SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

Sweet Square said:
Click to expand...


Amazing how many times journalists have been misusing the word “relapse” today. Testing positive after testing negative could have meant relapse or reinfection. Two different things. Catching twice = reinfection. Original infection flaring up again = relapse. the words have been used interchangeably in almost every article about this update.

Anyhoo. I’m being pedantic. This is still good news.
 
nimic said:
He'll never concede anything, so it's a bit pointless to try.
Click to expand...

My entire point is that we have no idea how much virus was already in Belgium, France, UK, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Ireland etc etc in mid March so comparing responses is rather pointless at this point and utterly unscientific.

How can I concede that? I mean, I’ll happily do so when a paper or evidence is presented showing how much virus was present in each individual country in mid-March.

Do you want me now to concede and just say “ok, you’re correct, we know without doubt that Germany and Belgium had the same level of virus mid March, so Belgium should’ve done better“? Based on absolutely zero evidence and contrary to how impressive the Belgium response was.

Or I can concede to Wibs, that Australia did an amazing job with their response, way better than Belgium, and completely ignore that they locked down later than Belgium, on the same day as the UK.

I’ll hold my position I think, we simply don’t know the most important variable. In the next few months we’ll have a better idea how well countries have responded and coped.
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
Amazing how many times journalists have been misusing the word “relapse” today. Testing positive after testing negative could have meant relapse or reinfection. Two different things. Catching twice = reinfection. Original infection flaring up again = relapse. the words have been used interchangeably in almost every article about this update.

Anyhoo. I’m being pedantic. This is still good news.
Click to expand...

I was wondering this as it's behind a paywall. Have they actually concluded you can't catch it twice (or at least the same strain) or have they just concluded those previous cases were in error?

The headline suggests permanent immunity but that seems unbelievably good news.
 
RedRover said:
A long term lock down to save those people, whilst risking the ability for the people working now who fund the economy (and often care for those vulnerable groups), and ruining the future of the very young who are the people who will fund the country when the current crop retire is unthinkable.
Click to expand...

Any lockdown has only one purpose and that is to delay the onset of contagion to a level where the NHS could cope, it is not, as such, about reducing the death toll for old or young. Until some medication, vaccine or other treatments can be found to push back the virus, those affected by the more virulent strains will die, unless their own bodies can fight it off with some nursing help. Older people especially those trapped in care homes and suffering from other medical problems, or simply running out of steam as they age, will have more chance of being infected, and less chance of recovery. This is not a government policy it is a fact of life at this time
 
Last edited:
Government hits UK testing target
The UK carried out 122,000 coronavirus tests on the last day of April, passing the government's target of 100,000.
 
Last edited:
Smores said:
I was wondering this as it's behind a paywall. Have they actually concluded you can't catch it twice (or at least the same strain) or have they just concluded those previous cases were in error?

The headline suggests permanent immunity but that seems unbelievably good news.
Click to expand...

It was always the most likely event rather than unbelievable but with all the fear around it's no surprise most were cautious.
 


438 hospital deaths. It's good news we've come down to the 400-600 range all week. Other countries hard hit did this in the 4th week, we took 5 weeks so good to finally do it.

SalfordRed18 said:
Who exactly did they apparently test?
Click to expand...

They stuck a test stick up Johnson's nose 20,000 times to reach the goal.
 
sammsky1 said:
Government hits UK testing target
The UK carried out 122,000 coronavirus tests on the last day of April, passing the government's target of 100,000.
Click to expand...

By massively fiddling the numbers

https://www.hsj.co.uk/story.aspx?storyCode=7027544

The Department of Health and Social Care is now including tests that have been posted or delivered to people’s homes in its figures. This means tests which are sent to people are counted before the recipient has provided and returned their sample to a laboratory.

HSJ understands that up to 50,000 of the tests that will be reported as having taken place on 30 April will actually represent the mailing or the agreeing to mail a home testing kit.
Click to expand...
 
Smores said:
I was wondering this as it's behind a paywall. Have they actually concluded you can't catch it twice (or at least the same strain) or have they just concluded those previous cases were in error?

The headline suggests permanent immunity but that seems unbelievably good news.
Click to expand...

They concluded that people have been testing positive after previously testing negative because they’re getting viral debris (rather than live viruses) on the swab. Presumably part of the healing process involves damaged cells breaking down and releasing loads of bits and pieces of dead virus.

Tells us feck all about whether they’re immune or not, unfortunately. Basically the headline is massively misleading.
 
As much as the testing figure has been manipulated for PR reasons at least they're testing more which is a positive.

The aim is a continued test and trace system though.
 
