Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[The Wizard]

if public are catching an infectious disease caught through close proximity, when told to not get close to other, who is suppose to be to blame?

of course no click and collect is not the answer, which is people not flouting the rules and going to each others homes, meeting up at the park and so on.

You’ve taken a portion of my post and posted it out of context Did I say that it’s not partly people’s faults? But then we heard the same thing during summer with people being chastised for going to beaches, protests, pubs etc

The point being, the government have managed to somehow paper over the fact that once again the spread in hospitals and care homes, the #1 driver of lethality due to the people being infected, has sky rocketed, now I’m not stupid I do know that infection control is difficult within these settings but you’d think we’d have been better prepared this time and they are getting away with it by making trivial things like people going for a run 5 miles from their home or collecting a gazebo from a garden centre headline news, meanwhile this scandal goes unnoticed.

 

[beorhthelm]

You’ve taken a portion of my post and posted it out of context

because even with the relatively high numbers in hospital and care homes, the vast majority of infections are "in the community" people mixing together. not in schools (less than hospitals) or shops (less again) nor pubs (shut), but in their homes.

 

[A1X]

Some people are genuinely stupid, what impact will closing a click and collect or some of this nonsense mentioned? It just kills the thousands of businesses that are just managing to scrape by offering deliveries/collections.

From reading the restrictions, it appears what they are stopping is C&C services which aren't outside. So the businesses can remain open but people have to remain outside to collect the items. In much the way they've operated at most supermarkets with big car parks. So they aren't stopping completely, but they have to be done in a better ventilated space (although I appreciate this might be a complete nightmare for shops within indoor shopping centres etc.).

 

[Poojah]

Some people are genuinely stupid, what impact will closing a click and collect or some of this nonsense mentioned? It just kills the thousands of businesses that are just managing to scrape by offering deliveries/collections.

The government and media have managed to deflect all blame onto the public whilst letting those high up get away with the true problem which as with the first wave is spread within hospital of already sick people and care homes, but guess what? No one is talking about that because everyone is talking about some people going to a garden centre or meeting up in a park.

I can’t believe people don’t see it.

I agree with the crux of your post, but I think the point of shutting non-essential click-and-collect and closer the doors of takeaways is more about the broader, indirect impact of the gesture than it is about directly cutting transmission through those specific channels.

For whatever reason(s), the public's behaviour in general in response to the lockdown is very different to back in March and April, when compliance was, for the most part, total. The rules are to all intents and purposes the same; the reaction much diluted.

These seemingly pointless new steps are there to serve as a reminder that you should be in your house unless you absolutely need to be outside of it. Picking up a coffee machine from Argos is not essential. Neither is meeting up with your mates in the park.

It is however a shame that these businesses are collateral damage in an attempt to make the public do what they should already be doing. We are, sadly, collectively selfish and it is collectively that we ultimately suffer.

 

[beorhthelm]

It is however a shame that these businesses are collateral damage in an attempt to make the public do what they should already be doing. We are, sadly, collectively selfish and it is collectively that we ultimately suffer.

sadly accurate summary

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

You’ve taken a portion of my post and posted it out of context Did I say that it’s not partly people’s faults? But then we heard the same thing during summer with people being chastised for going to beaches, protests, pubs etc

The point being, the government have managed to somehow paper over the fact that once again the spread in hospitals and care homes, the #1 driver of lethality due to the people being infected, has sky rocketed, now I’m not stupid I do know that infection control is difficult within these settings but you’d think we’d have been better prepared this time and they are getting away with it by making trivial things like people going for a run 5 miles from their home or collecting a gazebo from a garden centre headline news, meanwhile this scandal goes unnoticed.

This is one on the major failings of out media, in all the pressers It’s “why are we not locking down harder”

There’s been no questions about infection rates in hospitals/care homes which of course will drive most deaths because people are already sick/old.

No real pressing on how and when the recovery starters and what will be the guides out

It’s easier to focus on 2 woman getting coffees/fake outrage about Johnson going on a bike ride Outside whilst being flanked by security.

Surely no one can be impressed by the media in all of this?

