Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[Notters]

The modellers say the more successful China are now (and the isolation has been draconian) the worse the second peak will be in the autumn (we are not predicted to have a second peak, owing to the decline in new cases due to there being too few folk, not previously exposed to the virus, to do the spreading - so called herd immunity).

You are exactly correct. Herd immunity requires either that most people are vaccinated or most people (still alive) have had the disease and recovered. Simple isolation will work only if you stay isolated. Forever.

Is this true? The bit about us not having a second peak I mean. I think the risk here is that 70% of people in London will have been exposed, but say only 20% of people in Sussex, and 10% of people in Yorkshire, and as restrictions are lifted, it is the shires that are affected badly as they don't have the density of medical facilities etc.

I am of course hypothesising.

 

[Triggaaar]

The modellers say the more successful China are now (and the isolation has been draconian) the worse the second peak will be in the autumn (we are not predicted to have a second peak, owing to the decline in new cases due to there being too few folk, not previously exposed to the virus, to do the spreading - so called herd immunity).

I don't agree. We're not short of folk to still catch the virus. The decline in cases here will be because of our lockdown (keeping R under 1). We'll also get a second peak unless we keep social distancing for quite a long time. China can also have some social distancing, rather than completely lift the restrictions.

You are exactly correct. Herd immunity requires either that most people are vaccinated or most people (still alive) have had the disease and recovered. Simple isolation will work only if you stay isolated. Forever.

Simple isolation will work if you remove all the cases, and don't let anyone else into the country.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Is this true? The bit about us not having a second peak I mean. I think the risk here is that 70% of people in London will have been exposed, but say only 20% of people in Sussex, and 10% of people in Yorkshire, and as restrictions are lifted, it is the shires that are affected badly as they don't have the density of medical facilities etc.

I am of course hypothesising.

I am just going by the graphs I have seen.

I am presently intrigued by the latest Italy numbers. There is a hint of a plateau. If I were a betting man I'd wager this is a pause rather than a peak.....so, too early to say.

 

[Notters]

I don't buy it. A virus that can lead to no symptoms, or cause pneumonia so severe that people drown in their own pulmonary exudate?

As [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION] has noted, there may be something wrong with the information coming from China and, increasingly, I am beginning to agree.

I'm no expert but isn't this normal for viruses? Colds can affect some people badly and others not at all. I had a couple of spots with chicken pox but my daughter was really quite ill.

 

[RossyG]

New study backing up the high asymptomatic theory.

...

The report above refers to the Italian studies backing this up.

Also in Iceland* https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/01/europe/iceland-testing-coronavirus-intl/index.html

* The country, not the freezer centre formerly known as Bejam.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I don't agree. We're not short of folk to still catch the virus. The decline in cases here will be because of our lockdown (keeping R under 1). We'll also get a second peak unless we keep social distancing for quite a long time. China can also have some social distancing, rather than completely lift the restrictions.

Simple isolation will work if you remove all the cases, and don't let anyone else into the country.

Ever.

Yes, but I was considering realistic options.

 

[Triggaaar]

New study backing up the high asymptomatic theory. Latest case study group showed 78% asymptomatic.

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1375

Ah seen it’s already been put up. It would explain why it is so insanely contagious.

The report above refers to the Italian studies backing this up. Are Italy also lying?

Lying about most cases being asymptomatic? Who says that China are lying about that?

 

[Mellotron]

Also in Iceland* https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/01/europe/iceland-testing-coronavirus-intl/index.html

* The country, not the freezer centre formerly known as Bejam.

So Italy and Iceland are lying too? No doubt Spain will be lying too, soon.

Wow, this is a huge global secret conspiracy!

 

[RossyG]

I'm no expert but isn't this normal for viruses? Colds can affect some people badly and others not at all. I had a couple of spots with chicken pox but my daughter was really quite ill.

Also viral load seems to be a factor here.

 

[Marty___Mcfly]

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1375

4 out of 5 cases asymptomatic based on this study

 

[Mellotron]

We obviously hope that's a

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1375

Ah seen it’s already been put up. It would explain why it is so insanely contagious.

The report above refers to the Italian studies backing this up. Are Italy also lying?

Lying about most cases being asymptomatic? Who says that China are lying about that?[/QUOTE]

Probably the people who are doubting/totally disregarding the figures that are being increasingly backed up in multiple countries. I agree that China aren’t necessarily to be 100% trusted, however it would definitely be in their interest now to help the rest of the world as much as possible when it comes to information like this.

It’s now starting to look increasingly likely that somewhere isn’t the region of 50-80% of cases are asymptomatic, as suspected by quite a few from very early on.

 

[Triggaaar]

But that's ridiculous. Even if nobody has it there, which is so unlikely we can be confident it is not the case, then it would inevitably return with a vengeance almost immediately.

Why would it return 'with a vengeance'? It would just return, the same as before. But this time they'd have social distancing and restricted travel to contain the spread.

Surely they must believe enough people have had it for there to be a degree of herd immunity to keep the contagion within manageable levels.

If that was the case, why would they have bothered with a lockdown in the first place? The whole point of the lockdown was to stop the spread. But you're suggesting it's spread to just about everyone anyway.

I just can't believe they would consider the disease eradicated in the area. That would be utterly insane.

