not fair that sometimes that involves younger people, but we also can't shut down the whole of society on that basis, just as we don't restrict all cars to 20mph (seriously, if we did that worldwide, the number of deaths and disabilities we'd cut out would be astronomical).

I don't mean that in a snarky way, it's a genuine question, as I think if large numbers of people and families have to self isolate, although they may not be admitted to hospital, it will affect us all in many ways.

Well, I guess the question there is at what point do we no longer have to isolate just because we have been in contact with a positive case?

@Wherediditgo

There has to be a point where the focus shifts to hospitalisations and deaths and not cases, there just has to be

I agree but I’d even like to see the hospitalisation stats split out more clearly if that makes sense.

What I mean is, a statement such as ‘more younger people are being admitted to hospital’ could seem scary. However, my theory is:

1. They’re more likely to be admitted now than in the last 2 waves as Covid wards are not under strain. The NHS are more likely to admit someone for observation now rather than waiting until they’re at deaths door. Which makes sense as they have capacity.

1. How many of those younger people admitted have been in and out and fully recovered, with little to no medical intervention? Anecdotal I know, but my cleaner is 27 - she was taken by ambulance to A&E the other week struggling with breathing. They kept her in for observation, discharged her the next day with an inhaler and she has now fully recovered and back working. Not a nice experience for her, obviously... but not one that would involve the need to lock down an entire country.

The point is, what is the definition of a ‘hospitalisation’??

Yes you need data on length of stay and type of treatment not just numbers going in

@TheWomanInTheIronedMask

For people saying they aren't concerned as long as deaths and admissions don't go up, are you concerned about the other "knock on effects" eg education and healthcare and food chain disruptions?

I don't mean that in a snarky way, it's a genuine question, as I think if large numbers of people and families have to self isolate, although they may not be admitted to hospital, it will affect us all in many ways.

I think it's a point worth considering. It's pointless saying well as long as I don't become ill or die I'm not arsed (again, a view I am actually sympathetic to!) because you may be arsed when your DCs' classes or teachers are all off, or if your Amazon deliveries don't turn up as their warehouse staff aren't in to prepare orders, or if there are long queues in supermarkets as staff are off, or if your smear test gets cancelled as the nurse is off...

(I don't have a solution to this but I worry about it...)

I worried about the at the beginning of all this based on what the media was saying. Now? If someone was thinking that was a genuine possibility, I'd try to say as kindly as I could that they maybe needed to get help for their anxiety. It doesn't fit with the reality of what's ahead, unless we somehow have to deal with a completely new and much more deadly pandemic.

If the increase in cases is slowed by the high level of vaccination, it could see us through to the end of the summer term at which point schools closing for six weeks will slow transmission again - the unvaccinated population won’t be mixing in close quarters indoors. If we have decent weather this summer, people will spend a lot of time outside and we know that the crowded beaches of last summer didn’t cause spikes and that was without vaccination. By the time the autumn term starts, the whole adult population could be vaccinated and boosters could begin for older and more vulnerable people to dampen down any autumn acceleration. So although maybe they can’t abandon all restrictions entirely on 21st June, that might just mean masks indoors and sanitizer and personal space, booking time slots for attractions etc over the summer which really isn’t that bad. I guess testing and quarantine for international travel as well. I’m hopeful we won’t see another lockdown - provided vaccination coverage is high enough.

I’m low risk but I don’t relish the idea of going through covid again, it’s a horrible virus. And I can’t work if schools close and I have my primary age children at home all the time. So I hope we move cautiously, with an eye on what might happen in autumn if we aren’t careful, but I do feel positive that a third wave could be heavily mitigated by vaccines and a certain number of restrictions still in place.

The cases have been on a plateau for weeks, but now creeping up.
I don’t think it will have nearly as harsh an impact on hospitals or as many deaths this time with the number of vaccinations that have been completed. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the planned June 21st restriction lifting is delayed.

The reason for lockdown is to avoid overwhelming the NHS. If that isn't happening, no lockdown needed

Why do people keep saying this? The reason in the beginning was to protect the NHS. Now we are trying to restrict the spread to prevent new variants which may well affect much younger people or be vaccine resistant. With the way it is spreading through schools our kids are becoming guinea pigs. Highest case rates in 10-14 year olds. You want your kids to be more at risk?

@MintyMabel

The reason for lockdown is to avoid overwhelming the NHS. If that isn't happening, no lockdown needed

Why do people keep saying this? The reason in the beginning was to protect the NHS. Now we are trying to restrict the spread to prevent new variants which may well affect much younger people or be vaccine resistant. With the way it is spreading through schools our kids are becoming guinea pigs. Highest case rates in 10-14 year olds. You want your kids to be more at risk?

It hasn’t changed?

It’s still about hospital capacity.

I worked on ICU during the 2nd wave, and A&E during the first. When a 3rd surge happens, I am going to park my backside on a sofa and watch all of Netflix. I can't do that again. Period.

It doesn't fit with the reality of what's ahead

Have you forgotten how staff shortages were impacting things at the beginning? When the initial variant had less propensity to spread? It isn’t unlikely that when people return to offices, large numbers of staff will have to isolate.

It hasn’t changed?

It’s still about hospital capacity.

It has changed. It isn’t only about hospital capacity.

@MintyMabel

The reason for lockdown is to avoid overwhelming the NHS. If that isn't happening, no lockdown needed

Why do people keep saying this? The reason in the beginning was to protect the NHS. Now we are trying to restrict the spread to prevent new variants which may well affect much younger people or be vaccine resistant. With the way it is spreading through schools our kids are becoming guinea pigs. Highest case rates in 10-14 year olds. You want your kids to be more at risk?

you may well want to restrict the spread - but that is not government policy. The ONLY thing that matters is that the NHS is not overwhelmed.