Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[e77]

I think he might be celebrating that the number isn't higher. I think it's a bit OTT to imply that anyone is jumping up and down in glee at reports of another death.

Remember that about 200 of those deaths are purely random and are little or nothing to do with coronavirus. And an unspecified number more are those people who could have been vaccinated and chose not to be - you know the old proverb about leading a horse to water. The number of people who have taken proper precautions against coronavirus and have died anyway, is pretty small, especially in consideration to how it used to be. That is something to celebrate.

I would respond to that by pointing out the mandated wearing of face coverings in enclosed public spaces might have made that figure even lower. As I don't think that is going to happen there is no point arguing for it anymore.

However, what I really have a problem with is someone who has decided he knows better than the world of science and public health and refused to have a vaccine thinks he has a right to gloat about the better than expected, by some, amount of cases when he has refused to contribute to the main initiative to cause that.

 

[Billy the Fish]

I would respond to that by pointing out the mandated wearing of face coverings in enclosed public spaces might have made that figure even lower.

That's a very big might. There's absolutely no proof that masks in this context make a difference.

As I don't think that is going to happen there is no point arguing for it anymore.

Agreed. The silly thing is we've had ample opportunity to prove this one way or another in the past 18 months. There's scientific studies for literally everything these days, why is there so little research around masks?

 

[beorhthelm]

That's a very big might. There's absolutely no proof that masks in this context make a difference.



Agreed. The silly thing is we've had ample opportunity to prove this one way or another in the past 18 months. There's scientific studies for literally everything these days, why is there so little research around masks?

there is quite a bit of research, it shows non-standard masks are pretty ineffective at doing anything substantial. standard masks are good but not 100%, really need properly fitting, filtered types for protection against sustained exposure.

 

[e77]

Sigh, are we really still doing the masks don't work argument?

Look here

The disease is transmitted by fluid droplets leaving the mouth and nose. That is indisputable. If i wear a mask then it makes them less likely to reach anyone else.

But as I say, the rest of the world and the government can't be bothered so crack on.

 

[Swansman]

Sigh, are we really still doing the masks don't work argument?

Look here

The disease is transmitted by fluid droplets leaving the mouth and nose. That is indisputable. If i wear a mask then it makes them less likely to reach anyone else.

But as I say, the rest of the world and the government can't be bothered so crack on.

Might work.

What doesnt work is the vaccine. Look at Israel, shambles. Might offer a little protection, might offer no protection (as numbers were low globally last summer as well), might offer protection for a short while.

Still lots of research going down on how this virus works and why its so nasty and so on, it appears the vaccines are a desperate attempt to find the solution before finding the problem. The only way of dealing with this virus is to face it, adapt to it and have it adapt to us. If anything, the vaccine might only make it worse - mutating into more aggressive strains rather than the opposite.

Mind you, I'd love to be very very wrong about it as I would love to get rid of this shit.

 

[e77]

Might work.

What doesnt work is the vaccine. Look at Israel, shambles. Might offer a little protection, might offer no protection (as numbers were low globally last summer as well), might offer protection for a short while.

Still lots of research going down on how this virus works and why its so nasty and so on, it appears the vaccines are a desperate attempt to find the solution before finding the problem. The only way of dealing with this virus is to face it, adapt to it and have it adapt to us. If anything, the vaccine might only make it worse - mutating into more aggressive strains rather than the opposite.

Mind you, I'd love to be very very wrong about it as I would love to get rid of this shit.

On the other hand masks have very little downside.

As for the Vaccine I seem to recall it was always fairly widely predicted it's protection would fade with time and we (or at least some of us) might need boosters. In the UK we are currently at a quarter of hospital admissions by peak, admittedly with better weather at the moment, and deaths are less than 100 a day down from 1300.

Be it masks or vaccines there is no silver bullet to make Covid disappear.

 

[Billy the Fish]

Sigh, are we really still doing the masks don't work argument?

Look here

The disease is transmitted by fluid droplets leaving the mouth and nose. That is indisputable. If i wear a mask then it makes them less likely to reach anyone else.

But as I say, the rest of the world and the government can't be bothered so crack on.

That article is already well out of date, it's written before they knew about aerosol transmission.

Of course properly spec'd and properly fitted masks work, that's not in question. In the real world how many people are doing this? The majority I see aren't.

It would be good to see some of the claims backed up with actual data.

 

[e77]

That article is already well out of date, it's written before they knew about aerosol transmission.

Of course properly spec'd and properly fitted masks work, that's not in question. In the real world how many people are doing this? The majority I see aren't.

It would be good to see some of the claims backed up with actual data.