"Mr Hancock's very cross. I think you all need to spend the next 2 months WOO."

View attachment 132427

 

[Blue3]

We have all been affected by Covid19 but with regards to the news today that Vaccine antibodies are likley to remain for up to five months, Vaccinations started in January my predicted vaccination date is June with others not until September plus questions to availability of supplies and burn out of staff with this all in mind, it is highly unlikely the entire population will have had its first vaccination before those who first received their vaccination will require a booster, with this in mind will the UK have the resources to effectively deliver this because at some point of this program those needing to be vaccinated will be double that number it is today?

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

We have all been affected by Covid19 but with regards to the news today that Vaccine antibodies are likley to remain for up to five months, Vaccinations started in January my predicted vaccination date is June with others not until September plus questions to availability of supplies and burn out of staff with this all in mind, it is highly unlikely the entire population will have had its first vaccination before those who first received their vaccination will require a booster, with this in mind will the UK have the resources to effectively deliver this because at some point of this program those needing to be vaccinated will be double that number it is today?

The news was that naturally infected people could usually expect about 5 months or more immunity. It wasn't about vaccines. Vaccines usually elicit a stronger response which will, we hope, last a good deal longer.

 

[dsr-burnley]

We have all been affected by Covid19 but with regards to the news today that Vaccine antibodies are likley to remain for up to five months, Vaccinations started in January my predicted vaccination date is June with others not until September plus questions to availability of supplies and burn out of staff with this all in mind, it is highly unlikely the entire population will have had its first vaccination before those who first received their vaccination will require a booster, with this in mind will the UK have the resources to effectively deliver this because at some point of this program those needing to be vaccinated will be double that number it is today?

You're misinterpreting the data, which is already presented in the most pessimistic way possible.

When they say that antibodies last 5 months, that's not the same as saying antibodies disappear after 5 months. They're saying the antibodies are still there after 5 motnhs and who knows how long they will last.

They are also disregarding the common theory that some people's immunity is built off antibodies generated from other coronaviruses; a theory probably strenghtened by this research.

They are also ignoring statisitcs that prove almost definitively that people are not catching coronavirus twice. The number of people worldwide who have been proved to have it twice is about 50 to 100. Which is as close to zero risk as you can get, and that's over 1 0 month "trial". This survey is looking for evidence that the practical data is wrong.

They could rejig the conclusions to say that they have little evidence that you can get reinfected but it's not impossible, and they don't know whether immune people can pass on the virus but it's not impossible.


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/previous-covid19-infection-immunity-five-months-b883913.html

 

[beorhthelm]

We have all been affected by Covid19 but with regards to the news today that Vaccine antibodies are likley to remain for up to five months, Vaccinations started in January my predicted vaccination date is June with others not until September plus questions to availability of supplies and burn out of staff with this all in mind, it is highly unlikely the entire population will have had its first vaccination before those who first received their vaccination will require a booster, with this in mind will the UK have the resources to effectively deliver this because at some point of this program those needing to be vaccinated will be double that number it is today?

think you're refering to news covid infections confer at least 5 months immunity. they are reporting 5 months because that how long its been studied for, so they cant say for sure that it'll be longer. this virus is strain of a known family, and immune system normally responds with antibodies that for years or forever.

 

[dsr-burnley]

The news was that naturally infected people could usually expect about 5 months or more immunity. It wasn't about vaccines. Vaccines usually elicit a stronger response which will, we hope, last a good deal longer.

I think the news was that naturally infected people could expect at least 5 months' immunity. The test hasn't been running 6 months so they don't have an opinion on whether it lasts longer.

Though as the disease has been running for at least 10 months and virtually no-one has had it twice, the practical (as opposed to theoretical) evidence suggests that infected people can expect at least 10 motnhs' immunity.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

I think the news was that naturally infected people could expect at least 5 months' immunity. The test hasn't been running 6 months so they don't have an opinion on whether it lasts longer.

Though as the disease has been running for at least 10 months and virtually no-one has had it twice, the practical (as opposed to theoretical) evidence suggests that infected people can expect at least 10 motnhs' immunity.

