Yep this came a year too late for me if it proves to be the case.
I'm already thinking about which brand to start smoking again. Do they still make Woodbines?
Yep this came a year too late for me if it proves to be the case.
I am not really sure where you got this from:Tbf, there are multiple teams of scientists who think 12-18 months is much more realistic than 6, and even for that, they urge caution. There is also the fact that the vaccines take 10-15 years to be developed.
Oxford’s team is also not the leading team on this. Moderna from Boston is the leader, and they produced a vaccine two months ago (I am not sure that Oxford’s super optimistic team has even developed the vaccine yet), and administered it on humans a month ago or so. The 12-18 months or so delay is more about doing intensive (though somehow rushed) testing, rather than developing the vaccine. There are already multiple vaccines that seem to be working fine.
What Oxford’s team is proposing looks to me to essentially skip the testing. Which can be dangerous for mass vaccinations and it will likely not get the green permit. And to be fair, I think that they have been advocating to start administering it in doctors and medical staff on fall, not on general population.
That’s a good theory but even the age adjusted rates seem to show smokers doing surprisingly well. From memory it was a bit of a mixed picture. Smokers less likely to die than non-smokers but more likely to end up in hospital. Or something like that. Could be the other way round! Either way, it was massively counter-intuitive because everyone expected smokers to be the worst affected by every metric.I wouldn't be surprised if it's because smokers are more likely to die before they enter the corona danger zone
feck right offThe latest theory for men doing worse than women is that the virus hides from our immune system by hunkering down in our balls.
TidyWanna know why? Quick anecdote.
I'm from Wales, in the valleys, we say 'butt' at the end of every sentence, with the meaning being 'mate' or 'friend'.
I went to university in England and after a week or so, realised I had to replace 'butt' because it was causing issues whereby people thought my sentence was going to continue. I didn't want to adopt 'mate' because I didn't like the term at all and 18yr old me associated it with southern English (stupid viewpoint I know, now). So I went for man as my sort of habitual ending to a sentence.
Is this really true?In fact that was the main reason given for Chinese men doing worse than Chinese women. Higher incidence of smoking in Chinese men. Turns out that wasn’t true at all. The latest theory for men doing worse than women is that the virus hides from our immune system by hunkering down in our balls. Seriously. Sneaky little bastard.
Yep, I was not sure. In any case, they seem to be 6 weeks behind Moderna, and a few weeks behind some other companies who are doing testing for a while now.I am not really sure where you got this from:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...-oxford-university-human-trials-a9467061.html
I am aware that most experts think that 12-18 is more realistic than 6, I was just saying that it is incredibly arrogant to completely write off six saying given that some of the people actually working on it think that it can be done in that time. I am not holding my breath and expect it to be six, but, as long as any experts are claiming it is possible, I will be hoping for it.
Fake news just in, doctors advise multiple testicle clearouts a day to rid yourself of coronavirus.does that mean if you have comically gigantic balls you'll get more corona?
I could be completely wrong but I think it's down to the devolution powers of the Scottish and Welsh governments.why is the system different in scotland/wales v england?
You’d be surprised. There’s a lot of stoners out there who literally think smoking weed cures cancer. And most other ailments you can think of. Looks like we might have one of them in this thread!
That sort of aligns with my hypothesis on why Germany has such good outcomes.I wouldn't be surprised if it's because smokers are more likely to die before they enter the corona danger zone
It’s a theory based on a single, small study. Generated a lot of newspaper headlines but probably a load of bollox (see what I did there?)Is this really true?
Which would mean chronic super-spreaders would also be chronic man-spreaders.does that mean if you have comically gigantic balls you'll get more corona?
Rebuttal @oates ?I'm a vaper, I haven't smoked cigarettes for years now. It would be nice to think nicotine did something other than keep me sane ....
That is correct.I could be completely wrong but I think it's down to the devolution powers of the Scottish and Welsh governments.
The difference I observed in college was that average pot smokers inhaled less actual puffs of smoke per day than the hardcore cigarette smokers would smoke per cigarette (bong hits of high THC California pot). I counted this back then and the heavy cigarette smokers (1 pack+/day) were inhaling more puffs of smoke in a single day than the average pot smokers would take in 3-4 weeks. Even assuming the smoke is equaling damaging, the cigarette smokers were inhaling exponentially more of it and far more regularly throughout the day.I used to be a heavy weed smoker man, and I have never met one in my life who had healthy lungs. Nicotine is shit, we all know that, but inhaling exhaust-pipe levels of ANY kind of smoke into your fecking lungs is NOT healthy despite what the most ardent of stoners will bleat on about. It's certainly not as bad as smoking cigs, but you know what's better again for your lungs and health? Not smoking at all. At a push, I would entertain the idea that smokers and weed smokers might not be as susceptible due to having damaged lungs that the virus struggles to get a grip on. If that's considered protection, then yeah maybe they are protected.
