Scrutable

Plan B is over. Even face masks.

I was quite surprised that pretty much everything is going. The government line will now be that they took the correct decision in not adding more restrictions, but I think it's more that they took a reckless gamble that turned out OK by pure luck. And even "turned out OK" is relative - it looks like we're peaking at ~20,000 in hospital with covid (and even if they are there for something else and just happen to have covid as well they still need to be on a covid ward) with 250+ deaths a day (7 day average), with attendant massive strain on the NHS.

They should be mandating FFP2/3 masks not getting rid of them completely. I am going to keep wearing mine.

Herainestold wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 2:15 pm They should be mandating FFP2/3 masks not getting rid of them completely. I am going to keep wearing mine.

I don't think there's too much science behind the announcement. I'll keep wearing a mask in enclosed public spaces

wilsontown wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:51 pm I was quite surprised that pretty much everything is going. The government line will now be that they took the correct decision in not adding more restrictions, but I think it's more that they took a reckless gamble that turned out OK by pure luck. And even "turned out OK" is relative - it looks like we're peaking at ~20,000 in hospital with covid (and even if they are there for something else and just happen to have covid as well they still need to be on a covid ward) with 250+ deaths a day (7 day average), with attendant massive strain on the NHS.

How are we doing against pre-pandemic excess deaths? Is that part of the justification, I wonder?

badger wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 8:17 pm

wilsontown wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:51 pm I was quite surprised that pretty much everything is going. The government line will now be that they took the correct decision in not adding more restrictions, but I think it's more that they took a reckless gamble that turned out OK by pure luck. And even "turned out OK" is relative - it looks like we're peaking at ~20,000 in hospital with covid (and even if they are there for something else and just happen to have covid as well they still need to be on a covid ward) with 250+ deaths a day (7 day average), with attendant massive strain on the NHS.

How are we doing against pre-pandemic excess deaths? Is that part of the justification, I wonder?

Not brilliantly

note that 2020 and 2021 were the highest Decembers this century

Wk44-51 (wks 52 and 53 are a bit strange) 2015-2019 average was 84302, 2021 was 96172

It feels like we're back to square one in this game of snakes and ladders.

Thanks @jimbob, but I suspect the decision makers look at this kind of thing: https://twitter.com/ONS/status/14833716 ... wsrc%5Etfw
and say, "ah, we're below average now, let's ditch NPIs and crack on"

Also when you look at figure for all cause published today, that dotted line that says "expected deaths had pandemic not occurred", which is around where we are now, again looks convincing on one level that we are AOK.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... ly-reports

It will be interesting to see if hospitals cope, and how much immunity Omi confers. My eldest tested positive again just over 5 weeks after coming out of isolation from his first one, almost certainly Delta in December and then Omi in January. If that's him (and everyone else) sorted for the next 6 months, then we're all good to go until next winter, right?

“ By 24 March, the legal requirement for people with Covid to self-isolate will end”

So, we’re back to a sense of normality again. Let’s see how the NHS copes.

headshot wrote: Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:17 pm “ By 24 March, the legal requirement for people with Covid to self-isolate will end”

So, we’re back to a sense of normality again. Let’s see how the NHS copes.

Meanwhile in NZ house hold contacts of positive tests have to isolate for 24 days.

New Zealand will make household contacts of Covid cases isolate for 24 days under harsh new rules brought in to combat an impending Omicron outbreak.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has brought in the strict measures as the country battles to stay Covid Zero despite the threat of the highly contagious mutant strain.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -DAYS.html

Where have the mail got that from?

NZ has a 14 day isolation period, with 10 days for close contacts.

What benefit would 24 days have?

headshot wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 7:33 am Where have the mail got that from?

NZ has a 14 day isolation period, with 10 days for close contacts.

What benefit would 24 days have?

I think they're saying that if you are a close contact you have to isolate for 10 days, and if on Day 10 you test positive then you have to isolate for a further 14 days. That would make 24 days, which isn't a duration explicit in the NZ regulations (I think).

But, my reading of the NZ regulations is that if you are positive, you have to isolate for 14 days or until you are negative and have zero symptoms for 3 days (72 hours). I'm not sure if it's at least 14 days, or if you test positive but then test negative the clock is re-set to 3 days.

Either way, you could spin it to longer than 24 days if you wanted to be really scare-mongering (this is the Mail!)

They are being ultra cautious in NZ.

They have gone to Code Red on their Covid 19 protection framework, which involves masking and attendance restrictions.
It does not involve an actual lockdown.

Jacinda Ardern has cancelled her wedding.

"My wedding will not be going ahead," she told reporters, adding she was sorry for anyone caught up in a similar scenario. Ardern had not disclosed her wedding date, but it was rumored to be imminent.

About 94% of New Zealand's population over the age of 12 is fully vaccinated and about 56% of those eligible have had booster shots.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-paci ... 022-01-22/

Martin_B wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 1:48 pm

headshot wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 7:33 am Where have the mail got that from?

NZ has a 14 day isolation period, with 10 days for close contacts.

What benefit would 24 days have?

I think they're saying that if you are a close contact you have to isolate for 10 days, and if on Day 10 you test positive then you have to isolate for a further 14 days. That would make 24 days, which isn't a duration explicit in the NZ regulations (I think).

But, my reading of the NZ regulations is that if you are positive, you have to isolate for 14 days or until you are negative and have zero symptoms for 3 days (72 hours). I'm not sure if it's at least 14 days, or if you test positive but then test negative the clock is re-set to 3 days.

Either way, you could spin it to longer than 24 days if you wanted to be really scare-mongering (this is the Mail!)

Yes I think they are adding the 10 and 14, which might work out to be the case, but there are other combinations, which could be less... or more depending on how your tests work out.

24 days sounds like a long time, but in China some people had to isolate in their apartments for six months.
In the Philippines a friend couldn't leave his house for about 3 months as he is older than 65. His wife and kid could go out but not him. He was living in a place where the regulations were strictly enforced, which was not true everywhere.

Martin_B wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 1:48 pm

headshot wrote: Sun Jan 23, 2022 7:33 am Where have the mail got that from?

NZ has a 14 day isolation period, with 10 days for close contacts.

What benefit would 24 days have?

I think they're saying that if you are a close contact you have to isolate for 10 days, and if on Day 10 you test positive then you have to isolate for a further 14 days. That would make 24 days, which isn't a duration explicit in the NZ regulations (I think).

But, my reading of the NZ regulations is that if you are positive, you have to isolate for 14 days or until you are negative and have zero symptoms for 3 days (72 hours). I'm not sure if it's at least 14 days, or if you test positive but then test negative the clock is re-set to 3 days.

Either way, you could spin it to longer than 24 days if you wanted to be really scare-mongering (this is the Mail!)

Clause 5b. requires "persons living in the same household as a case (regardless of their vaccination status) until they have returned a negative result to a day 8 COVID-19 PCR test and completed 10 days from the date of the person’s last potential exposure to COVID-19, as set out in guidance published on the Ministry of Health website" The last exposure is counted as 14 days after the case's positive test. So 24 days in all, as they have to isolate while the case isolates as well.

I know someone who got caught up in these type of rules before they changed in South Australia. Their son arrived from interstate and tested positive on their arrival test. They isolated at their parent's house, who were also required to isolate as close contacts. Once the son was free to go, the parents were required to isolated for a further 14 days as close contacts, despite testing negative several times. Needless to say they were not exactly pleased with the additional isolation requirement.