711 said:
I might be alright with a bit of practice then, Mrs numbers has already made some for the family, with copper strips in , so they should be washable. I'm guessing you will approve of the fabric. :)
G0QycVj.jpg
Click to expand...
She's very clever to have made that! I've just ordered a couple of fabric ones for oates and me because we're going to have to be wearing them for a very long time - mine has a chihuahua on it (wearing pink sunglasses).
 
Fiskey said:
Is there more evidence of this? The kind of thing the media should be getting to the bottom of.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see the proof too. But honestly, when it comes to this government, start with the assumption that they are lying, you will rarely be wrong.

Plus, it does explain the huge leap in numbers. They didn't suddenly open twice as many drive through centres did they?
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
My entire point is that we have no idea how much virus was already in Belgium, France, UK, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Ireland etc etc in mid March so comparing responses is rather pointless at this point and utterly unscientific.

How can I concede that? I mean, I’ll happily do so when a paper or evidence is presented showing how much virus was present in each individual country in mid-March.

Do you want me now to concede and just say “ok, you’re correct, we know without doubt that Germany and Belgium had the same level of virus mid March, so Belgium should’ve done better“? Based on absolutely zero evidence and contrary to how impressive the Belgium response was.

Or I can concede to Wibs, that Australia did an amazing job with their response, way better than Belgium, and completely ignore that they locked down later than Belgium, on the same day as the UK.

I’ll hold my position I think, we simply don’t know the most important variable. In the next few months we’ll have a better idea how well countries have responded and coped.
Click to expand...

That's fair. Though it does mean debating the merits of this and that might be more than pointless right now.
 
RedRover said:
There's not a chance of that in the UK. The whole point of the lock down is to flatten the curve to allow essential services to cope and not to exceed capacity. It largely means the same number of people are likely to be infected but over a longer period. This can only be about buying time until a vaccine or treatments are developed, or failing that (this not being guaranteed) keeping the spread controlled until herd immunity is achieved. The government don't want to admit it but there you go.

The country can't afford people to be in lockdown for months and years on end. A recession takes years off life expectancy and a failed economy could kill more than the virus.

Its a very uncomfortable truth but the virus largely kills elderly people who cannot contribute to the economy and who often (due to underlying health conditions) do not have a long time to live. That is tragic, as is every life lost but there is a balance we need to keep. A long term lock down to save those people, whilst risking the ability for the people working now who fund the economy (and often care for those vulnerable groups), and ruining the future of the very young who are the people who will fund the country when the current crop retire is unthinkable.

Antibody testing is ongoing and if that indicates that there is an "iceberg" of people who have already had the virus (and the studies so far indicate that) and if, as suggested the actual risk of death overall is less than 0.1% (or less again for younger people) the economic damage will at some stage outweigh the damage the virus causes. People run the risk of death everyday from all kinds of threats, yet we do not lockdown because of it. How many die of Malaria, or Flu across the world every year? How may die in car accidents?

I think social distancing will remain in some form for a while but even that will have a shelf life. Some people you read online seem to think the world will be forever changed and I think some things (i.e. the way we work and the use of technology to minimise unnecessary travel) will, but socialising won't. Its innately human for people to want to socialise and that's why places we can do that exist. Things may change over time (i.e. local pubs closing and being replaced by a Nando's or similar as a place where young people meet) but the principle remains the same. People will not put up with months and months of having to work but then not "let off steam" as they usually would by meeting friends at the end of the week, or going to a cinema, concert or sports event. People are already getting sick of this so what'll happen in three months? Compliance cannot possibly be policed and eventually, the tide will turn against the Government because people will want a return to normality. As an example a 70+ year old friend of my parents, having been self-isolating for weeks has said that he'd rather take his chances and enjoy what years he has left than be locked up every day because he isn't living a life. If that was me I'd feel the same given that at some point in the next few years some disease or ailment is going to do for me anyway.

As an aside, the media have a lot to answer for. They've seemingly convinced a generation of young, healthy people that they're going to die of they go to Tesco to pick up some shopping. Evidently this is very serious but accurate reporting around risk should be made clear, rather than prioritising getting clicks online with sensational articles filled with doom and gloom about how we'll never return to normal. Printing daily deaths is, I suppose required but the human brain is not wired up to deal with that much death, even though around 1600 people a day die on average in the UK.
Click to expand...
Having brainwashed the public into thinking they're going to die if they go to Tesco's with the constant "stay at home" messaging they will simply switch to a different type of brainwashing message that it's ok to go out (especially commuting to work!) as long as we employ social distancing etc. Then people will do that instead, even though the risks are little different.
 
Fiskey said:
Is there more evidence of this? The kind of thing the media should be getting to the bottom of.
Click to expand...

