Covid 19 Part XXXV-956,720 ROI (5,952 deaths) 452,946 NI (3,002 deaths) (08/01) Read OP

Tbf if we're actually at 20k cases a day already and it's had no effect on hospitalisations or ICU, then feck it, the thing is clearly just a cold for the vast majority of people so there's nothing to worry about.

No. Firstly, if it's 20000 cases today, it's only just hitting that number now and it will take a week or so to hit hospitals. Secondly, at the moment, it's spreading among young people who will have low hospitalisation rates. It's possible it will all end up being ok if Omicron has significantly lower ICU rates but we don't know that yet. I think it's going to be a scary couple of weeks.

Scary case numbers for sure but that is currently all that matters to those managing this. We also have no idea what the hospitalisation rate will be but if the research suggesting that there will be at least 40%+ fewer in hospitalisations from Omicron there may not be pressure there anyway. Not keen personally on the guessed at unfound cases as any old number is as valid as the next and it really serves as means of putting the frighteners on people. We will never really know.

I know someone who was tested at the IMI around lunchtime on Tuesday and got their result early this morning.

My experience of antigen leads me to believe they are next to useless. I personally have had 3 positives 3 days running and a negative PCR on third day.

Speaking to friends and colleagues this is a widespread thing. I read recently they produce as much as 50% false positives. And you can’t trust a negative. I don’t see the point in them with those stats.

I know a family that came home from UK holiday about 4 weeks ago and got 5 negative antigen tests at home. The mother had to do a PCR before she returned to work (healthcare). She was positive in PCR and PCR tested the rest of the family - all positive. The antigen tests and PCRs were 48 hours apart.

I also know someone who had 3 positive Antigens, and a negative PCR. A second PCR taken 36 hours after the first by his employer on return to work was positive.

Antigens, we've used them very well in my job and they have been excellent at highlighting some positives that wouldn't have otherwise been found. Other than the one instance, I dont know anyone who's gotten a positive on multiple Antigens and a negative on PCR.

PCR can report false positives and negatives too. Antigens are an excellent tool in my experience and should have been used on a much wider basis throughout the pandemic

PCR tests can detect fragments of the virus long after the person has effectively "recovered". As far as a I know antigen tests detect the virus over a shorter timeframe, in the middle of it's life cycle, around the time it is "shedding". I could be misinformed but that's my understanding.

So.. it's inevitable to have mismatched results in some cases when there's a large population sample.

Poland has reported 17,156 new cases in the past 24 hours, down nearly 40% on the peak of two weeks ago. Only 14 Omicron cases detected so far though.

COVID mass hysteria has taken over and it's possibly worse than the virus. It's past time for the vast majority of people to limit the amount of "bad COVID news" they access on multiple platforms.

I saw one definition of the end of a pandemic recently which defined it as when it was no longer a prominent news item. (i.e. no-one ever declares it "over").

Does it depend on what part of the country you're in i wonder? (Re: test results)

88,000 new cases in France.

This article is in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, published on the US based National Center for Biotechnology Information website.

I'm not sure on the forum rules re posting links and quoting so apologies if anything breaches them.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7913136/

"In this article, we aim to develop a political economy of mass hysteria. Using the background of COVID-19, we study past mass hysteria. Negative information which is spread through mass media repetitively can affect public health negatively in the form of nocebo effects and mass hysteria. We argue that mass and digital media in connection with the state may have had adverse consequences during the COVID-19 crisis. The resulting collective hysteria may have contributed to policy errors by governments not in line with health recommendations. While mass hysteria can occur in societies with a minimal state, we show that there exist certain self-corrective mechanisms and limits to the harm inflicted, such as sacrosanct private property rights. However, mass hysteria can be exacerbated and self-reinforcing when the negative information comes from an authoritative source, when the media are politicized, and social networks make the negative information omnipresent. We conclude that the negative long-term effects of mass hysteria are exacerbated by the size of the state."