In a preliminary scenario, we estimate that within three weeks there could be up to 90,000 300,000 cases per day and 50 to 200 admissions per day if measures do not significantly slow the epidemic, the National Institute of Public Health wrote in Variable omicron risk assessment which was published on Monday.
The scenario defined by the Family Health Initiative is based on the fact that new infection control measures are not slowing the epidemic significantly.
It won’t be 300,000 cases
Organ Olsvik, professor of medical microbiology at the University of Tromsø, believes that these numbers are difficult to prove.
“I think such large numbers are difficult to document scientifically,” Olsvik tells TV 2.
It is mathematical modeling that is impossible to achieve in my world. Ten days after that 3 million people were infected, it is impossible to achieve this. We have been vaccinated and there are five million people here, continues the professor.
Olsvik stresses that Norway is an elongated country, and that the spread of infection will not happen in the same way as in a test tube.
There wouldn’t be 300,000 cases per day if we did the smallest operations possible to prevent that, Olsvik says.
But is it realistic that many people are injured?
– It is allowed to play with mathematics, it is allowed to see what can happen. It’s also perfectly fine to make terrifying pictures. But this is not my strategy. I think we should deal with facts and facts as closely as possible, he says.
It indicates the seriousness of the situation
FHI’s subject director, Frode Forland, says the scenario is a mathematical model that will show how quickly an omicron can spread from the current doubling rate of two to three days.
“It’s not a realistic presentation, or a prediction as to what we think is going to happen, but an account that shows the gravity of the situation, and the need to take action now,” Forland tells TV 2.
– If it is unrealistic or predictable, what is the reason for coming up with an account that cannot be scientifically proven?
– Like I said, it shows how the new variable will be able to propagate if it gets some leeway. Calculations show that we are facing a situation with a great deal of uncertainty, and potentially a high risk of infection and disease of many, which requires rapid action to prevent this from happening, says the director.
Fear of a wave of disease
FHI fears that the omicron variant even before the new year could cause a wave of many patients, many hospitalizations, a huge burden on the health service and a huge burden on society in the form of sick leave.
The institute believes that even if the omicron variant causes less serious illness in an individual, the high prevalence would result in a much larger number being accepted than it is today.
At the same time, FHI Director Camilla Stoltenberg also acknowledges that the numbers in the risk report are not real.
We don’t think it’s realistic with many. What’s important to us is to show a picture of the direction that a large number of infected people are going each day, an increase in the number of patients in hospital and an increase in the number of patients who have to be at home, says Stoltenberg. to tv 2.
Maximizing crisis is never good
The orator at Christiania University College, Kjell Terje Ringdahl, believes that the Norwegian authorities in general have a high credibility in society. He still believed that residents should not be unnecessarily intimidated.
Maximizing a crisis is never good. They have gained the confidence of the Norwegian authorities because they did not escalate the crisis to the limit. Presenting large numbers based on keyboard exercises can start people losing confidence if it turns out that the big numbers aren’t true at all, Ringdahl says.
He stresses that FHI scenarios need to be taken seriously, and says it’s important that authorities also be open about large numbers. He still believes that there is a delicate balance between being open and creating fear.
—But it’s pretty clear: Large and extreme numbers of casualties can create fear, says Khatib.
How to properly use the quick test:
“Explorer. Unapologetic entrepreneur. Alcohol fanatic. Certified writer. Wannabe tv evangelist. Twitter fanatic. Student. Web scholar. Travel buff.”