IOM Covid removing restrictions

[wrighty]

34 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

And just as important vaccination doesn't protect everyone 100% - and we don't really know how long existing vaccinations will last for or if the delayed second dose will be effective.  This explains the decisions of nursing homes to stop visitors - even if there is 90% effectiveness that mean 10% of your residents might be vulnerable.

Looking at the figures from the recent outbreak that I quoted on a previous page, you can use those to work out how likely Covid was to put you in hospital.  Overall it was 4%, but it varied a lot by age range:

0-9:  1%

10-19:  0%

20-29:  2%

30-39:  3%

40-49:  5%

50-59:  5%

60-69:  19%

70+:  25%

We're use to the virus having a devastating effect on the extremely elderly, but this shows that those in their 60s seem almost as vulnerable.

Edited to add:  It's worth emphasising that over half those hospitalised were under 60, because the higher rates of infection among younger groups meant the smaller percentages of hospitalisation still produced a lot of patients.

Risk of needing hospital admission for covid is proportional to e^0.044t, where t is age in years. It doubles for every 15 years of age. 
 

Risk of dying is proportional to e^0.109t - doubles every 6 years. 
 

If anyone is interested I can get the coefficients to calculate actual probabilities (not got the numbers to hand on my phone)

[Roger Mexico]

16 minutes ago, trmpton said:

"Hospitalised" makes in sound like COVID put them all in hospital.  We know it didn’t. 

Actually we know it did.  Because the figures were in answer to a question that asked for "a breakdown of the age profile of individuals admitted to hospital for treatment for COVID-19", which is what Hooper asked.  It can't be any clearer.

You and many others have spent the last year telling yourselves a constant stream of reassuring fairy stories that somehow Covid won't affect people like you.  Of course it has affected people like you and some people like you have died from it.

Edited April 24, 2021 by Roger Mexico
Missing words

[ptarmigan]

1 hour ago, Banker said:

Well people who aren’t happy can make their own choices & avoid crowds etc & stay in as much possible 

Yes that helps. But if you are a shop worker you might prefer not to be working in an unventilated shop with mo one wearing a mask.  

[TerryFuchwit]

53 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Actually we know it did.  Because the figures were in answer to a question that asked for "a breakdown of the age profile of individuals admitted to hospital for treatment for COVID-19", which is what Hooper asked.  It can't be any clearer.

You and many others have spent the last year telling yourselves a constant stream of reassuring fairy stories that somehow Covid won't affect people like you.  Of course it has affected people like you and some people like you have died from it.

True.  But in fairness young people die of all sorts.of things every day.

The truth is that hardly any young people at all have died of covid.  Sure, we can all find an article about one but so what?

What's the age of the youngest person on island to die because of Covid?

[code99]

4 hours ago, Out of the blue said:

It is unfortunately going to take a little time for mindsets to change from elimination/zero cases to accepting that Covid is likely always going to be present to some extent. 

Agreed.

In my opinion the IOMG Covid policy change from forcing people to cocoon themselves in their own homes (and be threatened with imprisonment for breaking the self-isolation rules) to be left alone to make their own judgments regarding Covid risks will take some time for some people to get used to. This will especially be the case for people in the vulnerable categories who have not yet been fully vaccinated. Also, is it fair to expect GPs/ medical professionals to advise patients about Covid risks that even these professionals cannot fully understand? 

For over a year we had lived in a highly state-regulated society where even minor deviations from the government's rules have sometimes been met with what most reasonable people have regarded as excessive punishments. It therefore should not come as a surprise that some sentient beings, unlike AI machines, cannot at the flick of a switch change from the Orwellian world of state control, which we have been in, to a normality where individuals must assess and take their own Covid risks. 

Normal people freely accept that every day they face some personal risks because that is part of living. Similarly, most people accept the big risks like dying of cancer, etc. But Covid is different becasue individuals cannot control Covid risks, but governments can. This new situation will leave some people feeling that they are not in control, and are not being protected either.

I suspect that the new 'living with Covid' mantra will, before long, require much more work by the government that it now appears. The other day the CEO of Pfizer alluded to the fact that booster shots might be required every 6 to 12 months. There is still a lot more science to be done and decisions to be made, of that there is no doubt.     

I intend to live a normal life as much as possible, but I have sympathy for people who are suffering from Covid anxieties. There is an article in today's Guardian that talks about Covid anxiety syndrome. Worth a read:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/24/fears-covid-anxiety-syndrome-could-stop-people-reintegrating

[Banker]

No new cases today, active 11😀

[wrighty]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

Actually we know it did.  Because the figures were in answer to a question that asked for "a breakdown of the age profile of individuals admitted to hospital for treatment for COVID-19", which is what Hooper asked.  It can't be any clearer.

You and many others have spent the last year telling yourselves a constant stream of reassuring fairy stories that somehow Covid won't affect people like you.  Of course it has affected people like you and some people like you have died from it.

