Covid - coming out of Lockdown 3 - no politics, less opinion and more facts and information.

[Hobby]

"No Polictics"...

 

 

 

Except when it suits.

[MJI]

15 hours ago, Halvarras said:

 

 "Even faster" than a 'vaccine' so "effective" that it needs a booster every six months - how easily is the utterly brilliant and endlessly adaptable human immune system dismissed. It has to be brilliant otherwise the human race wouldn't have survived, but apparently it fades after less than six months........

 

Studies published in 2008 found that survivors of the 1918 Spanish Flu outbreak still had the antibodies 90 years later - just search 'Spanish flu antibodies'. Those pointers seem to be pointing strongly in the wrong direction. Granted, this disease did give the human immune system a very tough test, but thankfully for all our sakes it wasn't defeated.

This disease is new to humans and our immune system doesn't handle it well.

 

We can help with the vaccination programme but our bodies need to get used to it hence the boosters

[Nearholmer]

TBH, I can’t see how it’s possible to discuss matters of huge public policy import without discussing alternative viewpoints that underly alternative tactics or strategies, which is another name for politics.

 

The test is whether we can do it without:

 

- dropping into the tramlines of “my party right or wrong”; or,

 

- accusing anyone who disagrees with our individual views as being a cretinous twerp, or worse; or,

 

- loudly dismissing as biased any news organ that dares issue stories that fail to reinforce our own prejudices.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Hobby]

Alternative viewpoints are fine, and are not politics, but there are certain people that clearly are using this thread to make digs at the party they clearly dislike whilst ignoring what their own favourites are up to. And it seems to suit some people to allow it.

 

As the thread title says, it's about Covid and there should be no politics, we've managed that for nearly 200 pages, it's a shame that it's now reappearing just like the locked thread and is spoiling it for many of us who are trying to discuss Covid and not taking part in cheap party politics, surely there's enough of that in the Commons without it having to spread here?!

[hayfield]

3 minutes ago, Hobby said:

Alternative viewpoints are fine, and are not politics, but there are certain people that clearly are using this thread to make digs at the party they clearly dislike whilst ignoring what their own favourites are up to. And it seems to suit some people to allow it.

 

As the thread title says, it's about Covid and there should be no politics, we've managed that for nearly 200 pages, it's a shame that it's now reappearing just like the locked thread and is spoiling it for many of us who are trying to discuss Covid and not taking part in cheap party politics, surely there's enough of that in the Commons without it having to spread here?!

 

Well said, 

 

Back to covid, our small village has the highest rates of covid infections since the pandemic arrived. Whilst there are no data on hospitalizations or deaths for the village, there is far less concern if any in the village. I went out to the pub for a drink and a meal last night, not a mask in sight, the day before the medical centre was very busy with the booster program

 

Proves nothing other than a realisation that covid has become something we have to live with

 

As for the Kent branch of the family,  I have another niece and 2 of her children who are recovering from covid, my niece is double jabbed and their eldest daughter has had her first jab. Certainly it looks like if you have children there is a much higher chance of becoming infected

[Nearholmer]

These things generally go badly wrong if any of us rises to the bait dangled by someone of an opposite persuasion, or starts calling politics when someone expresses a view that challenges our own too deeply.

 

Which is to say it takes at least two to make a fight, and it’s sometimes worth turning the other cheek for the sake of continuing peace.

[Zero Gravitas]

13 hours ago, Hobby said:

I just found it amusing that it was the leader of the party who were plugging mask wearing that got it, perhaps he wasn't as careful when not on camera!? 

 

36 minutes ago, Hobby said:

"No Polictics"...

 

 

 

Except when it suits me

 

 Just corrected that second quote for you :-)

[Not Jeremy]

18 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

 

Which bit of that did you not understand Eddie?

 

 

Your statistical "analysis" of risk.

 

Probabilities don't work as you have described them.

 

It is more complicated than that, which comment could be applied to much of this thread.

 

Which is not political.

 

 

[snitchthebudgie]

3 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

Your statistical "analysis" of risk.

 

Probabilities don't work as you have described them.

 

It is more complicated than that, which comment could be applied to much of this thread.

 

Which is not political.

 

 

 

Yes, I agree that statistics are more complicated, but the point made is still good - take a few simple precautions and your risk of catching the virus is significantly reduced - even if it's not as much as the OP suggested.  The reduction is enough to justify the actions.....

[Nearholmer]

Probability of catching the bug:

 

Its immensely difficult to work out an personal covid risk level, or single interaction probabilities of contracting it, and I tend to think that the best one can do is to quickly work out the current society-wide figures, then think about whether  individual behaviour or circumstance puts you at above or below average probability.

