So, coronavirus...

[Sandstorm]

You expect London to peak within a week.

Shut the stations, fence the M25. Keep those filthy city folk away from the rest of the country this Xmas!

[JM2K6]

So 4000 confirmed Omicron cases but PHE stating there has likely been over 200000 cases. Does that not suggest that 98% of Omicron sufferers either have no symptoms or symptoms so mild they aren't getting tested.

Or don't have access to tests. You can't book a PCR in London at the moment and LFT stocks are minimal.

There is that, but I don't think it accounts for a significant factor of the difference.

Simply too many unknowns at this stage, I think.

[Blackmac]

Or don't have access to tests. You can't book a PCR in London at the moment and LFT stocks are minimal.

There is that, but I don't think it accounts for a significant factor of the difference.

Simply too many unknowns at this stage, I think.

Yep, think that's the case but I just feel the scaremongering campaign is just being ramped up too much. Sturgeon has just stated that Omicron now accounts for 27.5% of all cases then announced 110 new Omicron cases out of a total of 3117. Arithmetic obviously not a SG strong point.

[Dogbert]

There is that, but I don't think it accounts for a significant factor of the difference.

Simply too many unknowns at this stage, I think.

Yep, think that's the case but I just feel the scaremongering campaign is just being ramped up too much. Sturgeon has just stated that Omicron now accounts for 27.5% of all cases then announced 110 new Omicron cases out of a total of 3117. Arithmetic obviously not a SG strong point.

If you were listening that is not what she said from the 3,117 new case yes 110 were confirmed to be down to Omicron , however the S gene dropout - a good indication of Omicron levels - is currently present in 27.5% of cases

Is more down to your understanding of the data that has been presented , rather than any SG Arithmetic

[Big D]

Labour will have to tread the line of agreeing with the government, trying to land a kick and trying to widen the rift between front and back benchers. Not sure they have the skills to do it. Which is a shame.

[fishfoodie]

It's just the growth in numbers that is, rightly, scaring health officials.

Even if you've 95% of your population vaccinated; & the vaccines are highly effective; that still leaves you with 5% that can; & will get infected.

If you've 200,000 cases; that's 10k unvaccinated people, in a week !

You can't keep up that level of cases; for any length of time; before your ICUs & hospitals are facing collapse.

[Slick]

Booster done, very efficient again.

Folk sitting waiting the 10 minutes to leave a vaccination station taking their masks off to speak on their phone

[Calculon]

From tomorrow, red list gone.

Just want to thank the UK for alerting the world of Omicron, well done

[petej]

From tomorrow, red list gone.

Just want to thank the UK for alerting the world of Omicron, well done

Spaffer's government has no shame.

[JM2K6]

They lie as easily as breathing.

[I like neeps]

Labour will have to tread the line of agreeing with the government, trying to land a kick and trying to widen the rift between front and back benchers. Not sure they have the skills to do it. Which is a shame.

The backbenchers are total fruitloops who are cosplaying world war two on their WhatsApps. It really shouldn't be difficult. Labour should vote against the restrictions unless there's financial support available for those affected.

[Calculon]

There's also a case, not for fearmongering, but emphasising worst cases that is scientific. Using the precautionary principle is important when you've only got one of something, like a global environment or a global population. If we'd applied it more in earlier waves in the UK, there might not be as many dead.

I don't really understand this term "precautionary principle". What exactly does it mean, just a fancy way of saying "better safe than sorry"? It seems a phrase that can be used to justify whatever precautions (restrictions) are deemed necessary, whatever the actual nature of the resistrictions, and without then having to lay out a clear cost/ bennefit rationale of said restrictions. Which admittedly can be very hard to do consideing the somewhat unpredictable nature of this pandemic.

The UK along with most countries made loads of mistakes in the beginning. Most people , including myself, completely underestimated the impact the virus would have. So I can't be too critical of decisions taken in the first few months. Even those taken by shitty politicians.

[JM2K6]

There's also a case, not for fearmongering, but emphasising worst cases that is scientific. Using the precautionary principle is important when you've only got one of something, like a global environment or a global population. If we'd applied it more in earlier waves in the UK, there might not be as many dead.

I don't really understand this term "precautionary principle". What exactly does it mean, just a fancy way of saying "better safe than sorry"? It seems a phrase that can be used to justify whatever precautions (restrictions) are deemed necessary, whatever the actual nature of the resistrictions, and without then having to lay out a clear cost/ bennefit rationale of said restrictions. Which admittedly can be very hard to do consideing the somewhat unpredictable nature of this pandemic.

