Coronavirus Thread

[leicsmac]

17 minutes ago, Markyblue said:

My last words mac i enjoy many of your posts and know you are very intelligent but i feel your playing devils advocate. In plain terms the few that cannot be vaccinated will have to be protected in other ways "the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few". Have a good day.

Fair enough. I personally think that is not particularly farfetched to think the most vulnerable can be protected using the vaccine and a semblance of normal life can resume in a timely fashion with the correct application of a vaccination program and it's not an either or...but that of course comes down to how competent the authorities are with procurement, planning and logistics.

 

Enjoy your day too. 

[Legend_in_blue]

 

A very interesting watch all the way through.

 

As for the vaccination push, brilliantly summarised at 44:34.

 

[Strokes]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55120734

[Guest Fktf]

1 hour ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

A very interesting watch all the way through.

 

As for the vaccination push, brilliantly summarised at 44:34.

 

As far as I can tell he waffles on about  vaccinations in relation to death rates and saving lives, which is then used to criticise lockdowns. But neither of these are, and never have been, the primary driver of lockdowns, and they're not for the vaccine either.

Edited 29 November 2020 by Fktf

[reynard]

13 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

I hope your wife is well on the mend, it must have been very frightening to have had her diagnosis and treatment delayed. An awful experience at any time, but particularly then.

 

I assume that the delay was a result of practical difficulties and priorities for hospitals and doctors caused by the virus circulating, rather than due to the lockdown imposed? I believe at peak that hospitals were very close to full in the UK, and if it was anything like here, doctors were reluctant to treat face to face in their surgeries.

 

The point I was trying to make is that had there been no lockdown the situation would have been even worse as there would be even more virus circulating and hospitals would be even more stretched. The appalling situation that you and many others faced where cancer diagnosis and treatment was delayed has been wrongly used to argue against lockdowns. In fact it should be used to argue the exact opposite. Earlier lockdown would have stopped the virus getting out of control, which would have allowed doctors and hospitals to continue their work more easily.

Thank you she received the all clear last week. Probably the most stressful time of our lives and I concur 100% with your rationale. Without the lockdown in the Spring there is no doubt she would not have been treated whilst hospitals were overflowing with covid patients. Apart from anything else you don't want to be anywhere near a covid sufferer if you have cancer. Also It is important to note the emotional stress that someone suffering from cancer goes though let alone having to have all the treatment, biopsies and other tests and consultations on your own as no accompanying person was allowed to attend the hopsital appointments with her.

I know this is a selfish view but I'm so thankful for the lockdowns etc which have enabled diagnosis and treatments to continue, even if not as they normally would. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.

[bovril]

29 minutes ago, Strokes said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-55120734

The praise that Sturgeon got for her handling of the pandemic is surreal.

[yorkie1999]

3 hours ago, leicsmac said:

As I said, vaccinating those children isn't to directly protect them primarily (though it will), it's to protect the people they may come in contact with while about their daily business who cannot be vaccinated. What other things, exactly, are being worked on for people who cannot take the vaccine?

 

Sometimes, measures like this aren't just about protecting the person themselves, it's about protecting other people, too.

The pfizer vaccine has been developed so anyone can have it as it doesn't work like a traditional vaccine. 

 

"RNA is the nucleic acid that converts DNA into proteins. It carries the genetic information of the COVID-19 virus.

mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccines have become a possibility over the past few years and unlike conventional vaccines, which are produced using weakened forms of the virus, RNA vaccines use only the pathogen's genetic code.

They introduce an mRNA sequence into the body that contains the genetic instructions for the person's own cells to produce the vaccine antigens and generate an immune response.

Most standard vaccines work by injecting a dead or weakened form of the pathogen into the body which then builds immunity to it as the immune system learns to recognise and respond to the infectious agent."

Edited 29 November 2020 by yorkie1999

[leicsmac]

47 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

The pfizer vaccine has been developed so anyone can have it as it doesn't work like a traditional vaccine. 

 

"RNA is the nucleic acid that converts DNA into proteins. It carries the genetic information of the COVID-19 virus.

mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccines have become a possibility over the past few years and unlike conventional vaccines, which are produced using weakened forms of the virus, RNA vaccines use only the pathogen's genetic code.

They introduce an mRNA sequence into the body that contains the genetic instructions for the person's own cells to produce the vaccine antigens and generate an immune response.

Most standard vaccines work by injecting a dead or weakened form of the pathogen into the body which then builds immunity to it as the immune system learns to recognise and respond to the infectious agent."

Interesting. I'd heard the Pfizer effort was an mRNA vaccine, but I wasn't aware that this could be one of the potential benefits of it.

 

I'll have to look and see if this means it can be taken by immunocompromised people with no side-effects, but it seems at first glance that it could.

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

I'll have to look and see if this means it can be taken by immunocompromised people with no side-effects, but it seems at first glance that it could.

