We need a new Covid Strategy...

[Hazelnutbean]

Suppressing Omicron, a disease that seems to be little more than a bad cold for most (having had the protection of vaccines or prior infection) seems to be so transmissible that it will be impossible to contain unless we live a permanent lockdown.

Wouldn't a better strategy be to just accept this and:
a) allow it to pass through low risk groups scrapping isolation, with people just off work if too ill;
b) bring back shielding for the CEV extending to whole households to allow proper protection, fully financially
and practically supported;

The latter would put a dent in workforce numbers, but so is all the isolation that current measures require, but the speed of Omicron transmission would mean that if it was allowed to spread exponentially in low risk groups (most of whom would only need a couple of days off if at all) it max out in a couple of weeks and burn out in a month or so, meaning these measures would only be needed for six weeks or so.

Yes, it's a bit shit for those shielding with their families, but if we carry on as we are, they'll likely have to shield anyway but for longer.

Yes. It's many more people than those lists. Over 50% of the UK adult population, in fact.

Oh dear god, the dramatics (and bullshit) 🙄

The vaccine offers significant protection to most groups, including a lot of the original CEV. There are a proportion of this group that the vaccine does not seem to do much for, unfortunately, particularly those with auto immune disorders. It would be helpful to get a clearer picture of who those people are so that strategies can be put in place to protect them as far as possible.

By vulnerable I mean vulnerable to severe disease and death. Post vaccination and boosters.

@TheKeatingFive

There is more clarity now on who is most vulnerable, particularly since the vaccinations. It's not like 2020 where the CEV lists were very extensive. This important data and more use should be made of it.

While the unvaxxed are an issue when it comes to nhs resource, the more vulnerable unvaxxed are the major problem. I think a more targeted programme to get percentages as high as they can feasibly be among over 60s would be of most benefit.

I agree about more targeted campaigns. If you look at the median BMI in the recent ICNARC report, a more targeted program to increase percentage uptake in people with higher BMIs (even if younger) would also be beneficial.

Don't forget too, the impact of mass 'mild' infection - sheer chaos of huge numbers of staff sickness all at the same time.

Mass ‘mild’ infection is only a problem because of our current policies. We have people sitting at home for 10 days with no symptoms or a sore throat/headache for a few days. We need to review the policies if this variant is milder.

Isolation periods definitely need to be looked at. Isn't omicron believed to be more infectious at an earlier stage than other variants?

@Hazelnutbean

Suppressing Omicron, a disease that seems to be little more than a bad cold for most (having had the protection of vaccines or prior infection) seems to be so transmissible that it will be impossible to contain unless we live a permanent lockdown.

Wouldn't a better strategy be to just accept this and:
a) allow it to pass through low risk groups scrapping isolation, with people just off work if too ill;
b) bring back shielding for the CEV extending to whole households to allow proper protection, fully financially
and practically supported;

The latter would put a dent in workforce numbers, but so is all the isolation that current measures require, but the speed of Omicron transmission would mean that if it was allowed to spread exponentially in low risk groups (most of whom would only need a couple of days off if at all) it max out in a couple of weeks and burn out in a month or so, meaning these measures would only be needed for six weeks or so.

Yes, it's a bit shit for those shielding with their families, but if we carry on as we are, they'll likely have to shield anyway but for longer.

Great idea got breeding another variant abs causing untold cases of Long Covid. I’m so tired.

FYI mild means any case not hospitalised. You can be severely ill and not hospitalised. I was severely ill, stopped breathing several times and wasn’t hospitalised. I now have long Covid. It’s rubbish. I wouldn’t wish any of this on others. My case was mild in medical terms even though it ravaged my lungs, stomach and heart

@TheKeatingFive

By vulnerable I mean vulnerable to severe disease and death. Post vaccination and boosters.

Yes so do I.

And I wasn’t clsssed as vulnerable

Although of course the risk of Long Covid disability makes everyone vulnerable to an extent.

@Tahaniisfine

FYI mild means any case not hospitalised. You can be severely ill and not hospitalised. I was severely ill, stopped breathing several times and wasn’t hospitalised. I now have long Covid. It’s rubbish. I wouldn’t wish any of this on others. My case was mild in medical terms even though it ravaged my lungs, stomach and heart

Cross posted. Yes exactly what you're saying.

And I'm so sorry for what you're going through. Far too many people want to ignore, deny, or downplay Long Covid risks .

I know lots of research is going on into Long Covid and potential treatment. I hope in time to you'll find a way to treat and/or manage it - hopefully eventually a full recovery