The UK along with most countries made loads of mistakes in the beginning. Most people , including myself, completely underestimated the impact the virus would have. So I can't be too critical of decisions taken in the first few months. Even those taken by shitty politicians.

I don't understand that final paragraph. Are you holding governments to the same standard as a layman with no specialist knowledge or access to scientific data?

[SaintK]

I'm sure this will motivate the front line NHS staff. Along with their 1% pay rise

[Slick]

Yup, all together now “fuck you, pay me

[salanya]

A lot of care and penmanship has gone into that:

'lut bsv nidus,
Bois Jruse''


Can the man actually write?!

[Blackmac]

Simply too many unknowns at this stage, I think.

Yep, think that's the case but I just feel the scaremongering campaign is just being ramped up too much. Sturgeon has just stated that Omicron now accounts for 27.5% of all cases then announced 110 new Omicron cases out of a total of 3117. Arithmetic obviously not a SG strong point.

If you were listening that is not what she said from the 3,117 new case yes 110 were confirmed to be down to Omicron , however the S gene dropout - a good indication of Omicron levels - is currently present in 27.5% of cases

Is more down to your understanding of the data that has been presented , rather than any SG Arithmetic

That is certainly not the way she put it. She described how Omicron is indicated by the S gene drop out and then said that they now represent 27.5% of all cases. It's completely splitting hairs to suggest otherwise and we all know that is exactly the way she wanted it to be interpreted.

[Dogbert]

Yep, think that's the case but I just feel the scaremongering campaign is just being ramped up too much. Sturgeon has just stated that Omicron now accounts for 27.5% of all cases then announced 110 new Omicron cases out of a total of 3117. Arithmetic obviously not a SG strong point.

If you were listening that is not what she said from the 3,117 new case yes 110 were confirmed to be down to Omicron , however the S gene dropout - a good indication of Omicron levels - is currently present in 27.5% of cases

Is more down to your understanding of the data that has been presented , rather than any SG Arithmetic

That is certainly not the way she put it. She described how Omicron is indicated by the S gene drop out and then said that they now represent 27.5% of all cases. It's completely splitting hairs to suggest otherwise and we all know that is exactly the way she wanted it to be interpreted.

Precisely , The interpretation is that exactly that the variant now represents 27.5% , That's exactly what she was trying to get over - on purpose , or guess what people would gab onto the 'only 110 out of 3117
Which figure do you think is more accurate 3.52% ( 110/3117) or the 27.5% presented by the S gene dropout ?

Or do you believe that the SG 'just got the "arithmetic wrong "

[fishfoodie]

A lot of care and penmanship has gone into that:

'lut bsv nidus,
Bois Jruse''


Can the man actually write?!

I think that's Latin for; "Get back to work, you plebs"

[Blackmac]

If you were listening that is not what she said from the 3,117 new case yes 110 were confirmed to be down to Omicron , however the S gene dropout - a good indication of Omicron levels - is currently present in 27.5% of cases

Is more down to your understanding of the data that has been presented , rather than any SG Arithmetic

That is certainly not the way she put it. She described how Omicron is indicated by the S gene drop out and then said that they now represent 27.5% of all cases. It's completely splitting hairs to suggest otherwise and we all know that is exactly the way she wanted it to be interpreted.

Precisely , The interpretation is that exactly that the variant now represents 27.5% , That's exactly what she was trying to get over - on purpose , or guess what people would gab onto the 'only 110 out of 3117
Which figure do you think is more accurate 3.52% ( 110/3117) or the 27.5% presented by the S gene dropout ?

Or do you believe that the SG 'just got the "arithmetic wrong "

No, I think they are deliberately misrepresenting the true scale of the Omicron issue in order to further their obvious aim of discouraging socialising during the festive season.

Also can you explain why only 110 of around 1000 have been confirmed. Surely they are either positive Omicron cases or not.

[Dogbert]

That is certainly not the way she put it. She described how Omicron is indicated by the S gene drop out and then said that they now represent 27.5% of all cases. It's completely splitting hairs to suggest otherwise and we all know that is exactly the way she wanted it to be interpreted.

Precisely , The interpretation is that exactly that the variant now represents 27.5% , That's exactly what she was trying to get over - on purpose , or guess what people would gab onto the 'only 110 out of 3117
Which figure do you think is more accurate 3.52% ( 110/3117) or the 27.5% presented by the S gene dropout ?