They were asked about it in the Press Conference just. Prof John Newton replied:

"The majority are counted in labs, but for any test which takes place outside the programme they’re counted when they leave the programme, he says. So tests that are mailed out or go out by satellite, have always been counted that way. "
Click to expand...

So any home delivered tests are counted when they are dispatched rather than when/if they're sent back. According to https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public 40,369 tests were dispatched this way yesterday and included in the total test results
 
Smores said:
That's like 5hrs of fox news jammed into one post. Congratulations.

I'm not trawling through each point so I'll stick to your final one. No they haven't convinced people that they're going to die they've convinced them (as has the government) to do their civic duty and stay home to protect others, it takes a sociopath not to get why people are doing this.
Click to expand...

You're entitled to your opinion but your reference to Fox News indicates that you've completely missed the point of my post and also completely misunderstand both what I was trying to say. Congratulations.
 
RedRover said:
Antibody testing is ongoing and if that indicates that there is an "iceberg" of people who have already had the virus (and the studies so far indicate that) and if, as suggested the actual risk of death overall is less than 0.1% (or less again for younger people) the economic damage will at some stage outweigh the damage the virus causes. People run the risk of death everyday from all kinds of threats, yet we do not lockdown because of it. How many die of Malaria, or Flu across the world every year? How may die in car accidents?
Click to expand...

The official death rate in New York State is already 0.12% of its entire population as of right now.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Agree with a lot of what you say but this bit...



...is not true at all. All the better designed studies give single digit % prevalence. More of an ice cube than an iceberg.

I disagree with your last paragraph too. Early on in this thing there were loads of complaints of fear mongering and we saw British young people crowding pubs when all the countries around the UK were already in lockdown. If we’ve learned anything from the thousands of British people already killed by this virus (with thousands more deaths, young and old, to follow) it’s that it wasn’t taken seriously enough. If we’ve got to a stage where young healthy people are nervous to go to Tescos then that’s great. Because that’s what’s needed to stop another massive surge. Let’s not forget that second peak of the Spanish flu killed more than the first.
Click to expand...

I have tried to educate myself on the science behind it but don;t profess to be any kind of an expert. I read a lot on a specific sub on Reddit which focuses on the debate around the science, rather than posting news stories etc and you're correct, there are issues with the data produced so far, however they do all seem to indicate a general trend in there being many more cases than reported and/or diagnosed. Where that leaves us overall i suppose its too early to tell.

Your latter point is a fair one. My issue is that at some stage in the near future we need a road map out of this towards some semblance of normality because the government cannot support us indefinitely, nor probably for much longer to the extent that it is. Sensible young people may be scared of the virus but they should also be scared of what happens if the economy tanks. The future for us all, and especially for the young would be bleak. The poorest in the country will be the ones who suffer most.

Just to be clear I am not at all suggesting that Lock down be lifted and we let the virus run riot. Clearly measures need to be taken to ensure that the NHS can cope with the demands placed upon it whilst the younger, fitter less at risk members of society are able to get back to work in some form or other.
 
RedRover said:
I have tried to educate myself on the science behind it but don;t profess to be any kind of an expert. I read a lot on a specific sub on Reddit which focuses on the debate around the science, rather than posting news stories etc and you're correct, there are issues with the data produced so far, however they do all seem to indicate a general trend in there being many more cases than reported and/or diagnosed. Where that leaves us overall i suppose its too early to tell.

Your latter point is a fair one. My issue is that at some stage in the near future we need a road map out of this towards some semblance of normality because the government cannot support us indefinitely, nor probably for much longer to the extent that it is. Sensible young people may be scared of the virus but they should also be scared of what happens if the economy tanks. The future for us all, and especially for the young would be bleak. The poorest in the country will be the ones who suffer most.

Just to be clear I am not at all suggesting that Lock down be lifted and we let the virus run riot. Clearly measures need to be taken to ensure that the NHS can cope with the demands placed upon it whilst the younger, fitter less at risk members of society are able to get back to work in some form or other.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I think we’re on the same page really. I think the initial “fear mongering” was necessary to shock people into a radical change in their behaviour. But it’s all about managed risk from here, so we might need to be a little less cautious.
 
Kag said:
Good post.

The government has a seriously difficult job to do with regards to communicating how to relax the current measures. There are far too many people that have lost sight of reality, and have consumed themselves with this virus, as if it’s the only variable that contributes towards danger and death. I’ve followed the measures, I agreed with them and I understand the severity of the virus, but those people that harbour views relating to “full” or continuous lockdowns are too narrow in their thinking.