44 people became reinfected in that study. Not virtually no-one but still a small percentage.

 

[dsr-burnley]

44 people became reinfected in that study. Not virtually no-one but still a small percentage.

Not true. What they found was that of the people who had covid at the time of testing, they found 44 with evidence of antibodies that suggested that they might have had it before - 2 probables and 42 possibles. A number, incidentally, that would go towards confirming the theory that some people have antibodies that work against this coronavirus that they got from catching other coronaviruses in the past.

There is another "test" going on in the real world. There are approximately 200,000 people in this country who were positively tested for coronavirus in March to May last year, and survived. That's about 1 in 250 of the adult population. The statisitcal test of how many of them have been reinfected can be done by looking at the 50,000 daily positives now, and seeing how many of them also had it last Spring.

If previous infection carries zero protection 8-10 months down the line, you would expect about 1 in 250 of the current positives to have had it before - that's 200 per day. If it provides 50% protection, you would expect 100 per day. 90% protection, you would expect 20 per day.

How many people, per day, are testing positive who also tested positive last Spring? So far as I know, none. I have seen none reported, and the press would be interested in even the odd one. Worldwide, it's the same story - there are about 50-100 people confirmed as reinfected. So the actual practical evidence says that having coronavirus protects you for at least 8-10 months; which means that theoretical evidence that suggests it might not, can at least be taken with a dollop of salt.

 

[atomised]

The news was that naturally infected people could usually expect about 5 months or more immunity. It wasn't about vaccines. Vaccines usually elicit a stronger response which will, we hope, last a good deal longer.

That's how I'd read the article too. Didn't get the impression it referred to vaccines.

 

[Blue3]

The news was that naturally infected people could usually expect about 5 months or more immunity. It wasn't about vaccines. Vaccines usually elicit a stronger response which will, we hope, last a good deal longer.

Oh thank you for clearing that up

 

[Blue3]

You're misinterpreting the data, which is already presented in the most pessimistic way possible.

When they say that antibodies last 5 months, that's not the same as saying antibodies disappear after 5 months. They're saying the antibodies are still there after 5 motnhs and who knows how long they will last.

They are also disregarding the common theory that some people's immunity is built off antibodies generated from other coronaviruses; a theory probably strenghtened by this research.

They are also ignoring statisitcs that prove almost definitively that people are not catching coronavirus twice. The number of people worldwide who have been proved to have it twice is about 50 to 100. Which is as close to zero risk as you can get, and that's over 1 0 month "trial". This survey is looking for evidence that the practical data is wrong.

They could rejig the conclusions to say that they have little evidence that you can get reinfected but it's not impossible, and they don't know whether immune people can pass on the virus but it's not impossible.


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/previous-covid19-infection-immunity-five-months-b883913.html

Thank you that's very clear and reassuring the press do like to sensualise story's

 

[Yoda]

When they say that antibodies last 5 months, that's not the same as saying antibodies disappear after 5 months. They're saying the antibodies are still there after 5 motnhs and who knows how long they will last.

That could actually be a very good sign that the possibility of re-infection is low. Most antibodies fade after a maximum of 49 days. For them to still be present must mean they've been in contact with the virus again for their T & B cells to reproduce them.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Seemingly, the Brazilian variant has two different types, and one of them has been here for a while.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55676637

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Johnson press conference later?

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....ry-challenge-if-lockdown-lasts-through-spring

I wonder how much this is in his thinking

 

[The Wizard]

Replying over here as not to spam the GNT

So it categorically WILL happen then

I'm sure there will be more unwieldy alternatives put in place for those who are unable or unwilling to have the vaccine. But I personally welcome it as good news if it opens up the world to something a bit more normal. I'd have thought most people would consider that to be good news

I can understand people feeling that but for me there’s nothing normal about segregating what freedom people have based on whether they’ve had a vaccine or not.

doesnt have a lot of say in it if other countries insist on it for travel.

True, but for most countries tourism, requiring a health passport in the next 18 months would mean utter ruin, it’s not viable and nobody would be able to go. It’s not just tourism either, it wouldn’t work in many aspects.