A lot of pot smokers don't filter though unlike pre-bought cigarettes and those filters really do take out a lot of the crap.The difference I observed in college was that average pot smokers inhaled less actual puffs of smoke per day than the hardcore cigarette smokers would smoke per cigarette (bong hits of high THC California pot). I counted this back then and the heavy cigarette smokers (1 pack+/day) were inhaling more puffs of smoke in a single day than the average pot smokers would take in 3-4 weeks. Even assuming the smoke is equaling damaging, the cigarette smokers were inhaling exponentially more of it and far more regularly throughout the day.
that's how every smoker i know started outLots of pot smokers roll joints with tobacco so the argument isn't exactly apples vs oranges.
depends on the city from my experience. That wasn't really a thing in California, the land of the bong, whereas my NYC friends, would do that all the time. At least the people I knew, there was a huge amount of pot smokers that wouldn't ever smoke tobacco.Lots of pot smokers roll joints with tobacco so the argument isn't exactly apples vs oranges.
Bong hits certainly less damaging than joints, as the smoke is cooled and (partially) filtered by the water. You’re still setting stuff on fire and sucking smoke right down to the bottom of your lungs. Which is not going to do them any good, put it that way.The difference I observed in college was that average pot smokers inhaled less actual puffs of smoke per day than the hardcore cigarette smokers would smoke per cigarette (bong hits of high THC California pot). I counted this back then and the heavy cigarette smokers (1 pack+/day) were inhaling more puffs of smoke in a single day than the average pot smokers would take in 3-4 weeks. Even assuming the smoke is equaling damaging, the cigarette smokers were inhaling exponentially more of it and far more regularly throughout the day.
Cheers for this.That is correct.
His insiders blame England specific procurement legislation introduced by Cameron's government. As far as I can see some people argue the legislation was introduced to combat against large scale fraud in the sector whilst others argue it's a secret Tory plot to sell off the NHS piecemeal. Fair to say its a politically emotive subject.
My question would be if it is an England specific thing then why are only some hospitals/trusts badly affected, something he acknowledges in the thread. Obviously there will be many variables affecting this but the journalist doesn't explore any of them in anyway but focuses the insiders that blame the procurement issues.
I'm not saying that the insiders are wrong in what they say, only that if there are quite a few anomalies operating under the same rules then the specifics need to be looked at.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Not really.Anyone else worried about a spike in crimes if we all have to wear face-masks?
Yea we did too (Manchester). I remember everyone punching each other in the arm for weeks afterwards.I got the BCG in school - was this not standard for most people for many years? Perhaps this was just in NI? I honestly don't know.
Anyone else worried about a spike in crimes if we all have to wear face-masks?
Haven't most in the UK already had that vaccine?Some countries are trying the BCG vaccine to see if it works. In theory it may work so India, Vietnam and even in UWA in Australia are trying it in trials. Incidentally in some small Asian countries everyone gets a BCG vaccine and a Polio vaccine at birth. Maldives is a good example. It looks like at this moment in time, they have about 86 confirmed cases and half are foreigners and 16 recovered and fortunately at this moment in time no deaths. But this figure is going to rise for sure as more people are tested. The good news maybe no deaths (so far). If and there is a big IF it is the BCG that seems to keep this under control then it is very good news. As far as the information I had from all these who has been tested positive only one man of 80 years is in ICU and he has had past complications of various underlying causes including a stroke and pneumonia too.
Sri Lanka has 310 positive cases and 7 deaths including some foreigners in this 7. From the 310 already 100 have recovered.
Not available in my territory, i fear for the USA with an early opening like Florida are looking to implement.
You need to get a shot after every 10-15 years.Doesn't the BCG vaccine wear off though? Thought I read this was debunked weeks ago in terms of if you had it a long time ago. Not saying a recent or new injection wouldn't help but in the UK almost every teen had it at school spanning 50 years.
BCG protects (partially) against TB only for a very long time. It also gives a short-term protection against a load of other respiratory pathogens for a short time after you get the jab. So it’s extremely unlikely that it’s protecting against covid many decades later. So yes, you’re basically correct. There’s most likely other reasons for countries which vaccinate everyone with a BCG having relatively low mortality from covid.Doesn't the BCG vaccine wear off though? Thought I read this was debunked weeks ago in terms of if you had it a long time ago. Not saying a recent or new injection wouldn't help but in the UK almost every teen had it at school spanning 50 years.
This was somehow acceptable practice in British schools. Teenager logic...Yea we did too (Manchester). I remember everyone punching each other in the arm for weeks afterwards.