Christmas fixtures, what can we hope for?

Quoted from promotion plaice

Good luck getting a drink at the home games if you go in the Lower Trust Bar, tried to get a drink in there at the Chesterfield game and it was about eight deep, and I went in there about five minutes before half time to try and beat the queues. Gave up in the end.

Wish they still had that table bar in the foyer/entrance.

Wont be able to get to any of them unfortunately.

I hope six points, a win against Kings Lynn
Draws in the home games and the usual away defeat
Very worst case, three draws and a defeat If we continue with five at the back and no wingers.
Usual worry how will we ever score a goal to win a game!
Utm

Quoted from ska face

Because Kieth Starmer shíts his pants at the thought of doing any opposing for fear someone in the Telegraph would say he’s “playing politics”.

Just to get this back onto football, I hope someone does a Dave Busst on Starmer’s neck

Disgusting comment.


Moderators?

Quoted from promotion plaice

I'm pretty sure it was said in jest DB mate  

My apologies LH, didn't see the joke but get it now.

Quoted from 137

Disgusting comment.


Moderators?

Quick, someone inform the Compliance Unit!

Quoted from Poojah

Let me be clear; I am no Covid-sceptic. Going back as far as January last year I was one of the first to raise alarm bells among family, friends and colleagues, and quite a bit of písstaking I took for it too. However, I have learned to become very sceptical of this cabinet and in particular Boris Johnson.

I think it’s fair to say that it is widely accepted that Omicron is an incredibly transmissible virus, and that’s evident in this country and in particular London right now. But other countries do not seem to be as panicked or as frenzied as we do, so why is that?

This article from the Telegraph suggests that Omicron may in fact be a very mild disease indeed, and top scientists in South Africa remain perplexed at our response to its arrival on our shores. It’s worth a read (link to bypass paywall):

https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%.....vaccine-jabs-give%2F

Now I realise you could come back at me with any number of doomsday-esque articles from our own press, and that selectively calling out particularly optimistic or grim articles isn’t a very objective way of looking at things.

But this is fact. The current 7 day average for Covid cases in South Africa is 21,917 - the highest it has ever been. The second highest was in early July, when cases hit just over 19,000. At that point in time the 7 day average for deaths was 338. The latest 7 day average death figure? 24, a number of which are understood to be Delta, not Omicron. I appreciate this is a small sample, but unless Omicron has a much greater lag between the recording of cases through to death, then it’s certainly indicative of a significant reduction in lethality.

So why would a government that has been famed for acting way, way too late multiple times in the past, suddenly become a world leader in urgency and caution? Why? Simply because it had found itself down political shít creek, and Omicron is its paddle.

I recognise the fact that Omicron’s transmissibility is problematic; I’m not completely dismissing it. But do I believe that all of the fear and panic currently being peddled is for the good of the British people, or for the British government? You can probably work out the answer to that.

Don't wholly disagree, but I don't think the number of deaths is what's scaring decision makers tbh.

It's incredibly transmissible and may see a rise on hospitalisatons not deaths. Given the state of our NHS and the fact is winter with flu season and other things going around, a small spike in hospitalizations could have disastrous consequences and lead to strain which again sees essential operations and screening etc not happen.

It's also around 10 day isolation of healthcare staff. There are some organisations with half their staff off work, if this is a hospital then things are going to get cancelled. Yes it may be mild for the staff but even Omicron poses risks to elderly and sick patients in hospital, as does flu - you wouldn't want a nurse with flu treating extremely ill patients in any ward.

Pre-covid the NHS was in such a state (and there a few reasons for this) that they were on their knees most winters without Covid to contend with.

Noone should be placing the disease of Covid post-vaccination in the same severity as other things - probably similar to the fiu which still does kill 30 000 a year. But the NHS and other fronting services cannot cope with it ripping through the population.

A better funded and stable NHS might have seen us able to act differently once majority were vaccinated, but that isn't our start point.

Quoted from MarinerWY

Don't wholly disagree, but I don't think the number of deaths is what's scaring decision makers tbh.

It's incredibly transmissible and may see a rise on hospitalisatons not deaths. Given the state of our NHS and the fact is winter with flu season and other things going around, a small spike in hospitalizations could have disastrous consequences and lead to strain which again sees essential operations and screening etc not happen.

It's also around 10 day isolation of healthcare staff. There are some organisations with half their staff off work, if this is a hospital then things are going to get cancelled. Yes it may be mild for the staff but even Omicron poses risks to elderly and sick patients in hospital, as does flu - you wouldn't want a nurse with flu treating extremely ill patients in any ward.

Pre-covid the NHS was in such a state (and there a few reasons for this) that they were on their knees most winters without Covid to contend with.

Noone should be placing the disease of Covid post-vaccination in the same severity as other things - probably similar to the fiu which still does kill 30 000 a year. But the NHS and other fronting services cannot cope with it ripping through the population.

A better funded and stable NHS might have seen us able to act differently once majority were vaccinated, but that isn't our start point.

Completely non-football, but a good post. If the ideal of the NHS was actually funded properly we probably would never have needed lockdowns in the first place.