Or do you believe that the SG 'just got the "arithmetic wrong "

No, I think they are deliberately misrepresenting the true scale of the Omicron issue in order to further their obvious aim of discouraging socialising during the festive season.

Also can you explain why only 110 of around 1000 have been confirmed. Surely they are either positive Omicron cases or not.

I'm no medical expert , but my understanding is this - The S gene drop out is a marker for the presence of the Omnicron variant , but not definite proof - The definite proof can only be confirmed by a genome scan

The S gene dropout test is a useful surrogate and a quick fix. Other variants and mutations can also cause a dropout. I suspect that they will only confirm a Positive for Omnicron with a full Genome sequence

So its a bit more complicated than "either positive Omicron cases or not"

If any of the above is incorrect - then maybe another poster who has more experience can confirm / clarify

The best information that all the governments / devolved administrations in the UK is that this variant is much more infectious and will shortly become dominant , with the potential for large numbers of Hospitalisations

Do you believe that all the administrations are 'scaremongering' ( or just the Scottish one )

[petej]

That is certainly not the way she put it. She described how Omicron is indicated by the S gene drop out and then said that they now represent 27.5% of all cases. It's completely splitting hairs to suggest otherwise and we all know that is exactly the way she wanted it to be interpreted.

Precisely , The interpretation is that exactly that the variant now represents 27.5% , That's exactly what she was trying to get over - on purpose , or guess what people would gab onto the 'only 110 out of 3117
Which figure do you think is more accurate 3.52% ( 110/3117) or the 27.5% presented by the S gene dropout ?

Or do you believe that the SG 'just got the "arithmetic wrong "

No, I think they are deliberately misrepresenting the true scale of the Omicron issue in order to further their obvious aim of discouraging socialising during the festive season.

Also can you explain why only 110 of around 1000 have been confirmed. Surely they are either positive Omicron cases or not.

I would assume because not all labs test can confirm s-gene drop out and not all s-gene drop outs will be omicron and not all omicron will have s-gene drop outs but most will so it is a fair assumption. I think it takes further effort and testing to confirm omicron so you will sample some of the results (say 400 as 110 is 27.5% of 400) randomly to get validate the s-gene drop out% is correct say to say +-0.5%.

[Sandstorm]

If 3% of new infections are Omicron, then that’s bad. It means the more dangerous Delta is still running wild out there.

So restrictions are still a good idea IMO.

[Blackmac]

Precisely , The interpretation is that exactly that the variant now represents 27.5% , That's exactly what she was trying to get over - on purpose , or guess what people would gab onto the 'only 110 out of 3117
Which figure do you think is more accurate 3.52% ( 110/3117) or the 27.5% presented by the S gene dropout ?

Or do you believe that the SG 'just got the "arithmetic wrong "

No, I think they are deliberately misrepresenting the true scale of the Omicron issue in order to further their obvious aim of discouraging socialising during the festive season.

Also can you explain why only 110 of around 1000 have been confirmed. Surely they are either positive Omicron cases or not.

I'm no medical expert , but my understanding is this - The S gene drop out is a marker for the presence of the Omnicron variant , but not definite proof - The definite proof can only be confirmed by a genome scan

The S gene dropout test is a useful surrogate and a quick fix. Other variants and mutations can also cause a dropout. I suspect that they will only confirm a Positive for Omnicron with a full Genome sequence

So its a bit more complicated than "either positive Omicron cases or not"

If any of the above is incorrect - then maybe another poster who has more experience can confirm / clarify

The best information that all the governments / devolved administrations in the UK is that this variant is much more infectious and will shortly become dominant , with the potential for large numbers of Hospitalisations

Do you believe that all the administrations are 'scaremongering' ( or just the Scottish one )

I'm not a conspiracy theorist and given the fact I have spent my whole life in public service I always presume that governments are trying to do right by the population. Whilst I don't think they are looking to do any harm I certainly think that they have seized on the opportunity of Omicron to impose their will without having to legislate too much. Sadly I also think both the current Scottish and Westminster governments are rotten to the core and completely untrustworthy.

I'll admit I do not understand the science behind the testing situation but if they are only able to confirm 10% of the potential Omicron cases on a daily basis we either have a significant public health failing or as I sadly believe, they are deliberately overstating the problem to frighten the populace into compliance. PHE are claiming over 200000 cases with only 4000 confirmed.