That is what they've attempted. Do the maths. It's not possible for them to have had over half their population infected without having a horrific death toll.

 

[Mellotron]

Also viral load seems to be a factor here.

Yup - many are ignoring viral load which would also explain why sadly we may see an unusual number of healthcare workers struck down badly by this.

 

[Triggaaar]

Ever.

Yes, but I was considering realistic options.

Well not 'ever', because at some point we hope to have a vaccine. But Chinese people returning to China now get put into isolation in locked hotels, and are tested for the virus daily. They're not doing that in an attempt to get herd immunity.

 

[Triggaaar]

So Italy and Iceland are lying too? No doubt Spain will be lying too, soon.

Wow, this is a huge global secret conspiracy!

Probably the people who are doubting/totally disregarding the figures that are being increasingly backed up in multiple countries.

No, you're getting confused. I very much doubt the reported death total from China. And those figures are not backed up in multiple countries, it's quite the opposite. Every day countries release their figures, it seems more and more likely that China's total of 3.3k deaths is false.

But that doesn't mean I don't believe that a lot of cases are asymptomatic. That's a completely separate point.

 

[Machiavelli]

This pricked my interest when I read it yesterday then I was distracted. Not sure your point here: it costs American individuals much more for healthcare than it costs individuals in the UK. This is because drug companies, diagnostic companies and equipment companies charge more for their stuff in the US. This is because private health insurance will meet the charges. This is because Americans are prepared to pay a high premium for their health insurance. In other words it is a racket.

The only way we (the people of the planet Earth) can move forward with 'affordable' health care is to have a global 'nationalised' pharmaceutical and related enterprise. This is never likely to happen unless something game-changing like, er, a pandemic kicks in. In parma, attrition (compound failure) is so brutal that for many therapeutic areas it costs more than a billion pounds now to develop the drug (which means preclinical efficacy and safety and then the eye-wateringly expensive multicentre trials needed to show clinical efficacy and safety).

And before anyone says anything, generics are pirates who let big companies do all the work (and make all the spend) then basically counterfeit the drug when the patent expires, and drug patents don't last long.

When a company has a big clinical fail these days (whether through lack of efficacy, the ususal reason these days, or safety/adversity) the company is likely to go bust. Taking a drug to man is like doing all your betting account on one big bet. Consequently, acquisitions and mergers mean there are few big pharma companies left. I'd like to see them all merge and be under some sort of modern upgraded UN oversight, for common good. The employees need to be paid less but their positions made more secure. I could go on, but, cracked record, and all that....

I would have thought that the point I was making about healthcare spending and provision was clear, which is none too different from what you've said in the first paragraph. The remainder is interesting and persuasive too.

 

[Mellotron]

No, you're getting confused. I very much doubt the reported death total from China. And those figures are not backed up in multiple countries, it's quite the opposite. Every day countries release their figures, it seems more and more likely that China's total of 3.3k deaths is false.

But that doesn't mean I don't believe that a lot of cases are asymptomatic. That's a completely separate point.

I’m not the one getting confused - I never said I was referring to you, and I wasn’t. You’ve picked up on something that simply wasn’t there.

However, I agree with you on China’s death toll.

 

[Triggaaar]

I don't think you're correct about any of this.

Fair enough

The point of lockdown wasn't/isn't to stop the spread, as that is impossible. It is it slow the spread, or as we're describing it in this country, "flatten the curve" to prevent too many people from getting ill at once.

In our country, I completely agree that the goal is to flatten the curve. But China have not done what we've done. They've welded apartment blocks shut, so that people can't get out.

If, like you are suggesting, they believe they have actually "stopped" the virus from spreading and it is now gone from the area

Yes, they really do think that (in some areas, rather than the whole country). They claim that new cases are people arriving from overseas.

then the virus will return as people are exposed to it again, and thousands of people will get infected and many will die.

It is likely to return, but they can use strict measures to track people and shut down areas when new infections start again.

Like I say, I don't believe you are correct about this. I believe they have "flattened the curve" and are expecting the virus to re-emerge, albeit in smaller and more manageable numbers.

They have got down to 19 new cases across the country, and they claim those are from abroad. That's not flattening the curve, it's returning to zero. We're attempting to keep the numbers within the capacity of the NHS - so thousands of critically ill patients at any one time. That's what we mean by flattening the curve. It's a completely different approach to China.

Regardless, neither of those is trying to get herd immunity, which is what you thought China were doing. Have you looked at the numbers to see why that's not possible?

I understand every country in the world is to take this approach until the breakthrough anti-bodies test and vaccines.

Not all countries will follow the same path. China's response has been different to ours. Sweden haven't enforced a lockdown at all (although I guess they will if they have to).

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Thanks for confirming that you’re the wretched little prick that I’d always suspected you were.

[emoji23] who are you?

Sent from my SM-A600FN using Tapatalk

 

[Triggaaar]

I’m not the one getting confused - I never said I was referring to you, and I wasn’t. You’ve picked up on something that simply wasn’t there.

Ok. When I asked you who had suggested China were lying about asymptomatic cases you said 'Probably the people who are doubting/totally disregarding the figures that are being increasingly backed up in multiple countries'. Given that I started a thread about China lying about their figures, yes, I thought you meant people like me.

So if you didn't mean me, who is saying China have lied about a lot of cases being asymptomatic?