Actually we don’t.  I however do know that in at least some cases patients have been admitted having presented with other conditions, found to have covid on routine testing, and as part of their overall treatment plan had the words ‘monitor O2 sats, treat with oxygen if required’ put in their notes. Thus they were admitted to hospital and were treated for covid, but had they not also been run over by a bus (not an actual case, but you get the gist) they wouldn’t have been.

 

[Barlow]

23 minutes ago, code99 said:

to be left alone to make their own judgments regarding Covid risks will take some time for some people to get used to. 

Will this include heros who go to work when they have obvious signs of 'wu-flu or go to the theatre/cinema/pub because they are made of stern stuff. As in me-me-me fuck everyone else.

23 minutes ago, code99 said:

   

I intend to live a normal life as much as possible, but I have sympathy for people who are suffering from Covid anxieties. There is an article in today's Guardian that talks about Covid anxiety syndrome. Worth a read:

 

Can you find an Indian forum to spread your wisdom?

[trmpton]

2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Actually we know it did.  Because the figures were in answer to a question that asked for "a breakdown of the age profile of individuals admitted to hospital for treatment for COVID-19", which is what Hooper asked.  It can't be any clearer.

You and many others have spent the last year telling yourselves a constant stream of reassuring fairy stories that somehow Covid won't affect people like you.  Of course it has affected people like you and some people like you have died from it.

You are wrong, but unfortunately I can't prove it without dropping people in it.

However, I am less scared than you because I 100 percent know that what you are assuming to mean people in hospital who wouldn't have been if it weren't for covid, is completely in accurate and making the situation seem worse than it was.

[Roger Mexico]

2 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Actually we don’t.  I however do know that in at least some cases patients have been admitted having presented with other conditions, found to have covid on routine testing, and as part of their overall treatment plan had the words ‘monitor O2 sats, treat with oxygen if required’ put in their notes. Thus they were admitted to hospital and were treated for covid, but had they not also been run over by a bus (not an actual case, but you get the gist) they wouldn’t have been.

Oh you would expect some of that.  There was the child from St Mary's in January who was picked up in routine testing for instance, but it doesn't look as if they have been included in the figures in the Tynwald answer.  So I assume that obvious 'happens to test positive' cases have been excluded.  

Cases like the ones you describe could have been, depending on whether any treatment rather than monitoring was done.  We don't really know what criteria were applied in counting up the cases.  And there will be some where an existing serious condition has been exacerbated by Covid - do you include those?  I suppose the obvious test is that they wouldn't have needed admission if they hadn't been infected.

[wrighty]

20 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Oh you would expect some of that.  There was the child from St Mary's in January who was picked up in routine testing for instance, but it doesn't look as if they have been included in the figures in the Tynwald answer.  So I assume that obvious 'happens to test positive' cases have been excluded.  

Cases like the ones you describe could have been, depending on whether any treatment rather than monitoring was done.  We don't really know what criteria were applied in counting up the cases.  And there will be some where an existing serious condition has been exacerbated by Covid - do you include those?  I suppose the obvious test is that they wouldn't have needed admission if they hadn't been infected.

Without listing specifics of each case individually, which you can’t, there will always be a degree of subjectivity in answering these questions. 

[code99]

1 hour ago, Barlow said:

Can you find an Indian forum to spread your wisdom?

In case Bar low you are interested.

"Hospitals in India are suffering oxygen supply shortages as the country’s Covid-19 situation has dramatically worsened. India's underfunded health system is on the brink of collapse as the world's worst coronavirus surge wears out the nation. This week the number of recorded cases passed 300,000 a day, along with more than 2,000 deaths".

Edited April 24, 2021 by code99

[Pipsqueak]

27 minutes ago, code99 said:

In case Bar low you are interested.

"Hospitals in India are suffering oxygen supply shortages as the country’s Covid-19 situation has dramatically worsened. India's underfunded health system is on the brink of collapse as the world's worst coronavirus surge wears out the nation. This week the number of recorded cases passed 300,000 a day, along with more than 2,000 deaths".

in % of population terms its probably less than the UK.

[Barlow]

.

Edited April 24, 2021 by Barlow

[Banker]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

Oh you would expect some of that.  There was the child from St Mary's in January who was picked up in routine testing for instance, but it doesn't look as if they have been included in the figures in the Tynwald answer.  So I assume that obvious 'happens to test positive' cases have been excluded.  

Cases like the ones you describe could have been, depending on whether any treatment rather than monitoring was done.  We don't really know what criteria were applied in counting up the cases.  And there will be some where an existing serious condition has been exacerbated by Covid - do you include those?  I suppose the obvious test is that they wouldn't have needed admission if they hadn't been infected.

I think most people will accept Wrighty explanation rather that your scaremongering slant on figures!!