If the testing is lagging so far behind are we soon to see the massive increase in cases they are predicting.

[fishfoodie]

If 3% of new infections are Omicron, then that’s bad. It means the more dangerous Delta is still running wild out there.

So restrictions are still a good idea IMO.

You're falling into the trap of not running the numbers.

It sounds good, when you hear that, virus A, kills only 1% of the people it infects; versus virus B; that kills 10% of the people that it infects.

That is, until you find out that A is 50x more transmissible; so even the lack of lethality; is more than made up by the transmissably; & that is even before you consider the fact that vaccines deal more effectively with Delta, than Omicron.

Most of the UK is immunized against Delta; either thru vaccine, or because they were exposed to it.

Omicron is a risk; because it is vastly more infectious than Delta; & it is arriving at the worst possible time of the year; & when vaccines are at a low ebb

[Dogbert]

No, I think they are deliberately misrepresenting the true scale of the Omicron issue in order to further their obvious aim of discouraging socialising during the festive season.

Also can you explain why only 110 of around 1000 have been confirmed. Surely they are either positive Omicron cases or not.

I'm no medical expert , but my understanding is this - The S gene drop out is a marker for the presence of the Omnicron variant , but not definite proof - The definite proof can only be confirmed by a genome scan

The S gene dropout test is a useful surrogate and a quick fix. Other variants and mutations can also cause a dropout. I suspect that they will only confirm a Positive for Omnicron with a full Genome sequence

So its a bit more complicated than "either positive Omicron cases or not"

If any of the above is incorrect - then maybe another poster who has more experience can confirm / clarify

The best information that all the governments / devolved administrations in the UK is that this variant is much more infectious and will shortly become dominant , with the potential for large numbers of Hospitalisations

Do you believe that all the administrations are 'scaremongering' ( or just the Scottish one )

I'm not a conspiracy theorist and given the fact I have spent my whole life in public service I always presume that governments are trying to do right by the population. Whilst I don't think they are looking to do any harm I certainly think that they have seized on the opportunity of Omicron to impose their will without having to legislate too much. Sadly I also think both the current Scottish and Westminster governments are rotten to the core and completely untrustworthy.

I'll admit I do not understand the science behind the testing situation but if they are only able to confirm 10% of the potential Omicron cases on a daily basis we either have a significant public health failing or as I sadly believe, they are deliberately overstating the problem to frighten the populace into compliance. PHE are claiming over 200000 cases with only 4000 confirmed.

If the testing is lagging so far behind are we soon to see the massive increase in cases they are predicting.

There simply is no need to genome sequence every expected Omnicron case - simple statistics will give you a perfectly reliable figure, so the full genome sequence is not required , so its not a case of public health failure.

Testing is not lagging behind - there is quite a bit of spare testing capacity , in fact there were less than 30K tests yesterday , compared with nearly 60K on the 10th of December

[Blackmac]

I'm no medical expert , but my understanding is this - The S gene drop out is a marker for the presence of the Omnicron variant , but not definite proof - The definite proof can only be confirmed by a genome scan

The S gene dropout test is a useful surrogate and a quick fix. Other variants and mutations can also cause a dropout. I suspect that they will only confirm a Positive for Omnicron with a full Genome sequence

So its a bit more complicated than "either positive Omicron cases or not"

If any of the above is incorrect - then maybe another poster who has more experience can confirm / clarify

The best information that all the governments / devolved administrations in the UK is that this variant is much more infectious and will shortly become dominant , with the potential for large numbers of Hospitalisations

Do you believe that all the administrations are 'scaremongering' ( or just the Scottish one )

I'm not a conspiracy theorist and given the fact I have spent my whole life in public service I always presume that governments are trying to do right by the population. Whilst I don't think they are looking to do any harm I certainly think that they have seized on the opportunity of Omicron to impose their will without having to legislate too much. Sadly I also think both the current Scottish and Westminster governments are rotten to the core and completely untrustworthy.

I'll admit I do not understand the science behind the testing situation but if they are only able to confirm 10% of the potential Omicron cases on a daily basis we either have a significant public health failing or as I sadly believe, they are deliberately overstating the problem to frighten the populace into compliance. PHE are claiming over 200000 cases with only 4000 confirmed.

If the testing is lagging so far behind are we soon to see the massive increase in cases they are predicting.

There simply is no need to genome sequence every expected Omnicron case - simple statistics will give you a perfectly reliable figure, so the full genome sequence is not required , so its not a case of public health failure.