Recent reports indicate that there has been a 75% reduction in emergency cancer diagnosis. That’s deeply troubling. You factor in heart attacks, strokes and suicide (which will all increase in light of the incoming economic fallout and probable implementation of austerity) and the effects of lockdown may begin to outweigh the primary impact of the virus.

It’s concerning that expressing this view makes you some sort of pariah, void of all apparent empathy. Given someone has already used the word ‘sociopath’ in response to you, I fear we’re in yet more division within the public. The public will begin to argue about fall out about this, big-style.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I am scared of losing close relatives as I'm sure we all are, bit I'm also scared that I won't have a job or that my daughter's education will be damaged. Its evident that by any sensible reckoning, the idea of people locking themselves up for months and years on end is unrealistic. It is also very clearly not the plan the government has. This is all about keeping the NHS at a point where it can do the best job and save as many lives as it can. What if they can't develop a vaccine? Are we intending to stay locked down forever? Its simply not viable.

People are of course entitled to their opinion. I don't consider myself to be a sociopath. Any life lost to this is tragic but we mustn't lose sight of the bigger picture either.
 
Maticmaker said:
Any lockdown has only one purpose and that is to delay the onset of contagion to a level where the NHS could cope, it is not, as such, about reducing the death toll for old or young. Until some medication, vaccine or other treatments can be found to push back the virus, those affected by the more virulent strains will die, unless their own bodies can fight it off with some nursing help. Older people especially those trapped in care homes and suffering from other medical problems, or simply running out of steam as they age, will have more chance of being infected, and less chance of recovery. This is not a government policy it is a fact of life at this time
Click to expand...

Completely agree.
 
RedRover said:
I have tried to educate myself on the science behind it but don;t profess to be any kind of an expert. I read a lot on a specific sub on Reddit which focuses on the debate around the science, rather than posting news stories etc and you're correct, there are issues with the data produced so far, however they do all seem to indicate a general trend in there being many more cases than reported and/or diagnosed. Where that leaves us overall i suppose its too early to tell.

Your latter point is a fair one. My issue is that at some stage in the near future we need a road map out of this towards some semblance of normality because the government cannot support us indefinitely, nor probably for much longer to the extent that it is. Sensible young people may be scared of the virus but they should also be scared of what happens if the economy tanks. The future for us all, and especially for the young would be bleak. The poorest in the country will be the ones who suffer most.

Just to be clear I am not at all suggesting that Lock down be lifted and we let the virus run riot. Clearly measures need to be taken to ensure that the NHS can cope with the demands placed upon it whilst the younger, fitter less at risk members of society are able to get back to work in some form or other.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I think we’re on the same page really. I think the initial “fear mongering” was necessary to shock people into a radical change in their behaviour. But it’s all about managed risk from here, so we might need to be a little less cautious.
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
Having brainwashed the public into thinking they're going to die if they go to Tesco's with the constant "stay at home" messaging they will simply switch to a different type of brainwashing message that it's ok to go out (especially commuting to work!) as long as we employ social distancing etc. Then people will do that instead, even though the risks are little different.
Click to expand...

I suspect you're absolutely right. There was a bit of early comment this week about there not being a plan in place until Boris spoke yesterday.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
The official death rate in New York State is already 0.12% of its entire population as of right now.
Click to expand...
Slight tangent, but any ideas why Singapore has such a low number of reported deaths vs reported cases? 16 from 17,101.
They're a massive outlier at the moment.

Edit: Qatar too I suppose.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Fair enough. I think we’re on the same page really. I think the initial “fear mongering” was necessary to shock people into a radical change in their behaviour. But it’s all about managed risk from here, so we might need to be a little less cautious.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. We needed a "new normal" for a while and the figures indicate that it's doing its job. Hopefully the way out, whilst unlikely to be without difficulty is as smooth as it can possibly be.
 
RK said:
Slight tangent, but any ideas why Singapore has such a low number of reported deaths vs reported cases? 16 from 17,101.
They're a massive outlier at the moment.
Click to expand...

Not really. All I can guess is that death typically takes 12-14 days on average and the vast wad of those cases have come in the last fortnight or so.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
The official death rate in New York State is already 0.12% of its entire population as of right now.
Click to expand...

Fair point. I don;t understand the science well enough but surely there is the prospect of different figures based on demographics of various places?
 
If you want/need to wear a mask for anything more than 10-20 minutes at a time then I would recommend avoiding the ones that go round your ears.

This is a good guide to make a homemade one

https://www.patreon.com/posts/mrks-no-pattern-35679762

Avoid using shiny ribbon, shoe laces are great. Just needs some fabric and pipe cleaners.

They can be sterilised by going into a very low oven for 20 mins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.