SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
To be fair, the “goal” is cutting deaths from two million or so, down to that level. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if most countries have similar goals, pro rata for their population. America is a very big country.
It’s tragic on a global scale that two countries we would traditionally look towards for leadership and scientific excellence (UK and US) both seem to have dropped the ball here. The whole world will pay the price.
But such deaths are so incredibly rare that individual tragedy aside they give us a great deal of hope that young people, especially the very young, will be much much better off than the rest of us and the old in particular.
Iam far from thick, but watching Trump and his team doing their COVID 19 update, I honestly dont have a clue what he is on about, it all gibberish, its all over the place.
"Soz, we fecked up. A lot of you are going to die earlier than expected. Buckle up."
That also applies Boris Johnson's/Michael Gove's 5pm speeches.
My hot water cylinder completely died 4 days ago - leaking all over the floor and leaving me with turning all hot water off. I was really worried that I'd have to make do without hot water for a couple of months but plumbers are considered key workers. He stayed away from me as much as he could, but I imagine must be worried every day he works. I gave him a big tip and he mentioned his family at home and the concerns he has doing what he does..
Pure unfounded speculation alert
As this Coronavirus is a Betacoronavirus, in common with some of the viruses that give us colds, could this in part account for some people being asymptomatic or getting mild sysmptoms. In much the same way that getting t
As this Coronavirus is a Betacoronavirus, in common with some of the viruses that give us colds, could this in part account for some people being asymptomatic or getting mild sysmptoms. In much the same way that getting t
I don't know why people use this guy as if he's an independent voice. He's been a Labour party campaigner for years. He's got his Labour party hat on here.
I was wondering this. I had quite a bad cold a month before my fiancee feels she had Covid 19, I was completely asymptomatic.
Doesn't make him right though does it? He is spot on - many countries reacted far too slowly in many ways.
Maybe we shouldn't be sugaring the pill, but him trying to spin it as an endorsement of his government's response is repugnant though.
It would be great if that were the case. I also wonder how fast this virus might evolve to be less harmful which is often, but not always, the case?
No, not necessarily wrong, but you wouldn't present Owen Jones or Ash Sarkar as an independent voice whether what they have to say is valid or otherwise.
Isn't mutation itself just complete random luck which then gets selected for by an evolutionary stress? Would there be any evolutionary stress on this virus to select to a less harmful version?
Cause it's already pretty successful at infecting as many people as possible.
I honestly feel a bit sorry for people like you. But also cheers I need a bit of laugh after a rather dull day.
Unfounded speculation as well here, but I imagine if you are the type of person to get common colds often and react badly to them, you would very much be at high risk from this new strain even without 'underlying health conditions' due to the virus being from the same family
I'm more familiar with mammal and fish evolution but my understanding is that evolution by natural selection favors less harmful strains (or species or whatever the correct terminology) of virus because their hosts don't die and can spread the virus far and wide, to reproduce in new hosts wheras more fatal strains are more often "trapped" in the dead host.
Possibly, but all viruses tend to target specific parts of the immune system. The way the immune system responds to a virus can sometimes harm yourself so if the immune system over-responds it can produce a cytokine response which causing inflammation and therefore Pneumonia which is believed to be the major cause of death with Covid-19. This wouldn't happen to children as they have immature immune systems.
This happens a fair amount with viruses and why they can be unpredictable with some targeting younger adults and some older.
https://www.newscientist.com/term/cytokine-storm/
Yes, because without human input (such as vaccines) a stronger virus will kill more people meaning that strain of the virus would die out. The weaker mutations let people live, therefore the virus survives.
I honestly feel a bit sorry for people like you. But also cheers I need a bit of laugh after a rather dull day.
Why do you feel sorry for me? There are loads of people out there more deserving of sympathy at the moment.
This was one of the reasons why the Spanish flu particularly effected healthy people.
Exactly this. Sure, younger people seem to have an extremely low fatality rate, but feck, I don't want permanent lung damage (and possible other damages). I'd rather not get infected at all.
From what I know(from the INSERM). The answer would be no, in general coronaviruses will "produce" a fair amount of asymptomatic patients or provoke mild symptoms. It's part of their characteristics. It's important to remember that a virus doesn't want to kill its host but live discreetly with him.
100k deaths for a country of 350mil would be a pretty acceptable outcome, no?
In fact I'd say at this point it'll be a bit of a miracle if it's anywhere close to that.
In fact I'd say at this point it'll be a bit of a miracle if it's anywhere close to that.
I wonder if there was a slide about it being a “Democrat hoax”.
Not yet but Mitch is already trying to blame the impeachment hearings as diverting attention away from the threat of COVID-19, apparently.
I can’t wait to open the champagne when that “man” dies.
He presented him as the editor of The Lancet Fiskey, which is exactly what he is. You're right that people wouldn't present Owen Jones or Ash Sarkar as the editor of The Lancet because they aren't.
Last edited:
I just wondered if there was another factor at play with the particular corona-virus because of the disparity between the badly affected vs the asymptomatic. But I guess that wouldn't explain the huge skew to older people as they would also have partial immunity in some cases.
Because you've just written off the editor of one the worlds most well known medical journals during the biggest pandemic since the Spanish flu because he likes the party in red. It's brain worms of the highest order, all critical thinking gone out the window.
btw have you got a link to this guy being a labour activist ? I've had a look online but haven't found anything, also I think you might be confusing him with Professor John Ashton.
Last edited:
Honestly reckon there’s a crazy percentage of people in the UK who have got this/had this very lightly. Spoken to/heard of so many people who have had a cough, fever or lost their sense of smell and taste. A lot of celebs coming out now saying they have had it not just from the royal family but Paul Chuckle I notice! Absolutely essential people stay indoors the next few weeks.
But I wish he'd make his mind up
Richard claims the message by the end of January from China was absolutely clear – why then, in late January, did he Tweet:
https://order-order.com/2020/03/27/lancet-editor-slams-government-for-listening-to-his-advice/
I don't know who this guy is but article about this virus was published in the Lancet magazine in January and the British government was informed about the article but it looks like that they completely ignored it.
100,000 was actually on the low end of what I assume are 95% confidence intervals. 240,000 was the high end of the interval. I'm stunned they didn't state the point estimate for expected deaths. That should be the number being talked about.