Yeh, but thats totally inaccurate and manipulating numbers to paint a different picture to the actual reality.
What is the actual reality then?
Yeh, but thats totally inaccurate and manipulating numbers to paint a different picture to the actual reality.
Are face coverings actually mandatory or not in shops? Just been shopping in Aldi, Tesco and Asda..... Aldi fairly good, Tesco and Asda horrendous by their staff. I counted 17 staff between the two without even trying to look for it.
I doubt their bigwigs care - since they'll roll it in from a lockdown.
What is the actual reality then?
I remember back in April test to positive cases ratio was about 0.5, I reckon now it’s significantly lower given the number of tests being carried out?What is the actual reality then?
Could listen to Fauci all day, so refreshing to hear an expert talk with such authority and slice through the political bluster of dick heads like Rand Paul with a sledge hammer.
Peak of April with the same number of "officially" confirmed cases you had 3500- people a day hospitalized now you have 300, so in reality with basic maths we had 10x as many cases a day then just not being tracked.
Media manipulating figures to scaremonger, grab attention and sell headlines, we will reach that point again if we don't get on top of it but with the testing now you would expect 60k confirmed cases a day roughly.
I remember back in April test to positive cases ratio was about 0.5, I reckon now it’s significantly lower given the number of tests being carried out?
On the Gates foundation: a bit off topic but this one seems legit, unlike the Trump one for example.Bill and Melinda Gates more or less matching the UK government and EU Alliance spending. Amazing. Clearly the world needs more billionaires
On a more serious note, this might be one of those things where it’s not actually possible to throw any more money at the problem. There are only so man
On the Gates foundation: a bit off topic but this one seems legit, unlike the Trump one for example.
The Gates’ are committed to spending all of the money no later than 20 years after their deaths so there is no foundation left to manage. They don’t want someone else interpreting their wishes.
As he signed papers to formally dissolve the foundation, Feeney, who is in poor health, said he was very satisfied with “completing this on my watch”. From his small rented apartment in San Francisco, he had a message for other members of the super-rich, who may have pledged to give away part of their fortunes but only after they have died: “To those wondering about Giving While Living: try it, you’ll like it.”
But.. but.. the Gates are trying to rule the world through the vaccines and making huge profits off CovidThe Gates foundation is the biggest philanthropic organization in the world. Of course, they are legit.
Also, 25B is a LOT of money. Vaccine development most years gets <5B spent on it.
Read his biography, he was a man of classChuck Feeney went one better and managed to give away all his billions before he died.
On a more serious note, this might be one of those things where it’s not actually possible to throw any more money at the problem. There are only so many promising candidates and I would be amazed if a lack of funding is the reason for any delays in their development.
6178 cases
37 deaths
Worldometer.
I reckon we’ll be hitting 10k next weekWow....only 4-5 weeks ago we are at 2k cases/day. In another two weeks, we'll be hitting 10k/day
Crazy idea but you can also read the article linked in the tweet.The reality of that statement doesn't make a good thread for twitter though.
Yeah. My sentence looks a bit off as the word ‘seems’ clearly doesn’t belong there. Typical of me.The Gates foundation is the biggest philanthropic organization in the world. Of course, they are legit.
Also, 25B is a LOT of money. Vaccine development most years gets <5B spent on it.
The vast majority of the UK accepted the lockdown and a decent number of said majority were begging for an extension and to go even further (take the excercise right away) .It's not the health service it is the people . What Sweden did worked out for them because the public acted responsibly.
In UK and Ireland however the public are largely selfish morons so it is pointless to attempt to try things their way
@Pogue Mahone I think this article is suggesting a neutralising vaccine is quite possible https://theconversation.com/amp/how...covid-19-vaccine-is-safe-and-effective-146091
After collecting their luggage, arriving international passengers are asked to dab their necks with a wipe. In a separate booth, the jar containing the wipe is then placed next to others containing different scents, and the dog starts sniffing.
If it indicates it has detected the virus – usually by yelping, pawing or lying down – the passenger is advised to take a free polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test using a nasal swab to verify the dog’s verdict.
I think you mean sterilising vaccine? They refer to neutralising antibodies but they’re really just a proxy for effectiveness in early phase trials. They don’t tell us anything about whether the vaccine will be sterilising or not. Which is all that matters if you’re hoping to eradicate a virus. The article doesn’t really get into this.
It also confirms what I said to you before. They’re shooting for a very low bar of 50% efficacy. Which is obviously incompatible with eradicating the virus completely. Realistically, we’re hoping for a virus that will reduce severity of illness for the most vulnerable people approved for use at some point next year. Probably rolled out over the following 6-12 months.
I get the impression you’re expecting a sterilising vaccine being used to eradicate the virus, globally, at some point next year. Not going to happen.
In some papers I read neutralising was used as a synonym for sterilising, in that is prevented the virus infecting cells. Obviously, that doesn't mean a vaccine will operate efficiently enough to be functionally sterilising even if it does operate primarily to prevent infection, rather than deal with the virus post infection, but still good news.
And I have no expectation of global eradication. I hope that the vaccine will be potentially sterilising and I hope the 100% results from stage 2 result in a highly effective human vaccine (yes - I know that one doesn't equate to the other) and I think the results to date allow that hope (not fact or certainty) but I have no expectation that 7 billion people will be vaccinated by January 2021. Once we get a vaccine or vaccines there will be other issues and considerations - most likely an entirely different shit show as we are all led by donkeys bar probably NZ and a few others. Manufacture, distribution and vaccine resistant feckwits all spring to mind as potential problems.
The end of MancHattenManchester's numbers still rising. Keep in mind that Manchester has had measures against home visits for two months now. Bars in some areas have been closing at 10 for the past three weeks. Plus some shop closures etc.
And this is all happening before the bulk of students arrived. If 200/100k is going to be a new normal, or the figure that the NHS can handle for the winter then maybe we need some more colours for the alert flags. If it needs to come down, then just saying "local measures" won't help - unless there are actual local measures helping people rather than just telling them off for being naughty.
![]()
![]()
Not a snowball’s chance in hell of that happening! Hope you didn’t think I thought you were quite that far ensconced in cloud cuckoo land.
I share your hope. We all do. But you have to think about realistic, not hopeful, scenarios when working out what’s best for each country. And that’s why it’s reasonable to have had doubts about Australia/NZ and to wonder if the Swedes maybe weren’t quite as foolish as it first seemed.
I’d swap places with where NZ is right now in a heartbeat but there are much tougher times for them ahead. When their initial eradication strategy might cause a whole raft of problems down the line.
Who the hell came up with that job support scheme? Unless I’m completely misunderstanding something do they actually think employers are going to pay three people 55% of their wage when they could just have one person do it?
Always a risk the vaccine won't work or work well enough. Worth the risk imo as it was the moral choice. AU should also thank NZ because our federal clown collective couldn't afford yet another shambles and chaos if they hadn't followed NZ and it might have been the end of them.
As for Sweden, they are nowhere near herd immunity so even in such an atypical country there is still huge pain to be incurred if they are to pass HIT without a vaccine.