How can they still say nothing?

[Purplegurple]

So numbers today over 183,000. How can BoJo and his cronies still be making no statement? No clear guidance, nothing. I'm not wanting lockdown or anything but can't believe they're so quiet over all this.

I sadly caught covid from my son . Tested +ve first signs of a sore throat and I was +ve. My son tested +ve on 24th so I'd already cancelled our plans. I'm clinically extremely vulnerable, so I was pretty worried, but I'm convinced it's omnicrom as I had classic symptons as did my son. He was poorly than me but after 5 days he tested -ve followed by 2 other-ve tests which meant he could go out NYE clear of infection. I on the other hand am still testing +ve so still in isolation! But my symptoms are so mild. I know a high proportion of people have no symptoms but I think omnicrom is much more mild so they're holding off taking action. The prob is more infections mean the most vulnerable (and in that I include the non vaccinated) will get infected and that means more hospitalisation and avoidable deaths. This way to herd immunity is what the UK wanted to do to start with and the WHO critiqued the UK government. I do going other countries are rightly applying caution and the UK is yet again a bit experiment, but then this government actually doesn't give a toss. They've just done a deal to sell part of the nhs to a USA business....! Congrats to the 40% of voters to elected this government, you've finally created the opportunity for privatisation of what we hold dearest :(

This way to herd immunity is what the UK wanted to do to start with and the WHO critiqued the UK government. Herd immunity was bullshit a myth, it is expected many of the young people who caught Delta last term will now catch Omicron this term.

Of course people have anxiety. We’ve spent nearly 2 years being told we and those around us might die.

People deal with that anxiety differently. Some might prefer to pretend none of this is happening and it was all an overreaction, others might remain in fear of it for a long time and prefer the security of restrictions.

@Jooox

Of course people have anxiety. We’ve spent nearly 2 years being told we and those around us might die.

People deal with that anxiety differently. Some might prefer to pretend none of this is happening and it was all an overreaction, others might remain in fear of it for a long time and prefer the security of restrictions.

Or we could accept and understand the reality that we're in, and do stuff that helps.

They’re not but they should be as they’re often the only places that cev people can’t avoid.

We weren't locking down for the sake of CEV people. That really doesn't make sense in terms of the government's actions.

We locked down so that we would have functional health & emergency services. We didn't want inconvenient piles of corpses - from too many people dying all at once. Thousands of extra deaths staggered over the summer was just fine, remember.

We are not going to lock down now to protect CEV people.

If we lockdown - or implement other measures- it will be to keep society functioning as a whole.

it is expected many of the young people who caught Delta last term will now catch Omicron this term.

But the good news is that having had Omicron seems to protect against Delta!

@Jooox

Of course people have anxiety. We’ve spent nearly 2 years being told we and those around us might die.

People deal with that anxiety differently. Some might prefer to pretend none of this is happening and it was all an overreaction, others might remain in fear of it for a long time and prefer the security of restrictions.

I don’t think it’s either / or

You can be aware of your general risk (which might be very low, and made lower by vaccines) but still know what is happening.

You don’t have to be anxious or pretend none of this is happening

@herecomesthsun

We weren't locking down for the sake of CEV people. That really doesn't make sense in terms of the government's actions.

We locked down so that we would have functional health & emergency services. We didn't want inconvenient piles of corpses - from too many people dying all at once. Thousands of extra deaths staggered over the summer was just fine, remember.

We are not going to lock down now to protect CEV people.

If we lockdown - or implement other measures- it will be to keep society functioning as a whole.

As PP said,

Lockdown and removal of basic freedoms should be an emergency measure, only implemented if we are on the brink of total disaster ie war.

It shouldn’t be the default way of managing underfunded public services.

It was to avoid a disaster (as they had in various countries in the pandemic)

Read about it

Of course it’s not either/or, that’s why I said ‘some’ and ‘others’ to demonstrate either end of the scale. There’s a huge swathe of people in between ‘some’ and ‘others’.

I wonder if some posters just enjoy arguing for the sake of it.

@Jooox

Of course it’s not either/or, that’s why I said ‘some’ and ‘others’ to demonstrate either end of the scale. There’s a huge swathe of people in between ‘some’ and ‘others’.

Yes there are. You wouldn’t think that from here sometimes though.

Not highly anxious about Covid but also not pretending it’s not happening.

If I was pretending it wasn’t happening, I wouldn’t have allowed myself to be injected 3 times & arranged a PCR every time I have an active cough/cold. I believe in taking measures, just not as far as we have.

