Will this level of cases now just be acceptable?

[Tuba437]

Just having a think to myself. We're now at around 30k cases a day in general. The 7 day average daily deaths is about 89 (this was for around 45-50k cases a day). We can assume that I a month or so deaths will be at around 60 a day.

Over a year that works out at about 21k worth of deaths. Will this just be the acceptable number. We know the vaccine doesn't stop the spread so I highly doubt were ever just going to get down to sub 5k cases a day again.

21k is considered a very mild flu death rate for the year. We have a new virus around now so more deaths a year are going to be a thing whether we like it or not.

I also think red list countries should only be for countries with worrying variants. If I don't have to isolate if my wife tests positive (just daily testing) then why on earth would I have to spend 1500 on a government hotel to quarantine as I've been to a country with a lower covid rate than us?

Sorry about the rant.

@Peteycat

Yes you are. Its honestly horrible to read. Have you forgotten that all our kids have been locked up, their lives upside down and yet still, you bang on and on about restricting them further. Please go away and have a word with yourself.

Leaving aside the fact I haven't posted about kids on here AFAIK, of course I haven't forgotten, I'm a parent

Maybe a break from covid threads would be good, you seem very upset tbh.

Maybe YOU personally didn't, can't remember. Don't actually care. There's just a few on here though that need to be reminded that restrictions are over. Stop going round and round and blaming the schools, universities children etc because it's really boring now.

I don't need a break thank you. Thanks for your concern though.

I am upset. Very. Kids are suffering immensely. That definitely upsets me.

@Peteycat,

'Why are you all so obsessed with blaming school children? It's really quite odd.'

Facts are facts:

www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-01009-0/figures/1

What is odd is to accuse people who are stating facts of 'blaming'.

There's just a few on here though that need to be reminded that restrictions are over. Stop going round and round and blaming the schools, universities children etc because it's really boring now.

Restrictions being over is not the same as covid being over. Unfortunately the virus is expected to spread a lot in schools when they reopen.

It's not healthy. For them or society. It's awful. Life has to get back to normal for everyone. How long is it until you think it's 'safe'? Years? Decades? Honestly.

Facts are facts, well you may live your life that way but you will find most people don't live by data reporting and r numbers etc. Have you not noticed the media is reporting less and less? Time to get on with normality.

I'm sad that people die, people I know may die from it. I really don't want that at all. This is a shit situation for everyone but the scaremongering does not help anyone.

Covid unfortunately won't be over. It's here to stay unfortunately. I wish it wasn't but it is. We've been told that. That's one of the reasons restrictions are over.

Well I'm stating facts that you are blaming. It's right in front of me on this thread.

@Peteycat,

Fair enough to ignore it, although quite why you come on COVID threads I am not sure?!

I happen to be interested in data and analysis, and also to have some idea of what might happen. We are all different.

It is not when I think it is safe that matters, it is a question of hospitals not being overwhelmed. That was always the single most important determinant of what restrictions were in place, and will be going forwards.

For those who make decisions though, you cannot wait until cases are at critical level to act. You need as much data and high quality modelling as possible.

If we could just all stop talking about it and testing then that would be chuffing great. That way we can carry on as normal with an extra 20 odd thousand deaths a year of people I definitely don’t know so it won’t affect me.

Deaths and cases should not be the main barometers. With 800,000 people living with long term effects, there is an enormous risk to the long term health of our society as well.

I personally think we’ve gone too far opening everything up this fast, with no mitigations in place at all. We needed another winter to wait and see how the vaccines fare, with only moderately inconvenient restrictions like mandatory masks and ventilation. Perhaps some changes to isolation rules to involve PCR testing.

Instead we are the world’s guinea pig.

@Peteycat no one is scaremongering, they are discussing.

Your reaction to a routine discussion is rather extreme. You're on the coronavirus board, after all.

Saying 'life has to get back to normal' won't make it happen, unfortunately.

I'm on here to discuss. It obviously concerns me, that's why I am here. I appreciate intelligent people who can read and use data phoenix, of course I do. I just don't understand why it has to be all about the data though. The social side to this nightmare is important too.

Iannutstut this isn't a routine discussion though!

No, your right me saying that won't make it happen, and thankfully you requesting more restrictions will not be happening either.

A routine discussion is what are you having for tea! You can tell me if you like! I'm having Dahl.

There is a fair likelihood of masks, distancing and WFH in winter.

Nothing to do with whether I ask, only to do with hospitalisations.