Testing is not lagging behind - there is quite a bit of spare testing capacity , in fact there were less than 30K tests yesterday , compared with nearly 60K on the 10th of December

Sorry, didn't mean testing I was referring to the sequencing. From what I know positive cases are getting told if they have Omicron or not so that doesn't seem to marry up with your suggestion that there is no need to sequence every case.

I am maybe being a bit thick here but I also don't follow your claim that statistics will give a perfectly accurate Omicron rate. If they are going to do that should todays stated Omicron rate not have been 27.4% of 3117.

[Ymx]

https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2021/12/08/in ... doing-now/

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) is an important component of our surveillance to identify cases of different variants, following a positive PCR test result. This process can take a few days, so we use a marker known as ‘S gene target failure’ to identify possible Omicron cases rapidly and inform public health action. The Omicron variant of the virus has a number of mutations which mean that the S gene does not show up in PCR results. This referred to as S gene dropout or S gene target failure and it can be used as marker for this variant pending the WGS results.

And some other Sciency stuff on S Gene Dropout being used
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expe ... t-failure/
.

[Biffer]

No, I think they are deliberately misrepresenting the true scale of the Omicron issue in order to further their obvious aim of discouraging socialising during the festive season.

Also can you explain why only 110 of around 1000 have been confirmed. Surely they are either positive Omicron cases or not.

I'm no medical expert , but my understanding is this - The S gene drop out is a marker for the presence of the Omnicron variant , but not definite proof - The definite proof can only be confirmed by a genome scan

The S gene dropout test is a useful surrogate and a quick fix. Other variants and mutations can also cause a dropout. I suspect that they will only confirm a Positive for Omnicron with a full Genome sequence

So its a bit more complicated than "either positive Omicron cases or not"

If any of the above is incorrect - then maybe another poster who has more experience can confirm / clarify

The best information that all the governments / devolved administrations in the UK is that this variant is much more infectious and will shortly become dominant , with the potential for large numbers of Hospitalisations

Do you believe that all the administrations are 'scaremongering' ( or just the Scottish one )

I'm not a conspiracy theorist and given the fact I have spent my whole life in public service I always presume that governments are trying to do right by the population. Whilst I don't think they are looking to do any harm I certainly think that they have seized on the opportunity of Omicron to impose their will without having to legislate too much. Sadly I also think both the current Scottish and Westminster governments are rotten to the core and completely untrustworthy.

I'll admit I do not understand the science behind the testing situation but if they are only able to confirm 10% of the potential Omicron cases on a daily basis we either have a significant public health failing or as I sadly believe, they are deliberately overstating the problem to frighten the populace into compliance. PHE are claiming over 200000 cases with only 4000 confirmed.

If the testing is lagging so far behind are we soon to see the massive increase in cases they are predicting.

Can you explain why they want discourage socialising during the festive season?

[Blackmac]

I'm no medical expert , but my understanding is this - The S gene drop out is a marker for the presence of the Omnicron variant , but not definite proof - The definite proof can only be confirmed by a genome scan

The S gene dropout test is a useful surrogate and a quick fix. Other variants and mutations can also cause a dropout. I suspect that they will only confirm a Positive for Omnicron with a full Genome sequence

So its a bit more complicated than "either positive Omicron cases or not"

If any of the above is incorrect - then maybe another poster who has more experience can confirm / clarify

The best information that all the governments / devolved administrations in the UK is that this variant is much more infectious and will shortly become dominant , with the potential for large numbers of Hospitalisations

Do you believe that all the administrations are 'scaremongering' ( or just the Scottish one )

I'm not a conspiracy theorist and given the fact I have spent my whole life in public service I always presume that governments are trying to do right by the population. Whilst I don't think they are looking to do any harm I certainly think that they have seized on the opportunity of Omicron to impose their will without having to legislate too much. Sadly I also think both the current Scottish and Westminster governments are rotten to the core and completely untrustworthy.

I'll admit I do not understand the science behind the testing situation but if they are only able to confirm 10% of the potential Omicron cases on a daily basis we either have a significant public health failing or as I sadly believe, they are deliberately overstating the problem to frighten the populace into compliance. PHE are claiming over 200000 cases with only 4000 confirmed.

If the testing is lagging so far behind are we soon to see the massive increase in cases they are predicting.

Can you explain why they want discourage socialising during the festive season?

