Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

dazzer6666 said:

Been said by others on here previously - the correlation between infection numbers and hospitalisations/deaths is becoming increasingly broken. It’s those two numbers that are key - and both are still trending downwards despite case numbers going up.

Click to expand...

Pondicherry said:

We have to be careful with this type of information. Your first source is from a very small population (246 individuals) and contains a major flaw (which the report writers acknowledge) in that they only selected people who had been tested rather than a random population sample. "persons who have been vaccinated are possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated." The other major flaw with this study is that a more recent Swedish study of over 1 million individuals has shown that by day 220 there is no measurable benefit from any of the currently available vaccines. And this is the fundamental problem for those advocating vaccines as the "solution". Are you proposing that we vaccinate the entire world once every 6 months (the point at which vaccine effectiveness drops below 50% according to the Swedish study) ad infinitum? I would suggest this is not sustainable or practical.

The Swedish study is here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3949410

I am not suggesting that people should not get vaccinated. However I am suggesting that vaccination might not be the solution that the general media and some government sources are suggesting. They might be part of the solution.

Your second source has no data backing it up and has some information that is clearly not correct. For example it says that two doses of the main vaccines produce long term protection. We know this is not true. It also says vaccination reduces the chances of spreading the virus to others. Again we know this is not true.

Your third source is un-named individuals giving advice based on what data? The advice might be correct or it might not be. There are no published large scale long term studies looking at outcomes based vaccination status, age, sex, health and general immunity status that I am aware of. What I mean by this, as an example, if you looked at 10,000 men aged 20-25 in good health and with healthy immune systems over a year, you might find there is no significant difference in COVID health outcomes based on vaccination status. If this was the case, you might then conclude that there is no point vaccinating that population any further.

Click to expand...

Since1982 said:

I get that, and I’m encouraged by it but I don’t pretend to understand if we should be concerned about rising case numbers even if that doesn’t translate into hospitalisation and deaths. Does it not follow that more cases leads to more long Covid and a greater chance of mutations? Is this a serious threat? And judging by the absence of mask wearing when shopping in Brighton yesterday most people don’t seem concerned at all!

Click to expand...

Since1982 said:

I get that, and I’m encouraged by it but I don’t pretend to understand if we should be concerned about rising case numbers even if that doesn’t translate into hospitalisation and deaths. Does it not follow that more cases leads to more long Covid and a greater chance of mutations? Is this a serious threat? And judging by the absence of mask wearing when shopping in Brighton yesterday most people don’t seem concerned at all!

Click to expand...

dsr-burnley said:

Both the Alpha variant and the Omicron variant are believed to have come about by a single individual lingering for months with covid and the virus eventually mutating within that individual. The delta variant took off and spread at a time when the then-dominant alpha variant had very little foothold and cases were very low indeed, though it was believed to come into existence in India.

There are (at least) two ways to look at these variants and their likelihood, and both are correct, and they work in opposite directions.

One is that when the virus is all over the place it replicates far more often and therefore the number of mutations is going to be higher. A hundred times more reproductions means a hundred times more mutations. Undoubtedly true. Though I expect that pretty much everyone who is ill will be generating mutations every day - they are very common. Most single cell mutations die out without ever replicating themselves.

The other side of it is that when the virus is prevalent, it gives a less fertile field for any new mutation to spread into. A new covid mutation will find it harder to overwhelm the old one if the old one is all over the place. Less virgin territory for it to cover.

I believe it's 8 or 9 different coronaviruses, quite apart from covid-19, are prevalent in this country and around the world. Four of them infect humans, and two of these are common cold viruses. There is no record of any of them mutating into a more lethal form. This one is still new and volatile, but over time, as we get used to it and as it settles down, it is likely to stabilise and lose its effectiveness.

Click to expand...

Since1982 said:

I get that, and I’m encouraged by it but I don’t pretend to understand if we should be concerned about rising case numbers even if that doesn’t translate into hospitalisation and deaths. Does it not follow that more cases leads to more long Covid and a greater chance of mutations? Is this a serious threat? And judging by the absence of mask wearing when shopping in Brighton yesterday most people don’t seem concerned at all!

Click to expand...

crodonilson said:

While compulsory mask wearing in shops and public transport is a welcome start once again the Government.jas not gone nearly far enough. How about hospitality settings too? And working from home and social distancing?? I feer this will only delay an inevitable January lockdown as the Government let everyone mix as though this is a normal festive period when it is anything but.

Click to expand...

dazzer6666 said:

It’s not completely broken, but it’s becoming increasingly tenuous. Agree re mask wearing though, even where it’s a requirement it’s being largely ignored and not enforced, and personally would prefer it if people would still choose to wear them where it was ‘advised’, ‘requested’ or ‘preferred’. Hopefully the reintroduction of stricter protocols for a bit will be observed

Click to expand...

crodonilson said:

While compulsory mask wearing in shops and public transport is a welcome start once again the Government.jas not gone nearly far enough. How about hospitality settings too? And working from home and social distancing?? I feer this will only delay an inevitable January lockdown as the Government let everyone mix as though this is a normal festive period when it is anything but.

Click to expand...

atomised said:

They would never go far enough for you though. Festive period normal for me as was last year's. Sick of all this cancel Christmas agenda led by panicked people who no longer want to exist in any form of normality

Click to expand...

Marty___Mcfly said:

Do we actually know anything about this variant which makes it significantly more problematic than all the others? These steps from government seem purely precautionary- could turn out to be a non-issue if it’s no worse than all the others. [emoji2369]

Click to expand...