coronavirus

[Saintslass]

5 minutes ago, Pen-Y-Bont Crusader said:

My nephew is telling me that cases in the SE London area seem to be slowing based on his last three shifts. Good news if that’s the full picture.

That is good news.  It seems to be showing through on the charts at the press conferences where apparently cases have dropped 5% in London since the lockdown began.  Alas, in other parts of the country things are not quite as rosy.  Here in St Helens we had our highest number of recorded deaths yesterday and deaths in St Helens alone now stand at 85.  (By comparison in Warrington that number stands at 39)   

[gingerjon]

10 minutes ago, Pen-Y-Bont Crusader said:

My nephew is telling me that cases in the SE London area seem to be slowing based on his last three shifts. Good news if that’s the full picture.

Give it three weeks and all those who were infected by the Westminster Bridge clapalong (with full Met support) can turn up.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

11 hours ago, Saintslass said:

Anyway, I had to post this because I just know how much it will be appreciated on here! 

 

That should have a government health warning. 

[gingerjon]

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

[Robin Evans]

I'm beginning to think lance Armstrong never did walk on the moon.....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-52318539

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

It is and its notable how it is being increasingly mentioned in an almost drip feed kind of way. We have seen what tend to follow when this happens. It does though go against conventional thinking and even if true may only apply to a small percentage etc.

[Bob8]

3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

As I read it, and only that, it makes most sense as a warning against certainty. Humans are very complex organisms, the virus is very simple. How people react will be different. A healthy individual with the anti-bodies (which will vary per person) will almost certainly be able to display an immune response, which should confer a good level of immunity.

Probably. I think.

[Northern Eel]

12 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

There are numerous benefits to the antibody test, irrespective of the disappointing news above. This will be money well spent, I am certain.

[gingerjon]

Just now, Northern Eel said:

There are numerous benefits to the antibody test, irrespective of the disappointing news above. This will be money well spent, I am certain.

I certainly hope so. The worry, I guess, is that it confers false security.

[Bob8]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

I certainly hope so. The worry, I guess, is that it confers false security.

I suspect (guess) that it will be useful for population data in determining policy.

Individually, it would be the best data available.

[Northern Eel]

10 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

I certainly hope so. The worry, I guess, is that it confers false security.

I'm thinking:

• Identification of past sufferers for the purpose of further research
• Identification of past sufferers in front-line services who have shown only mild symptoms and may be less prone to the virus should they return to work
• The ability to use such data to track spread and virulence in certain geographic areas
• Extend research around the effects of the virus on children, particularly those who have shown no, or very low level symptoms

There would have have be a clear caveat attached to some of the outcomes of this work though.

[ckn]

15 posts removed on why you all love each other so much, and trying to explain to each other why you do so. 

[Dave T]

11 hours ago, BryanC said:

t I'm probably done on here for now.

Best thing you've posted yet 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

37 minutes ago, Robin Evans said:

I'm beginning to think lance Armstrong never did walk on the moon.....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-52318539

Why would he walk when he had a bike?

[Dave T]

9 hours ago, JohnM said:

No, they are not all angels. In such a huge organisation, there are bound to be some with lower standards than everyone else. 

However, even the severest critic would acknowledge the anxiety and fear that many NHS personel must experience when there are so many conflicting and negative stories in the news. Some media outlets seem to delight in digging up doom mongering specialists, or painting things as dark as possible. Look at the delight at the BBC as it published the lie that an NHS director had rung the BBC to get the phone number of Barbour. 

Clap the NHS? It's not a legal requirement yet, is it? I don't join in, preferring instead to do my best to ensure that by my behaviour I do not add to the NHS workload. 

Yes at the end of this, unless anyone knows better, the majority of state sector employees will still be paid, still get their pensions etc,  and indeed I'm advising my youngest grand-children to make sure that they get state sector jobs when they grow up. I have no doubt though that many non-NHS bureaucrats are putting the hours to handle the current heavy workload. 

As one who has on a few occasions kept away from the forums, mainly the political ones, I'd advise you to stay and fight. This is a predominantly left of centre set of forums, with what seems to be a significant proportion of posters being in the state sector and posters  need to be challenged. 

There are, of course a number of left of centre posters who make valuable contributions to discussions.

The rest I have on ignore. 

Did you seriously encourage BryanC to stay? I skim read and gave your post a like. 

I'll be taking it back promptly

[Damien]

3 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Did you seriously encourage BryanC to stay? I skim read and gave your post a like. 