Obviously the increased level of socialising would likely lead to an increased level of transmission and infection, regardless of Omicron. I'm not against the suggestion that there should be some restraint, but the governments have pretty much lost the moral authority to try and convince the public of the dangers, and the public, at this stage are pretty much beyond listening or caring. I think Omicron, while concerning, has provided them with the ideal tool to use to hammer the position home. I think they are exaggerating the risk and some of the rhetoric they are using to make their point is verging on the irresponsible and they are creating unnecessary panic.

[Paddington Bear]

Did an annual Christmas pub crawl last night, albeit depleted from those who came back positive on LFTs. In at least three Central London pubs in the run up to Christmas we were the only customers, only one (a spoons) was anything like busy. We've locked down by stealth with no support for hospitality businesses. Heart goes out to them - would usually be standing room at the bar in most of them.

[Blackmac]

https://ukhsa.blog.gov.uk/2021/12/08/in ... doing-now/

Whole genome sequencing (WGS) is an important component of our surveillance to identify cases of different variants, following a positive PCR test result. This process can take a few days, so we use a marker known as ‘S gene target failure’ to identify possible Omicron cases rapidly and inform public health action. The Omicron variant of the virus has a number of mutations which mean that the S gene does not show up in PCR results. This referred to as S gene dropout or S gene target failure and it can be used as marker for this variant pending the WGS results.

And some other Sciency stuff on S Gene Dropout being used
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expe ... t-failure/
.

Two people I know were informed they had the variant within 12 hours of PCR test. So are they using the S gene dropout indicator to inform individuals that they have the Omicron variant but not using it to make up the daily figures until they have further confirmation. Hence my question about the correct daily figure lagging behind by a few days as the current difference between the daily figures and the infection statistic (the 27.4%) are vast.

[Blackmac]

Did an annual Christmas pub crawl last night, albeit depleted from those who came back positive on LFTs. In at least three Central London pubs in the run up to Christmas we were the only customers, only one (a spoons) was anything like busy. We've locked down by stealth with no support for hospitality businesses. Heart goes out to them - would usually be standing room at the bar in most of them.

That is essentially my theory. If they had legislated to shut down hospitality they would have had to put a huge financial support structure in place. Panic the public into doing it for you and you are off the hook.

[Blackmac]

Yesterday Sturgeon said that Delta hospitalises 4% of cases. This morning she has just stated it hospitalises 2%. Good to have such a reliable source.

[JM2K6]

Yesterday Sturgeon said that Delta hospitalises 4% of cases. This morning she has just stated it hospitalises 2%. Good to have such a reliable source.

Do you have a link to her statement this morning?

[Blackmac]

Yesterday Sturgeon said that Delta hospitalises 4% of cases. This morning she has just stated it hospitalises 2%. Good to have such a reliable source.

Do you have a link to her statement this morning?

Just been on an interview with Lorraine Kelly.

[petej]

Yesterday Sturgeon said that Delta hospitalises 4% of cases. This morning she has just stated it hospitalises 2%. Good to have such a reliable source.

Do you have a link to her statement this morning?

Yesterday Sturgeon said that Delta hospitalises 4% of cases. This morning she has just stated it hospitalises 2%. Good to have such a reliable source.

Delta 4% and omicron 2%?

[Blackmac]

Yesterday Sturgeon said that Delta hospitalises 4% of cases. This morning she has just stated it hospitalises 2%. Good to have such a reliable source.

Do you have a link to her statement this morning?

Yesterday Sturgeon said that Delta hospitalises 4% of cases. This morning she has just stated it hospitalises 2%. Good to have such a reliable source.

Delta 4% and omicron 2%?

Nope, thats what she said yesterday. This morning it became 2% and 1%.

[I like neeps]

Did an annual Christmas pub crawl last night, albeit depleted from those who came back positive on LFTs. In at least three Central London pubs in the run up to Christmas we were the only customers, only one (a spoons) was anything like busy. We've locked down by stealth with no support for hospitality businesses. Heart goes out to them - would usually be standing room at the bar in most of them.

That is essentially my theory. If they had legislated to shut down hospitality they would have had to put a huge financial support structure in place. Panic the public into doing it for you and you are off the hook.

And conveniently have the party who should be the party of workers agree to it without any financial support. Well done messrs Johnson and Starmer.

[Blackmac]

I see Javid's claim of 200000 cases on Monday is being ridiculed. Likely to be more like 40000.
As I've said I understand the need for caution but object to the complete bullshit and dishonesty.