About a 70% reduction in infections. Source

I now await a reply of 'that evidence is wrong, find more of it'.

 

[Fat Boy Fat]

I have contributed, more than many.

I have done more lateral flow tests than I can count. I have self isolated when required to do so. I have worn masks when required to do so.

...and to top it off, I am fairly certain I am already immune to covid anyway, given a suspected case early 2020 and my inability to catch it now.

Natural immunity IS superior to vaccinated immunity, which we already knew and we will learn more about in the coming months/years.

As a key worker, who has definitely done my bit to get the better of covid in this country, which we have. We can all be proud with our collective and individual efforts in getting to where we are now. Freedom.

I have now come to the conclusion that you and Crodonilson are one and the same person and you are both just spoofing these boards with your frankly ridiculous statements...

Doing your bit for the country, not exactly dig for victory, is it?

Ps - love the way you threw in the key worker bit, in an attempt to make your opinions more valid in some way! "I'm a key worker, don't you know?"

 

[Fat Boy Fat]

Being a key worker absolutely validates the contents of my post, which is it was mentioned.

Due to my understanding of my relationship to the pandemic, I can look back and say with absolute confidence that I made the correct decision in not getting vaccinated - for both myself and for society.

I like you, you’re funny!

 

[beorhthelm]

Natural immunity IS superior to vaccinated immunity, which we already knew and we will learn more about in the coming months/years.

evidence? what i've read suggests its inconclusive. meanwhile vaccinations give greater probability of low level infection so less sick, and reduced infectiousness. net win for vaccination.

 

[beorhthelm]

Apart from maybe the top link, they are not easy reads, so be warned.

Completely agree that vaccinations are crucial. They will always be crucial for older and vulnerable people. But in one of the links below it mentions that natural immunity makes people less infectious, six months later and beyond.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01442-9

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00501-8/fulltext

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6529/eabf4063

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joim.13372

i dont see they support the claim, they all look at presence of immune antibodies over (limited) time without much by way of comparison. the closet from Lancet suggests infection boosts the immune system response to a dose of vaccine, as expected from two doses. given the variability of reponse to infection, it would be interesting how it could be shown.

 

[dsr-burnley]

i dont see they support the claim, they all look at presence of immune antibodies over (limited) time without much by way of comparison. the closet from Lancet suggests infection boosts the immune system response to a dose of vaccine, as expected from two doses. given the variability of reponse to infection, it would be interesting how it could be shown.

Is there any point getting excited about whether, in theory, people who are vaccinated are losing protection? Wouldn't it be more interesting to look at whether, in practice, people are getting more vulnerable to infection?

There seem to be two approaches to this vaccine-fading theory. One of them is to postulate a plausible but untested theory that degree of immunity is related to antibodies, count the antibodies, and suggest that a fall in number of antibodies means that people are getting vulnerable. The other approach, apparntly unfashionable, is to look at the actual numbers and see from that if people are vulnerable.

We have a million cases per months of coronavirus. (Literally, a million. That's not hyperbole.) Look at those million cases. Analyse the stats. The statistics will prove, one way or another, whether a higher proportion of people jabbed some time ago are catching coronavirus compared with more recent cases. If someone is ill, you don't need to work out in a laboratory whether or not they ought to be ill - the actual, practical data is there, so you don't need to work out the theoretical data. If you want to count how many goals Brighton (or Burnley) scored last year, you don't look at the xGoals and the pssession stats and the shots on target and all that guff - the actual data is there. Use it.

 

[Rugrat]

Is there any point getting excited about whether, in theory, people who are vaccinated are losing protection? Wouldn't it be more interesting to look at whether, in practice, people are getting more vulnerable to infection?

There seem to be two approaches to this vaccine-fading theory. One of them is to postulate a plausible but untested theory that degree of immunity is related to antibodies, count the antibodies, and suggest that a fall in number of antibodies means that people are getting vulnerable. The other approach, apparntly unfashionable, is to look at the actual numbers and see from that if people are vulnerable.

We have a million cases per months of coronavirus. (Literally, a million. That's not hyperbole.) Look at those million cases. Analyse the stats. The statistics will prove, one way or another, whether a higher proportion of people jabbed some time ago are catching coronavirus compared with more recent cases. If someone is ill, you don't need to work out in a laboratory whether or not they ought to be ill - the actual, practical data is there, so you don't need to work out the theoretical data. If you want to count how many goals Brighton (or Burnley) scored last year, you don't look at the xGoals and the pssession stats and the shots on target and all that guff - the actual data is there. Use it.

Good post.

