Omicron variant could cause 75,000 deaths by April

[AchillesLastStand]

As stated in thread title if we stay in Plan B according to government scientists.

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/11/omicron-covid-variant-could-cause-75000-deaths-in-england-by-end-of-april-say-scientists

Does anyone recall how many died in the wave last winter to compare?

@OchonAgusOchonOh

What is the point of releasing statistically useless data though? How will that help?

You have to have enough data upon which to base some form of conclusion. When numbers are low, confidence is low.

We will have enough very soon - because Omicron is doubling every 2 days, we will know quite quickly.

[quote rrhuth]@OchonAgusOchonOh

What is the point of releasing statistically useless data though? How will that help?

You have to have enough data upon which to base some form of conclusion. When numbers are low, confidence is low.

We will have enough very soon - because Omicron is doubling every 2 days, we will know quite quickly.[/quote]
I agree with you there. Releasing the data the way they are doing it is counter-productive. It looks like scaremongering as the message is unclear. That only invites questions and a distrust in further data being released.

I think it would be reasonable to state rate of increase in cases and, if some people have been hospitalised as a result of omicron, it would be no harm to state that in order to refute the "it's really mild, no-one is getting symptoms worse than a cold" brigade as a single case disproves that.

I think part of the problem is most people don't understand statistics but think they do. Equally, they don't seem to understand the public health or economic implications of a milder but more virulent mutation. They see the word "milder" and assume that means a lay person's version of mild rather than a medical version.

I think part of the problem is most people don't understand statistics but think they do

This is proving to be a huge problem. I have had to ask my mathematician relative to help me with some of it at times.

The concept of exponential growth still seems a total mystery to many, and yes the impact of a faster-spreading but milder variant. This is hampering the public debate a lot.

I do think there's a bit of brain shutdown too, it is not a fun topic to think about.

[quote rrhuth]@OchonAgusOchonOh

What is the point of releasing statistically useless data though? How will that help?

You have to have enough data upon which to base some form of conclusion. When numbers are low, confidence is low.

We will have enough very soon - because Omicron is doubling every 2 days, we will know quite quickly.[/quote]
There is no point unless you see it a good idea to get an emotive response from the public based on unclear and unuseful statements.

And if you do release an unclear statement and people respond by wanting clarification it is also wrong to use the term ‘Covid denier’ as much as some want to.

It’s natural for people to then ask well what do you mean exactly?

I didn't use the phrase covid denier, just to repeat, I said 'with not of' is a covid denial trope.

Asking for clarification on a hospital admission is not though.

If you get breaking news on hospitalisation and omicron case(s) - it’s natural to say what exactly do you mean

And yes that might be in the form so you mean of or with

I read in The Times recently that hospital admissions due to covid are largely from the unvaccinated....

If you get breaking news on hospitalisation and omicron case(s) - it’s natural to say what exactly do you mean I guess it is if you don't understand that you're asking for meaningless information at this stage.

@rrhuth

If you get breaking news on hospitalisation and omicron case(s) - it’s natural to say what exactly do you mean I guess it is if you don't understand that you're asking for meaningless information at this stage.

What a superior response. I don’t think you have better understanding than others. Even if you are convinced you do.

My preference would be to not have an emotive campaign like that at all.

Let us get the data

You won’t get the behaviour change you probably want though. Fewer people dropping contacts as a result.

Horrible news

Okay I don't mean to sound callous but very ill people die I hospital all the time from all sorts of respiratory illnesses. I'm not convinced this warrants breaking news.

Robert Peston
@Peston
.
@BorisJohnson
is being told by advisers that Omicron doubling time “is less than two days right now”. Severity “is unknown” but “would have to be quite a lot less for the next few weeks not to be a problem”. Delta was doubling every circa 7 days at its fastest in May, and…

Very sad the individual who has died Ofcourse.

Question is - much like previously when cause of death went down as covid if the person had tested positive within the previous so many days - was this as a direct result of omicron, an indirect result or a death of something else but also with omicron ?

Yeah, that's a bad take @MaxNormal, both in human terms and scientific.

That's someone's relative, so your reply is unpleasant. Also, scientifically that one death is not interpretable - so stick with the human level for now.

@rrhuth exactly.

@Roundeartheratchriatmas

Very sad the individual who has died Ofcourse.

Question is - much like previously when cause of death went down as covid if the person had tested positive within the previous so many days - was this as a direct result of omicron, an indirect result or a death of something else but also with omicron ?

'with not of' is a covid denial trope.

Just wait for the data. Given how fast Omicron is doubling, we will not have to wait long.

@MaxNormal

Okay I don't mean to sound callous but very ill people die I hospital all the time from all sorts of respiratory illnesses. I'm not convinced this warrants breaking news.

In a 'normal' year 25-30k people die from flu in the UK. This is many times that - and it's an even higher percentage when you consider that a lot of the frail and highly vulnerable have already died from covid or from pandemic consequences.

Omicron does look to have far fewer people struck severely which is good - but as it's SO much more contagious, a small percentage of many many millions is still really high. It will include not just a 92 year old dementia patient for whom it will be a blessed release, but also 29 year old pregnant women with toddler twins waiting at home, regular blokes in their 50s who were too busy with work and family to.remember to get a booster, and some unlucky ones among the quarter of 18-24 year olds who aren't unvaccinated.
Even if you don't care about the vulnerable - we have only around 5000 intensive care beds in England. So if they're full with older people with respiratory viruses, and you're in a car accident, or if you end up waiting 6 hours too long in A&E, or 6 weeks too long on an overcrowded waiting list, you might be dying too.

That's why it's news.

It is true no headlines should have used assumptions based on data we don’t have yet.

All those cancelled contacts on the back of a campaign would be going ahead still.

More mixing, less loss of income.

I would be very surprised if this poor individuals death wasn't solely attributed to COVID. Otherwise why report it in that manner?

More mixing, less loss of income undoubtedly, but more mixing, higher deaths is an understandable human concern.

It is not a simple matter.

I suppose we should include the 75k in this headline and ignore that too.

We don’t have the known variables or data.

@rrhuth bad faith take on my statement. Of course this is a private tragedy for the relatives, as is each of the hundreds of thousands of deaths that occur each year.

I just don't think it should be headline news.

[quote MaxNormal]@rrhuth bad faith take on my statement. Of course this is a private tragedy for the relatives, as is each of the hundreds of thousands of deaths that occur each year.

I just don't think it should be headline news.[/quote]
Unless you favour state control of the media it is going to be headline news. Just respond appropriately, with empathy.

@rrhuth I'm good with responding in a way I personally find appropriate, thanks.