Quoted from MarinerWY

Don't wholly disagree, but I don't think the number of deaths is what's scaring decision makers tbh.

It's incredibly transmissible and may see a rise on hospitalisatons not deaths. Given the state of our NHS and the fact is winter with flu season and other things going around, a small spike in hospitalizations could have disastrous consequences and lead to strain which again sees essential operations and screening etc not happen.

It's also around 10 day isolation of healthcare staff. There are some organisations with half their staff off work, if this is a hospital then things are going to get cancelled. Yes it may be mild for the staff but even Omicron poses risks to elderly and sick patients in hospital, as does flu - you wouldn't want a nurse with flu treating extremely ill patients in any ward.

Pre-covid the NHS was in such a state (and there a few reasons for this) that they were on their knees most winters without Covid to contend with.

Noone should be placing the disease of Covid post-vaccination in the same severity as other things - probably similar to the fiu which still does kill 30 000 a year. But the NHS and other fronting services cannot cope with it ripping through the population.

A better funded and stable NHS might have seen us able to act differently once majority were vaccinated, but that isn't our start point.

We’re all getting this over the course of the next few weeks, due to its transmissibility. However, there are positive signs that hospitalisations and deaths are going to be significantly lower per case. First, hospitalisations:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news.....cron-wave-much-lower

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne.....mitted-hospital.html

And then once in hospital, people are apparently falling far less ill:

https://mobile.twitter.com/michaelzlin/status/1471749391585214465?s=20

It’s going to be a rough few weeks, particularly after Christmas, purely due to how widespread this will be. But this will not be as terrifying as is being reported, and I say that who honestly has not downplayed previous waves.

Those figures are promising re hospitalisatons and deaths but doesn't help the staff shortage which is already happening:
https://www.theguardian.com/wo.....are_AndroidApp_Other

Sadly I know people who have missed cancer screening appointments, cancer growths weren't identified and their cancer is now at a much later stage (in one case terminal and without long left) than it perhaps would have been without the NHS getting overwhelmed over the past 2 years.

Also , we very much aren't the only country bringing in measures to limit the spread of Omicron. Ireland, France, Denmark and the US to name a few.

It certainly appears as though Omicron is less virulent than Delta and an early study just released seems to indicate that it may be quite a bit less dangerous to lung tissue than all previous variants. The theory is that this might lead to less serious illness. However, the rapid infection rate means that this might not be enough to save us from disaster.

Important factors to consider when comparing what seems to be occurring in South Africa to what may happen here:

Median age in South Africa: ~28
Median age in the UK: ~40

We have a much, much older population than in South Africa. Age is the major factor with serious disease in Covid and it is pretty certain that this will hold true with Omicron.

South Africa has had approximately double the death rate per capita compared to the UK (as calculated through excess death estimates) during the pandemic. The 3 previous waves hit there badly and they didn't have the ability to lockdown in the way we did and didn't have the levels of medical care we did. This means that a lot of the most vulnerable in SA have already been lost before Omicron hit.

Seroprevalence measured in Gauteng province before Omicron hit was (I seem to remember reading - sorry don't have the link to hand) something over 70% i.e. around three-quarters of people have previously been infected. The ONS surveillance reports indicate that around 20% of the UK population have probably been infected during the pandemic. Rates in older people and the vulnerable will be a lot lower than this due to shielding and the lockdowns. It is thought that prior infection probably provides a broader immune response than the vaccines though not known if one is better than the other when it comes to avoiding serious disease.

It is the summer in South Africa and the winter here. You're not going to have many people meeting indoors with the windows and doors closed in SA to keep things warm enough. I wouldn't expect there is too much aircon in use in SA among the most vulnerable populations.

These factors need to be taken into account when comparing the UK with the outcomes in SA.

Things we have going in our benefit are that we've got a much, much larger proportion of the population vaccinated. We've got a stronger healthcare service as well, though that will break if Omicron isn't incredibly mild in comparison to previous variants. The rate of infection is incredible, doubling in 1.5 days at present (and Yorkshire & the Humber have the highest rate of increase in the latest data). If we just carry on as normal, the hospitals will be overwhelmed in a few weeks even if Omicron is only one 10th as dangerous as Delta (a hypothetical number plucked out of the air to prove a point) - at the current rates of increase (which are likely to fall), that's would be about one additional week of cases to wipe out the drop in risk of 90%.

We'll have to wait and see how serious it proves to be in populations with similar demographics and vaccine status to ourselves. Unfortunately, there is only the UK, Denmark and Norway at the head of the Omicron wave at present. Denmark a bit ahead of other developed countries though probably only by a few days. Denmark and Norway have already brought in some restrictions and are increasing them as the days go on. We're not. It will take a week or two to see how this affects infection rates over there (they will continue to rocket up in Denark and Norway for a while yet due to those already infected but not symptomatic) and it will provide an interesting comparison with our approach of doing sodomist all.

I'd guess we're heading towards disaster rather than catastrophe which doesn't exactly encourage me.

If a mod wants to move this post to the other forum, not a problem for me. Just replying here because that's where Poojah has made his comments.