I think that it can - that was one of the aspects of the clinical trails. 

[Tuna]

Self Employed can claim their next grant from tomorrow.

[Leicester_Loyal]

https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/labour-support-government-tier-system-tory-rebellion-lisa-nandy-conservatives-776420

 

'Labour will need ‘convincing’ to prop up government on tier system amid Tory rebellion, Lisa Nandy says'

 

No chance they'll vote down the new tiered system, even if Boris doesn't release any economic cost information tomorrow.

[zorro en españa]

I have given myself a break from looking at Worldometer but just had a look.  The deaths profile in so many countries is dreadful.  Most Northern European countries looking bad and winter still to set in.

 

Procedures here in Spain look like they are starting to have an impact, thank goodness, but still some way to go.

 

Let’s hope all countries make a success in deploying the vaccine.

[CosbehFox]

13 hours ago, Markyblue said:

That is true but the vaccine is going to protect upto 95% of those taking it and other things are being worked on for those it doesn't protect.  Are you seriously saying normality can not return until 100% of people are completely protected, thats fantasy land. Children are more likely to die of a lightning strike are we to fit them all with earthing rods.

We simply don’t know enough about the effects of Long Covid to dismiss that there’s no need for the vaccine in the fit and healthy range. Cases have occurred where fit people suffer a week of average symptoms but then have after effects lasting months. 
 

There’s also the economic knock of - can businesses have their staff off for ten days to two weeks to prevent outbreaks at their workplaces? Take a school for example. Goes around the staff. School closes. Parents have to sort out healthcare. Food production factory closes down. Shortage of a particular product. 
 

Of course, that’s not considering that person may still require hospital treatment which is the core aim. 
 

It’s been whispered quietly but we are beginning to see the effects of the restrictions now, positive cases and hospital admissions coming down in the UK. That as frustrating as it is complying. I think my brain is completely bored with itself this weekend. 

Edited 29 November 2020 by Cardiff_Fox

[Wymsey]

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/more-60-arrested-anti-lockdown-4746818

[Dunge]

4 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/labour-support-government-tier-system-tory-rebellion-lisa-nandy-conservatives-776420

 

'Labour will need ‘convincing’ to prop up government on tier system amid Tory rebellion, Lisa Nandy says'

 

No chance they'll vote down the new tiered system, even if Boris doesn't release any economic cost information tomorrow.

I reckon they’ll back it if Boris can’t get the support of his own party, and maybe abstain if he can. It makes sense for Labour to have politics in mind for it but there’s no way they’ll want even part of the blame for a “no decision” at this point.

[Guest Markyblue]

6 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

We simply don’t know enough about the effects of Long Covid to dismiss that there’s no need for the vaccine in the fit and healthy range. Cases have occurred where fit people suffer a week of average symptoms but then have after effects lasting months. 
 

There’s also the economic knock of - can businesses have their staff off for ten days to two weeks to prevent outbreaks at their workplaces? Take a school for example. Goes around the staff. School closes. Parents have to sort out healthcare. Food production factory closes down. Shortage of a particular product. 
 

Of course, that’s not considering that person may still require hospital treatment which is the core aim. 
 

It’s been whispered quietly but we are beginning to see the effects of the restrictions now, positive cases and hospital admissions coming down in the UK. That as frustrating as it is complying. I think my brain is completely bored with itself this weekend. 

Not dismissing vaccinating fit and healthy people, the crux of what im saying is once the most vulnerable are vaccinated normality can return virtually.  The healthy population can/will be vaccinated but the time scale is not critical.  The virus going through the majority of healthy younger fit people in this country is NOT going to overwhelm the nhs.

[SpacedX]

Several studies indicate that Coronavirus infections in England  fallen by about a third over lockdown. The recent Imperial College tests simultaneously involved 100,000 and was conducted in tandem with Ipsos MORI. But it's React-1 report which is so telling:

 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/imperial_react1_r7_interim.pdf

.

The combined results of these initiatives demonstrate a 30% fall in infections between the last study and the period of 13-24 November. Prior to that, cases were accelerating - doubling every nine days at the end of October. It is now estimated the virus's reproduction (R) rate had fallen to 0.88.Much of this has been driven by falling infections in the North East and North West, where cases decreased by more than half. 

 

Interestingly, although England's national lockdown was enforced on 5th November the data indicates that there was a spike in cases in the week after likely due to pre-lockdown socialising and the five day average lag for the infection to be detectable by test. 

 

Of course, correlation does not equal causality, but as Imperial College's Professor Paul Elliott who directed the swabbing programme observed, this data strongly suggests that the tiered system and subsequent lockdown had helped arrest and reduced the infection rate across the country. 

 

Honestly? What does he know? It was only last Thursday that I read that lockdown doesn't work - so that settles it. Instead of wasting time with all this empirical evidence and medical based research, these clowns should be instead heeding populist opinion of a provincial football forum. That's what really counts. 