There's literally tons of data there. One of the big issues I have with our so called leadership is the constant reference to data driven decision making yet a complete lack of visibility to any (really meaningful) data. We're fed useless high level numbers which I initially assumed was because we (the population) were regarded as too stupid to understand anything more. As time has passed I've shifted my thinking and now think it may well be because they are to stupid to understand it.

I'm sure the data is there to tell us what is going on with the vaccinated population, but I can't find anything other than the odd anecdotal generalisation

 

[beorhthelm]

...
We have a million cases per months of coronavirus. (Literally, a million. That's not hyperbole.) Look at those million cases. Analyse the stats. The statistics will prove, one way or another, whether a higher proportion of people jabbed some time ago are catching coronavirus compared with more recent cases. If someone is ill, you don't need to work out in a laboratory whether or not they ought to be ill - the actual, practical data is there, so you don't need to work out the theoretical data. If you want to count how many goals Brighton (or Burnley) scored last year, you don't look at the xGoals and the pssession stats and the shots on target and all that guff - the actual data is there. Use it.

we only have about 8 months of data with vaccines for Covid19, the number is less relevant if measuring how effective the vaccine will be over time. so we do have to look at theoretical data. the general information on vaccines (beyond covid19) differs between diseases. for covid we know vaccine is effective so we should all have vaccine for maximum known immunity coverage, not rely on vagaries of natural immunity.

 

[nicko31]

Interesting in France they've done 11.5m 1st jabs have been given since Macron announced their “health pass”, they've now overtaken the UK on 1st doses.

They're getting their teens vaxed too with around half that have had a first dose, overall their cases falling steadily, we're going the other way

Johnson should take note

 

[Weststander]

Interesting in France they've done 11.5m 1st jabs have been given since Macron announced their “health pass”, they've now overtaken the UK on 1st doses.

They're getting their teens vaxed too with around half that have had a first dose, overall their cases falling steadily, we're going the other way

Johnson should take note

Macron, in my opinion correctly:

1. Is making all healthcare workers be vaccinated by 15th September, or face dismissal/suspension.
2. To enter a cafe, restaurant, cinema, museum, communal area of hotels, sports event, shopping mall or travel a long distance, you must have a covid passport.
3. France is vaccinating from age 12 upwards.

Belated changes after the French vaccines shambles in the first part of the year.

I think it would be condemned if implemented here. I recently watched a couple of debates about these issues, where commentators of both the left and right, also black rights campaigners, were in an unholy alliance against all of the above. Typical vehement comments were - infringement on human rights, a lack of understanding of ethnic minorities, no one touches my kids with an untried vaccine, vaccine Apartheid. In fact you see some of this on NSC on the Bloom/Barber moves to implement Covid rules, people up in arms.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Macron, in my opinion correctly:

1. Is making all healthcare workers be vaccinated by 15th September, or face dismissal/suspension.
2. To enter a cafe, restaurant, cinema, museum, communal area of hotels, sports event, shopping mall or travel a long distance, you must have a covid passport.
3. France is vaccinating from age 12 upwards.

Belated changes after the French vaccines shambles in the first part of the year.

I think it would be condemned if implemented here. I recently watched a couple of debates about these issues, where commentators of both the left and right, also black rights campaigners, were in an unholy alliance against all of the above. Typical vehement comments were - infringement on human rights, a lack of understanding of ethnic minorities, no one touches my kids with an untried vaccine, vaccine Apartheid. In fact you see some of this on NSC on the Bloom/Barber moves to implement Covid rules, people up in arms.

Feel free to correct me if this is out of date stats

But from memory BAME take up of jabs is much lower?

Can you imagine how it would look if you have a large number of BAME people turned away from places

 

[Weststander]

Feel free to correct me if this is out of date stats

But from memory BAME take up of jabs is much lower?

Can you imagine how it would look if you have a large number of BAME people turned away from places

It is, across some communities more than others, for all sorts of reasons.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jun/05/one-in-four-elderly-black-people-in-the-uk-still-not-vaccinated
Although the MP here blames government, Jeremy Vine for example has interviewed black folk of all ages, who are heavily influenced by lies on Facebook eg females lose ability to fall pregnant, males loss virility. He’s had apolitical doctors on such as Chris Smith and Sarah Jarvis who tried to quietly debunk the myths …. shouted down.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Sam Street [MENTION=612]Sam[/MENTION]streetwrites
·
7h
Zero Covid, 'back to normal' Melbourne, Australia has equalled London's 207 days in lockdown.

It now seems almost inevitable that it will spend four more weeks shut down and overtake Buenos Aires as the world's most locked down city.