I’m of the same opinion as you @Lifeisnteasy

The evidence thus far for the omicron wave suggests that people with covid are far less likely to be ill so the high case/infection level is much less of a healthcare problem and far more an economic one where people that can't work from home are by virtue of being covid positive removed from the economy. At very high levels of prevalence the rules (and restrictions) become part of the problem not part of the solution. The previous summer pingdemic with lower prevalence levels than now highlighted how the rules became part of the problem, solved incidentally by the epidemiological dubious relaxation that fully vaxxed contacts including other members of your household didn't need to isolate unless symptomatic.

So its fairly obvious to me that politicians are now going to have to make a hard choice, as doing nothing isn't going to be sustainable soon. We've not IMHO reached the peak countrywide yet.

Either to restrict in an attempt to drive prevalence down, this won't ultimately reduce the total number of cases, infections, hospitalisations or deaths over the wave just prolongate them probably for a few months longer than doing nothing. This wouldn't be to protect the NHS but to protect the functioning of the economy to ensure enough workers are available for it to continue without extended shortages. Remember not everyone can WFH and if a critical ratio of those that can't end up in covid isolation because of the rules things get really tricky.

Alternatively, they can accept that the rules and restrictions are part of the problem, the cure being worse than the disease so to speak and introduce relaxations primarily to free more people from covid isolation. The US slashing mandatory isolation down to five days from ten days is IMHO an economic rather than epidemiological driven measure. The change in the US "releases" 1.3m people back into the economy.

Politically restrictions look like and indeed would be a u-turn, the media in particular BBC news already crowing that the last worthwhile point for restrictions as per Warrick modelling was boxing day. Equally relaxing in the face of rising cases looks to be difficult even if it is IMHO the right call. I suspect we will trundle along for a couple of months with little or no change to existing restrictions.

Our school is encouraging the wearing of masks; but is a great deal keener on pupils and others staying at home if they have any of the new or old symptoms of covid. They really don't want spread happening in school on their watch, if it can be at all avoided. Very keen on regular LFTs too, at home if possible but also supported in school.

I can see the logic.

The evidence thus far for the omicron wave suggests that people with covid are far less likely to be ill so the high case/infection level is much less of a healthcare problem

That's not what the doctors and other hospital staff (those who actually know) are saying. Sheer numbers of ill due to the higher transmission is a problem for struggling overwhelmed hospitals and staff.

But of course it's not a problem for insulated MPs. Likewise our Pravda like media. They, like many on here, are well aware of the socioeconomic risk factors that keep them themselves protected. (Plus I suspect very short supply sotrovimab is available for senior MPs and other very high profile individuals).

I suspect we will trundle along for a couple of months with little or no change to existing restrictions.

Yes I think you're right. The government with the help of the media has successfully encouraged the public that 1000s killed every week is a 'low' number of deaths, and that eugenics lite letting the bodies pile up very high is acceptable. It's only The Others afterall. As for the million plus (and counting) Long Covid disabled? Shhhh, don't mention that. They're just another group of The Others.

Freedom. Boost the economy.
Oh but, don't smoke contribute huge tax revenue people. It might shorten your life...

Today's media includes an article on us apparently doing a Sweden. It does concede that Sweden has a higher death rate and worse economy than it's Scandinavian neighbours, but it neglects to mention the very relevant fact (for social distancing and voluntary mitigations) that unlike overcrowded Britain, 50% of Swedes live alone. The article was also completely Western centric.

The evidence thus far for the omicron wave suggests that people with covid are far less likely to be ill so the high case/infection level is much less of a healthcare problem this is false as the numbers requiring admission are expected to go very high due to the number of infections.

Politically restrictions look like and indeed would be a u-turn

A wise man may change his mind. A fool, never.

the media in particular BBC news already crowing

Who is elected (and funded by the taxpayer) to run the country? The media, or the government?

Likewise our Pravda like media.

eugenics lite

Oh but, don't smoke —contribute huge tax revenue— people. It might shorten your life...

Smoke away if you want to. But the media aren’t Pravda and the countless eugenics comments you’ve made are offensive

Yes I agree. The eugenics lite Let the bodies pile up because 'it's only the elderly and disabled' is indeed offensive.

As some of the most enthusiastic proponents of Let the Bodies pile up are very well aware, 6 out of 10 of those killed by Covid were disabled.

I'm no fan of Jeremy Corbyn. Quite the opposite. Can't stand the man. But he, and the group of doctors who wrote to the British Medical Journal last February, described it as social murder. They have a good point.

Yet Jeremy Corbyn voted against restrictions. Presumably because he knows that they are most punishing for those who have the least security.

The answer to social/health inequality is to direct the funding better to where it is needed, not just lockdown lockdown lockdown.