 

So right now, UK-wide, the rate of infection is somewhere about 500/100k.week, so if it remained at that in the long run, we would each have a "jam spread" probability of about 25% of catching it within a year.

 

Now, a cloistered and cautious pensioner might be operating at as little as 1:10 that probability, and a teenager in a poorly managed school might be operating at effectively 100% probability -- we probably each know roughly where we are on that continuum.

 

But, risk is about probability and consequence, so we also need to think about the statistical distribution of outcomes for "people like us". If our notional cloistered pensioner is say 85yo and has poor background health, their likelihood of a very bad outcome if they do catch it is shockingly high; if our notional teenager is fit as a fiddle, they'll probably barely know they've got/had* it. Perhaps counterintuitively, their overall risk (probability x consequence) might be similar, but saying that on its own doesnt add much to the sum of knowledge.

 

*By no means a teenager, but my BiL, I think 49yo, has had it over the past ten days (he will be able to rip the duct tape off the door and emerge from their spare bedroom tomorrow), and he only knew he had it because he did a precautionary LFD test before going to visit his mother, which a PCR then confirmed. He did get a mild temperature and a bit of a headache for three days after that, but that was about the worst of it. Double vaccinated AZ in about July IIRC.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by Nearholmer

[Hobby]

39 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

These things generally go badly wrong if any of us rises to the bait dangled by someone of an opposite persuasion, or starts calling politics when someone expresses a view that challenges our own too deeply.

 

Which is to say it takes at least two to make a fight, and it’s sometimes worth turning the other cheek for the sake of continuing peace.

 

 

I'd just rather they didn't make the first post.

 

38 minutes ago, Zero Gravitas said:

 Just corrected that second quote for you :-)

 

Yes, Zero Gravitas I'm afraid I was guilty of taking the bait... Though in my defence I only pointed out the obvious irony of the situation which seemed to be lost on the OP, and didn't try to make a politically bias post like they did. Perhaps you missed that.

[hayfield]

38 minutes ago, Not Jeremy said:

 

Your statistical "analysis" of risk.

 

Probabilities don't work as you have described them.

 

It is more complicated than that, which comment could be applied to much of this thread.

 

Which is not political.

 

 

 

 

A bit unfair as the principal is both sound and understandable to the layman.

 

I always remember in sales meetings, the message was "KEEP IT SIMPLE" 

 

 

[Not Jeremy]

9 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

 

A bit unfair as the principal is both sound and understandable to the layman.

 

I always remember in sales meetings, the message was "KEEP IT SIMPLE" 

 

 

 

I'd be more concerned to keep it correct, but then I'm just a simple soul...

[AY Mod]

1 hour ago, Hobby said:

Alternative viewpoints are fine, and are not politics, but there are certain people that clearly are using this thread to make digs at the party they clearly dislike whilst ignoring what their own favourites are up to. And it seems to suit some people to allow it.

 

Undoubtedly politics come into the equation in here and Nearholmer has adequately summarised a framework for it. Most people aren't particularly partisan and the criticisms would be levelled at whoever the government was at that point in time. None of us know where the leader of the opposition contracted it from; his local pub, one of the many palace of Westminster bars, a member from the opposite benches (they do talk) etc?

 

I've had people accuse me of political bias through these topics - just for the record I have never voted Labour but there are some within that party that I respect immensely and there are decisions made by the government (that I didn't vote for last time) that I vehemently disagree with. I'm centrist and with an interest in what a candidate can do for a constituency as much as they can whilst having voting powers. Across all parties I respect conviction politics and do not like political opportunism, whatever the colour.

[Hobby]

Fine, Andy, but this isn't the first time we've seen blatant political comments. I haven't accused you of any bias, just that these posts by being left to stand and not deleted/modified would appear to to say that political bias is allowed.

 

If people had taken the time to look beyond the headline pictures they'd have seen that the "mask photo" was dubious at best, there are photos on Twitter that show Keir in very close proximity with other members of his party in the last few days without any masks present. Although the two people concerned haven't tested positive it is clear that the mask wearing was only done in the Commons and was a typical case of "do as I say, not as I do". I'd have more respect for all parties if they all behaved responsibly, the catalogue of going places they shouldn't, non mask wearing, hugs, etc., etc., from all sides of the political spectrum and even the "experts" clearly show a lack of understanding of "acting responsibly". Which makes the opposition's mass mask wearing look stupid.

Edited October 29, 2021 by Hobby

[Nearholmer]

Let’s just forget all the arguing, and imagine gathering around a nice camp fire.

 

 

[Hobby]

Sat at 1 metre and wearing masks, please!  

[AY Mod]

23 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I'd have more respect for all parties if they all behaved responsibly, the catalogue of going places they shouldn't, non mask wearing, hugs, etc., etc., from all sides of the political spectrum and even the "experts" clearly show a lack of understanding of "acting responsibly".