@TheReluctantPhoenix

It is not when I think it is safe that matters, it is a question of hospitals not being overwhelmed. That was always the single most important determinant of what restrictions were in place, and will be going forwards

Disagree. As someone who is equally “into” data and analysis (as a job), the best variables are not always the first ones and they’re not always correctly interpreted. All variables are designed to be a proxy for something, in this case how severe the impact of cases are, not how severe the outcomes. The measure of impact was designed to represent the extent to which we might be able to manage outcomes, and whether our ability to do so was adequate or not as a result of cases.

Things have moved on and we are now learning more about outcomes. We are rapidly learning that deaths are not a sufficient proxy as they don’t include the hundred of thousands of people suffering long-term health problems, which will put unknown pressure not only on health services in the future, but also potentially on productivity and the economy.

Hospital admissions was only ever a short term measure. This is a public health crisis not a staffing crisis, and I think that indicators going forward need to better reflect that.

To be honest I’m hugely disappointed that after this long, it hasn’t been talked about more.

@Peteycat

I'm on here to discuss. It obviously concerns me, that's why I am here. I appreciate intelligent people who can read and use data phoenix, of course I do. I just don't understand why it has to be all about the data though. The social side to this nightmare is important too.

Iannutstut this isn't a routine discussion though!

No, your right me saying that won't make it happen, and thankfully you requesting more restrictions will not be happening either.

Data is used to inform our understanding of the "social" (and economic) harms of coronavirus restrictions though.

Impact on education, mental health, domestic abuse, non-COVID illness has been carefully scrutinised throughout the pandemic and balanced against the risks of coronavirus itself.

What has become clear is that without appropriate suppression policies coronavirus will impacts on all of these outcomes too - no one does well during an uncontrolled pandemic.

Rose star that is a really good post.

The social side to this nightmare is important too

There are already excellent studies (using established representative population samples) of this so they data is there too, it’s just less talked about it. If you’re interested in seeing more, have a look at the Understanding Society data sets and associated reports. They’ve been gathering data monthly since April 2020. ELSA has also done the same for people over 50. Very accessible and easy to read reports.

Thank you @Peteycat .. also worth remembering that we simply didn’t have anything else by which to measure in the early days, not even cases as you’ll remember that in the beginning, no one had access to tests unless they were hospitalised. So it was the best of a bad lot… it doesn’t need to stay that way. We can do better

This is a good one too:

Is the cure really worse than the disease? The health impacts of lockdowns during COVID-19

gh.bmj.com/content/6/8/e006653

Thanks RoseStar I will have a good look at this.

@RoseStar,

Lots of nice words.

Are you saying, though, that overwhelmed hospitals are possible to live with?!

Thank you speckled ostrich egg.

@TheReluctantPhoenix woah why the attitude? If you’re into data and analysis then you would understand exactly what I’m saying.

Overwhelmed hospitals should not be “the single most important determinant of why restrictions are in place”. Yes they tell us about staffing levels and the extent to which we can treat people if that’s all you care about (so to be more direct, I did not say anywhere that overwhelmed hospitals are something to live with), but they don’t tell us what COVID actually means for people at a population level.

If we knew that, we would be able to say how dangerous the disease is (not just how deadly), which quite frankly is a far better measure of whether restrictions should be in place or not.

And then we wouldn’t need to talk about hospital admissions because they’d be managed by restrictions in response to the public health implications, just as we do with absolutely all other illnesses that we live with in society. If the illness is severe, we take greater precautions to prevent people getting (flu jabs and smoking bans being good examples of this).

You are mixing up scientific advice with what is legally mandated.

Just because masks and some degree of social distancing is no longer required in England to the same degree by law (there were of course always legal loopholes), that doesn't mean that they aren't a precaution that could save lives. There is good scientific evidence for both of them.

Chris Whitty has said that he will personally continue to wear a mask in some circumstances. JVT admires the 3 Cs approach of the East.

For example, quoting the Evening Standard last month, below

Prof Whitty, England’s chief medical officer, said: “I don’t think we should underestimate the fact that we could get into trouble again surprisingly fast.”

Speaking at a webinar hosted by the Science Museum, Prof Whitty said: “We are not by any means out of the woods yet on this, we are in much better shape due to the vaccine programme, and drugs and a variety of other things.

“But this has got a long way to run in the UK, and it’s got even further to run globally.”

His comments came after Mr Johnson urged people not to “throw caution to the winds” .... and acknowledged there would be more hospital admissions and deaths from Covid-19 to come during “difficult days and weeks ahead”.

Prof Whitty said the key ...was “to take things incredibly slowly”, adding that he fully expected most people to continue to take precautions.

So, people who are being careful are following the advice from the government and its scientific advisors.

And no one is blaming children for anything.

that was to Peteycat