I'll be taking it back promptly

It seems like the call for political posts to go on the political forum changes depending on the politics involved.

[Moove]

29 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

Why would he walk when he had a bike?

The photographic evidence is undeniable

[JohnM]

33 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Did you seriously encourage BryanC to stay? I skim read and gave your post a like. 

I'll be taking it back promptly

I think you might be mistaking me for someone who cares about likes.  If we start advocating censorship of views we don't not like or do nor agree with, then the mods will be out of a job. 

[Dave T]

3 minutes ago, JohnM said:

I think you might be mistaking me for someone who cares about likes.  If we start advocating censorship of views we don't not like or do nor agree with, then the mods will be out of a job. 

Jeez John, lighten up. 

And nobody was censored. 

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Jeez John, lighten up. 

And nobody was censored. 

You deserve a like for that, I know you care about them 

[JohnM]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

. But it doesn't make the issue go away.

Like you, I've posted here rather than on the politics sub forum as this concerns facts not fiction. 

You are correct. The issue of the BBC's unbalanced reporting and promotion of fake news remains. Despite the excellence of  Victoria Derbyshire and one or two others, the partiality of most of their reporters remains blindingly obvious.

 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

You deserve a like for that, I know you care about them 

Just repaid the favour mate!

[SSoutherner]

1 hour ago, Northern Eel said:

I'm thinking:

• Identification of past sufferers for the purpose of further research
• Identification of past sufferers in front-line services who have shown only mild symptoms and may be less prone to the virus should they return to work
• The ability to use such data to track spread and virulence in certain geographic areas
• Extend research around the effects of the virus on children, particularly those who have shown no, or very low level symptoms

There would have have be a clear caveat attached to some of the outcomes of this work though.

My thoughts (with little scientific knowledge so feel free to correct me) is that Covid19 is caused by a coronavirus as are 25% of the cases of common cold

Over the past 50 years £Billions have been spent unsuccessfully searching for a cure for the common cold

Influenza is not a coronavirus BUT whilst we do have vaccines they are not 100% effective and they need continual development as there are various trains of Flu which have different levels of both transmittability and severity

I suspect Covid19 is here to stay, it wont wipe out humanity as the fact it does not kill all it infects means there is some form of natural resistance in some people (whether that is environmental, genetic in the virus or genetic in the humans involved is not yet resolved) so i think we will see repeated bouts of Covid19, hopefully not more often that yearly but as new strains evolve there will be new peaks and some strains may be more virulent and or more deadly and some less so - if we are lucky this first infection wave is the most severe and future strains/infection waves will be like after shocks, but i wouldnt bet me life on it

An idea of the true spread/infection rate will allow better modelling, better modelling will allow a scientific  consensus on how it spreads and how/why if effects different people differently and the risk factors - when we have that we can develop mitigation strategies. If we know certain factors make a person a super carrier then we wont be able to put people in that category into positions where they can contract it easily (like front line medics) equally if we find certain characteristics make a person oth unlikely to display symptoms and not a good vector then they will be in huge demand - both to do those jobs and also as research subjects to see if the reasons they are like that can be made into a treatment

Life will return to closer to normal but whilst we have spent a decade being told super antibiotic resistance will lead to the end of modern life/medical treatment I think  it is looking more likely it is this zoonotic disease which changes things - and unlike bacteria virii are harder to fight / mitigate

[Derwent]

Some experts are predicting that we will have 5 or 6 waves of this virus before it’s properly under control.

[redjonn]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Anyway, I'll stick this here because it relates to the virus situation although, as with all these things, a political edge.

WHO point out that, firstly, there's no evidence that people who have recovered from the virus are immune to it, and, secondly, the bought and paid for UK tests are probably worthless: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-no-evidence-that-covid-19-survivors-have-immunity-who-warns-11975011?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter

Today, we have always like the WHO.

But that thing about not guaranteeing immunity does now seem to becoming a persistent problem.

yep, well every time Whitty speaks on this he always says that can't be sure about immunity... it too early to say,  He caveats that it would be expected to give immunity but much too early to say on covid plus their has been some cases in which it has returned to individual. Though he says this may be because it never went away from the individual or the tests wee not accurate.

My point being he is always transparent, precise and specific... 

He has said it a number of times as has Vallance .

They are both polite but have been very specific on uncertainties. - they must get fed up with questions of certainty from journalist. For example yesterday Vallance did seem a little critical in his tone of a question about possibility of vaccine and that we should ensure we as in UK keep it and the implied sod the rest of world.