This year’s flu season could be bigger and worse as it combines with Covid to create a dangerous ‘twindemic’, some alarmist doctors have warned. The Mail has the story.
There are now concerns that the simultaneous onslaught of flu and Covid could overload the NHS, which is already trying to cope with record backlogs.
Figures from the Southern Hemisphere, which usually foretell what will happen in the U.K., indicate a flu surge two months earlier than normal, mostly driven by under-30s.
It suggests that a spike in flu hospital admissions in Britain could begin as early as October, also including many children.
One estimate suggests that the flu season could be twice as large as normal.
Sir Peter Horby, Professor of Emerging Infectious Diseases at Oxford University, told the Mirror: “It could come earlier and bigger, then you have a ‘twindemic’ with COVID-19 and that could put real pressure on the NHS.”
In a typical flu season there are between 15,000 and 30,000 hospitalisations due to the virus.
Dr. Simon Clarke, Associate Professor in Cellular Microbiology at Reading University, also said: “We’ve never had a [flu and Covid] dual outbreak so I’m concerned this UK season could be particularly bad. Catching flu and Covid together is particularly dangerous. We have the NHS under huge pressure as it catches up [from the pandemic] so you have a problem there.”
The health service waiting list has hit a record 6.8 million in England, with A&Es often full and ambulances frequently queueing outside with patients they cannot unload.
Will it be flu and Covid together, or will flu take over, while Covid, with natural immunity now very high, finally takes a back seat?
Of course, none of this is any reason to panic. It’s true that the health service is extremely busy at the moment, but that is not because of Covid.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I think you have illustrated perfectly why people in their droves are turning away from the mainstream media.
It’s largely one-sided fear porn and takes no account of empirically derived fact, feels no obligation to justify itself, all the while accusing those it disagrees with of doing exactly the same thing.
Yep you can bet on that.
Unless, of course, that industry, organisation or company is, in some way, aligned with state ‘truth’ – then there is no cynicism to be found anywhere.
^This.
It would be interesting to test this assertion and see how many MPs do actually receive funding from the gambling industry (not just winning a couple of quid on the horses).
While we’re at it we could also assess how many MPs receive funding from ‘Green’ lobby groups.
I would wager a couple of quid that our MPs are more in the pocket of the greenies.
A tenner says you’re right on that one.
I just noticed the subtitle “Leading Britain’s Conversation”. Bit pretentious, what? Especially in the Era of X. I was thinking it stood for Left-wing Bollocks Cluster.
More than pretentious.
Clearly not a news organisation then.
”Safeguarding”
There is a repulsive, extremely modern word, the epitome of the nanny state. Overbearing and sanctimonious.
It puts everyone into 3 categories. Victim, predator and protector.
If you don’t play along and give into everything the protectors demand, then you are a bad, reckless person and basically on the side of the predators.
Not too far off topic: RIS = reconfigurable intelligent surfaces
Spying on you and you haven’t even got a mobile phone! This shit sees through walls,no kidding!
Got a router? Tick, your on!
Microwave surveillance
Radio 1 Piedophile DJ dies after falling into river!
Oh dear, how sad, never mind!
His love of pies probably contributed his death, weighed him down perhaps.
Fat floats on water.
I am always amazed when I see talk shows on different screens in the gym at how many influencers and opinion types there are. Add the bias suggested here and it would be a surprise if it were not more abused!
Wouldn’t it be refreshing if the gov’t announced the nhs GPs would now be looking at all the adverse events and deaths post covid vaxx? And perhaps offer help.
Maybe asking about the huge level of excess deaths from 2020 onwards when normal pandemic observation would say that there should be less deaths than expected as the weakest have been culled early. This pattern is seen in countries with jab levels of no more than 30% and I presume no ongoing stabby programme. That in the US a report can look at the huge increase in 25-45 deaths – you know, the prime of life – and not go near ischaemic causes is amazing.
In my experience, and I have had a lot of interaction with journalists over the years, there are a slack handful of journalists who are focused on reporting the facts and then discussing that information in a balanced manner, warts n’all. The remainder tend to the lazy and venal, frequently driven by ulterior motives and an all consuming agenda. Anyone who disagrees with their position is an enemy who must be undermined and shut down with urgency.Their ‘facts’ and ‘truths’ trump everything else. Rationality is the prime casualty. Debate is DOA. Journalism contains an awful lot of cess – time we emptied the pit.
From the NICE guidelines:
Consider asking people about gambling (even if they have no obvious risk factors for gambling-related harm) when asking them about smoking, alcohol consumption or use of other substances (for example, as part of a holistic assessment or health check, when registering for a service such as with a GP or in contacts with social services).
The moment it’s accepted that, instead of treating demonstrably existing health problems in ways proven to be clinically effective, the job of a health service is to induce behaviour change to prevent health problems based on empirically unexplained statistical correlations, the number of such behaviours will be keep growing because there’s no amount of behaviours in other people natural busybodies wouldn’t object to and no limit to statistical correlations which can be fabricated intentionally or occur by accident to enable someone to ‘prove’ that his pre-existing theories had been right all the time.
The prominent example for this is Jeremy Clarkson. He was hospitalized because of pneumonia during a holiday in Spain about two years ago. During this stay in hospital, he was (most likely) talked into giving up smoking to improve his health. It improved so much that his life had to be rescued by an emergency ateriosclerosis operation about a year later. A scientist would now conclude that the theory that smoking causes ateriosclerosis has been disproven. A lobbyist who doesn’t give a f***k about how many people end up dying spuriously¹ because of medical misinformation spread for political purpose will start to talk and wave his hands energetically.
¹ An otherwise healthy acquaintance of my mother suddenly dropped dead during a walk about two weaks ago. I can’t help wondering if his life could also have been saved by such an operation had his doctors bothered to look for early symptoms despite he wasn’t a smoker and/or if he had been a celebrity, too.
i was given some good advice over 30 years ago. “If you torture data long enough it will confess to anything”. We have to be very careful with data – it’s just snapshots of reality.