Edited 30 November 2020 by Line-X

[Chrysalis]

3 hours ago, Markyblue said:

Not dismissing vaccinating fit and healthy people, the crux of what im saying is once the most vulnerable are vaccinated normality can return virtually.  The healthy population can/will be vaccinated but the time scale is not critical.  The virus going through the majority of healthy younger fit people in this country is NOT going to overwhelm the nhs.

I suggest you read into the history of vaccines, they work on a basis of vaccinating as many as possible, vaccinating only the most extremely vulnerable cases is a flawed strategy for two prime reasons.

 

(a) vaccines are not 100% effective so the % of those who it isnt effective on, need the protection of reduced community spread which is obtained by mass vaccination.

 

(b) there is many people who might be considered not vulnerable now, but are actually vulnerable due to undiagnosed conditions.

 

Not to mention the long term affects of covid are unknown. I would think people would be more understanding on here considering Nigel Pearson has been badly affected by it.

Edited 30 November 2020 by Chrysalis

[Jon the Hat]

37 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Several studies indicate that Coronavirus infections in England  fallen by about a third over lockdown. The recent Imperial College tests simultaneously involved 100,000 and was conducted in tandem with Ipsos MORI. But it's React-1 report which is so telling:

 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/institute-of-global-health-innovation/imperial_react1_r7_interim.pdf

.

The combined results of these initiatives demonstrate a 30% fall in infections between the last study and the period of 13-24 November. Prior to that, cases were accelerating - doubling every nine days at the end of October. It is now estimated the virus's reproduction (R) rate had fallen to 0.88.Much of this has been driven by falling infections in the North East and North West, where cases decreased by more than half. 

 

Interestingly, although England's national lockdown was enforced on 5th November the data indicates that there was a spike in cases in the week after likely due to pre-lockdown socialising and the five day average lag for the infection to be detectable by test. 

 

Of course, correlation does not equal causality, but as Imperial College's Professor Paul Elliott who directed the swabbing programme observed, this data strongly suggests that the tiered system and subsequent lockdown had helped arrest and reduced the infection rate across the country. 

 

Honestly? What does he know? It was only last Thursday that I read that lockdown doesn't work - so that settles it. Instead of wasting time with all this empirical evidence and medical based research, these clowns should be instead heeding populist opinion of a provincial football forum. That's what really counts. 

I am delighted that me being locked down in rural West Sussex is helping the North.  It's a ****ing masterplan.  Also that as of this week I will be under the same restrictions as Central London.

[SpacedX]

15 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I am delighted that me being locked down in rural West Sussex is helping the North. 

It isn't Jon. Being locked down in the north helped the north - although curtailment on national travel has also been beneficial. 

 

I thought you were moving to Perth? - which is about as isolated as you could ask for. 

Edited 30 November 2020 by Line-X

[bovril]

32 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I am delighted that me being locked down in rural West Sussex is helping the North.  It's a ****ing masterplan.  Also that as of this week I will be under the same restrictions as Central London.

We all need to get behind lockdown to make it a success, Jon. Stop your moaning and believe in Britain.

[Jon the Hat]

46 minutes ago, bovril said:

We all need to get behind lockdown to make it a success, Jon. Stop your moaning and believe in Britain.

I bet you are really pleased with yourself now aren't you

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

We all need to get behind lockdown to make it a success, Jon. Stop your moaning and believe in Britain.

 

 

Actually, it's about getting behind science as opposed to Boris's pathetic appeals to illusory jingosim and faux national pride. Worked for his beloved Brexit though. 

[Beechey]

1 hour ago, Line-X said:

 

 

Actually, it's about getting behind science as opposed to Boris's pathetic appeals to illusory jingosim and faux national pride. Worked for his beloved Brexit though. 

I don't think I'd say it's jingoistic. Appealing to patriotism, definitely, but not jingoistic at all.

Jingoism is an expression of nationalism in the realm of foreign policy, not in domestic health policy.

 

We don't want to fight but by Jingo if we do,

We've got the ships, we've got the men, we've got the money too,

We've fought the Bear before, and while we're Britons true,

The Russians shall not have Constantinople!

 

Regardless of my pedantic point, I agree with the sentiment. Who'd have thought minimising social contact reduces the spread of a virus? The revelation shocked me! 

Edited 30 November 2020 by Beechey

[SpacedX]

2 minutes ago, Beechey said:

I don't think I'd say it's jingoistic. Appealing to patriotism, definitely, but not jingoistic at all.

Jingoism is an expression of nationalism in the realm of foreign policy, not in domestic health policy.

Actually it's any emotional expression of patriotism - particularly in respect of a warlike foreign policy. And since we are reminded by such rhetoric that the virus originated overseas and we are "waging a war against it" - I think my description of Boris's contrived appeals to nationalistic fervour is quite apt.