 

I completely agree that there is an absence of any real leadership or role modelling and the populace is generally left to make everything up for themselves now and pick and choose what they want which is why we are where we are.

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, MJI said:

This disease is new to humans and our immune system doesn't handle it well.

 

We can help with the vaccination programme but our bodies need to get used to it hence the boosters

It was likely to have been the same with the common cold when it first arrived amongst the human race.

And any form of flu would also likely have been an almost certain killer.

However over millenia Sapiens has slowly built up immunity to both, with the common cold (also a coronavirus) being usually nothing more than an inconvenience.

Flu we do have inbuilt immunity for but not enough to relegate it to an inconvenience and it can still cause substantial loss of life, hence vaccination programmes to help the fight against it.

[Reorte]

15 minutes ago, melmerby said:

However over millenia Sapiens has slowly built up immunity to both, with the common cold (also a coronavirus) being usually nothing more than an inconvenience.

Most colds are from rhinoviruses not coronaviruses (although some are). I'd be interested to know if anyone knows whether the coronavirus colds are usually worse.

[Nearholmer]

23 minutes ago, melmerby said:

However over millenia Sapiens has slowly built up immunity to both,

 

I thought we were born with a sort of broad-spectrum, bug inspecific, immunity system, and that our system then has to learn individual bugs by exposure, and that the broad-spectrum inspecific system fades to some degree with puberty, by which time we've hopefully been exposed to the common bugs around us and acquired some level of immunity to them. If that understanding is correct, we haven't built-up immunity over millenia to anything specific, rather we've evolved a general capability.

 

Flu and colds in particular are forever dodging our immunity, by mutating and hence evolving themselves, and if as adults we pitch-up in a place that has common bugs that we haven't been exposed to as a child (or vaccinated against) we can be in real trouble. Likewise if some pesky foreigner arrives and brings a bug not native to where we live. Which I think is how European colonists managed to wipe out numerous native populations, and in other cases themselves got wiped-out by landing in places heaving with bugs they'd not met before.

 

Acquired immunity isn't lifelong in all cases, even in some cases where the disease that causes it isn't evolving to any extent. I was reading up on this last night, and discovered that Tetanus is one that for complex reasons our system is poor at handling, and about eleven years after infection or vaccination we have no immunity left. And, as I mentioned before, nobody quite knows yet how long immunity against Covid-19 lasts, with the maths suggesting that for some it will be as short as three months, that 50% of us will lose immunity within 16 months, and almost everyone will be out of immunity at about five years.

Edited October 29, 2021 by Nearholmer

[MarkC]

Apropos of nothing in particular - one of our ships, operating in the Med, was reported yesterday to have had EVERYONE on board test positive for C-19, via lateral flow kits. (This ship acts as an LNG bunkering tanker for, inter alia, cruise ships, occasionally). All on board reportedly double vaccinated too. As you can imagine, this put our office into a flat spin, trying to organise a complete relief crew, hotels etc etc.

 

HOWEVER, this morning, all were retested by a team who came on board in full Hazmat kit. Full laboratory PCR tests done. Everyone tested NEGATIVE. Panic over.

 

So, dodgy LF test kit pack? It makes you wonder...

Edited October 29, 2021 by MarkC

[alastairq]

I suspect the NHS are aware of the possibility of lateral flow test unreliability...They've sent me a home-brewed PCR test as well, to send in alongside a lateral flow test, to assess reliability...What a boogah, now I'll have to walk down to the village postbox, thereby increasing my chances of possibly contracting covid? The road only has one pavement as well!

 

 

Edited October 29, 2021 by alastairq

[boxbrownie]

52 minutes ago, Reorte said:

Most colds are from rhinoviruses not coronaviruses (although some are). I'd be interested to know if anyone knows whether the coronavirus colds are usually worse.

Apparently it depends upon the genus of the particular virus whether corona or rhino…..just asked my Son (he is a doctor) who is here for the week.

[Hobby]

46 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

 

Acquired immunity isn't lifelong in all cases, even in some cases where the disease that causes it isn't evolving to any extent. I was reading up on this last night, and discovered that Tetanus is one that for complex reasons our system is poor at handling, and about eleven years after infection or vaccination we have no immunity left.

 

That's interesting and contradicts what I was told in my local A&E recently. When I was a kid I was bitten by a dog and was given a tetanus injection. Recently our cat had a daft moment one night and landed on top of me with her claws out resulting an a rather deep wound. Playing safe I went to get a tetanus jab but when they checked my history they told me I wouldn't need one as my childhood jab meant I would still have some resistance. I was just given antibiotics, nothing happened, I assume her claws were clean!