|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On December 16 2021 22:35 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Looks like we don’t know much about how dangerous omicron is though, just that it’s unbelievably contagious (i read that it’s estimated there are 400k new cases a day in the uk). We can pray that it’s a milder strain, in which case it might be our pandemic exit.
If it’s as dangerous as delta, we are really screwed.
France is thinking about making the vaccine compulsory, which at that point is a no brainer imo.
I think it's pretty much a given it's less dangerous, however what does it mean long term? Will Omicron lead to long Covid problems as well? That would be a disaster given how contagious it is.
|
There is also the issue that it might be half as dangerous, but if its twice as infectious the end result is just as bad.
|
|
|
On December 16 2021 23:01 Gorsameth wrote:
There is also the issue that it might be half as dangerous, but if its twice as infectious the end result is just as bad.
I read this on the BBC too.
I don't think that's actually how it works.
I don't know that 'half as dangerous' is even helpful as a description. Its pretty vague on what the consequences of 'half as dangerous' are.
|
If it has 70% the hospitalization rate of Delta, but is 3x as infectious, you still wind up with 2.1x the number of people in hospital. You can't directly measure severity, just metrics like hospitalization/ICU/death rates to see where severity lines up.
If we get a Delta level dangerous strain, coupled with the infectivity of omicron, we can kiss a quick exit goodbye.
|
On December 17 2021 02:07 Lmui wrote:
If it has 70% the hospitalization rate of Delta, but is 3x as infectious, you still wind up with 2.1x the number of people in hospital. You can't directly measure severity, just metrics like hospitalization/ICU/death rates to see where severity lines up.
If we get a Delta level dangerous strain, coupled with the infectivity of omicron, we can kiss a quick exit goodbye.
At the moment in the UK we have a ridiculous infection rate, but very little talk of massive hospitalisations, and iirc one recorded death from omicron.
Obviously its early in this particular wave, but hospitalisations are definitely not at 70% of where they were early this year.
|
|
|
On December 16 2021 23:11 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 16 2021 23:01 Gorsameth wrote:
There is also the issue that it might be half as dangerous, but if its twice as infectious the end result is just as bad. The only silver lining would be once the wave passes badically everyone would have some level of protection.Hopefully enough of the population has some protection and our healthcare systems can hold as it does seem like avoiding getting this one is a pipe dream, its a when and not amd if.
Well it's not that obvious. At one point or another we will have to just live with the virus or one of its variants. The moment we can let the virus - or rather the current variant at that moment - circulate without fearing that the healtcare system could be overwhelmed, we will.
At the moment we have very little data, but the UK whould tell us in the next couple of weeks what percentage of people get seriously ill from the omicron. It might very well be that this is the "very contagious but not that dangerous" one and that we should just not try to fight it. Time will tell.
On December 17 2021 02:31 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2021 02:13 Jockmcplop wrote:On December 17 2021 02:07 Lmui wrote:
If it has 70% the hospitalization rate of Delta, but is 3x as infectious, you still wind up with 2.1x the number of people in hospital. You can't directly measure severity, just metrics like hospitalization/ICU/death rates to see where severity lines up.
If we get a Delta level dangerous strain, coupled with the infectivity of omicron, we can kiss a quick exit goodbye. At the moment in the UK we have a ridiculous infection rate, but very little talk of massive hospitalisations, and iirc one recorded death from omicron. Obviously its early in this particular wave, but hospitalisations are definitely not at 70% of where they were early this year. Norway is currently breaking records as our otger places that were not hit hard before. Now I dont know if that us delta driven or not. Heres to hoping its mild but gives good protection amd we can get a surge and get past it. Its hard to be too optmistic given how past waves have started in similar waves but there does appear to be more optimism from tge MDs then in the past.
As far as we know, Norway is in a Delta wave.
Note that I'm not saying anything about omicron, just that we don't quite know. The normal evolution of a virus is to get more contagious and less lethal with time. Lethality is a shit evolutionary strategy for a virus. Killing your host is a total fuck up as far as pathogens are concerned.
|
On December 17 2021 02:48 Biff The Understudy wrote:
The normal evolution of a virus is to get more contagious and less lethal with time. Lethality is a shit evolutionary strategy for a virus. Killing your host is a total fuck up as far as pathogens are concerned.
That only happens if the lethality affects the infectiousness. In the case of SARS-CoV-2, people infect others during 2-3 days before the onset of symptoms and 2-3 afterwards, and die a few weeks after that.
|
|
|
I'm a lot more worried about it filling up hospitals. Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Once they have to start turning away people it'll get bad fast. They're already only allowing people 2 weeks on max vent
|
On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take.
Sounds like they should get more ICU beds.
|
On December 18 2021 00:09 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Sounds like they should get more ICU beds. Again, the limit is almost never the amount of physical beds but the personal to care for patients.
"Just get more beds" is not a thing.
|
On December 18 2021 00:32 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 00:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Sounds like they should get more ICU beds. Again, the limit is almost never the amount of physical beds but the personal to care for patients. "Just get more beds" is not a thing.
Pretty sure that that is what is implied when someone says "get more beds". I doubt that anyone thinks that the main thing needed is the literal bed.
|
On December 18 2021 00:34 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 00:32 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2021 00:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Sounds like they should get more ICU beds. Again, the limit is almost never the amount of physical beds but the personal to care for patients. "Just get more beds" is not a thing. Pretty sure that that is what is implied when someone says "get more beds". I doubt that anyone thinks that the main thing needed is the literal bed.
You'd be surprised...
|
On December 18 2021 00:34 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 00:32 Gorsameth wrote:On December 18 2021 00:09 LegalLord wrote:On December 17 2021 23:19 Sermokala wrote:
Minnesota literally has about an ICU bed for a million people on a day give or take. Sounds like they should get more ICU beds. Again, the limit is almost never the amount of physical beds but the personal to care for patients. "Just get more beds" is not a thing. Pretty sure that that is what is implied when someone says "get more beds". I doubt that anyone thinks that the main thing needed is the literal bed.
Yeah, that. We talked through the details of how to address the key shortages (mostly labor, it seems) just a few pages back. A clearly better solution than holding society hostage to "number of ICU beds available" when the cause of said shortage is highly solvable.
|
|
|
On Wednesday I was in close contact with someone who has tested positive today. It was a squash tournament with a few drinks afterwards. He tested negative on Wednesday before the tournament (we were asked to do a lateral flow test) and the next day, but he was supposed to fly home for Christmas today and tested positive before the flight.
Does anyone know if a PCR test will tell me if I got infected? I had my booster yesterday, so I have the usual post-vaccine symptoms. For the record, my mom is unvaccinated, which is why I am strongly considering cancelling my flight, unless there's a way to rule out my getting infected.
|
On December 18 2021 04:31 maybenexttime wrote:
On Wednesday I was in close contact with someone who has tested positive today. It was a squash tournament with a few drinks afterwards. He tested negative on Wednesday before the tournament (we were asked to do a lateral flow test) and the next day, but he was supposed to fly home for Christmas today and tested positive before the flight.
Does anyone know if a PCR test will tell me if I got infected? I had my booster yesterday, so I have the usual post-vaccine symptoms. For the record, my mom is unvaccinated, which is why I am strongly considering cancelling my flight, unless there's a way to rule out my getting infected.
Here in the US i have been told if you get tested before 5-7 days since contact you can get a false negative.
Better to wait at least 5 days since contact unless you have symptoms.
|
On December 18 2021 04:47 Sadist wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2021 04:31 maybenexttime wrote:
On Wednesday I was in close contact with someone who has tested positive today. It was a squash tournament with a few drinks afterwards. He tested negative on Wednesday before the tournament (we were asked to do a lateral flow test) and the next day, but he was supposed to fly home for Christmas today and tested positive before the flight.
Does anyone know if a PCR test will tell me if I got infected? I had my booster yesterday, so I have the usual post-vaccine symptoms. For the record, my mom is unvaccinated, which is why I am strongly considering cancelling my flight, unless there's a way to rule out my getting infected. Here in the US i have been told if you get tested before 5-7 days since contact you can get a false negative. Better to wait at least 5 days since contact unless you have symptoms.
I've been told that about the lateral flow tests. PCR tests, from what I've read, work by amplifying the sample's viral matter. They can be used to determine at what stage of the infection you are based on how many cycles were needed to reach a certain level of amplified viral matter. I'm just not sure how sensitive they as, considering this would be the very beginning of the infection process for me.
My flight is on Monday, which makes this situation more tricky. Ironically, if I cancel my flight because of this, maybe it'll nudge my mom to get vaccinated...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
