SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

This whole rapid and severe reinfection thing is a crushing disappointment.

Of the 5 cases 2 have been worse and 3 mild or milder. Of the 4 in the Lancet article all 4 produced antibodies after reinfection. As this is better than you would predict, and there are so few cases, I don't think there is anything that suggests the need to be too downbeat.
 
Even with ani vaxxers being a problem a vaccine will help make it harder for the virus to spread, it will slow down transmission. I dont see anti vaxxers in this being a major concern, more of a cause of argument.

My worry is that countries like the US, Poland, the Balkan countries and most of Africa (and no doubt lots of other places) where there is significant vaccine resistance, will help to massively slow the world's recover from this even if we get a highly effective vaccine.
 
The problem is vaccine uptake if and when one is developed. Anti-vaxers seem to have exponentially grown over the last few months.

Anti vaxxers obviously are a bunch of total nincompoops but I fear in this instance, some people have a bit of inadvertent logic below their heaps of total BS.

I will of course take the vaccine when it comes, especially as a healthcare worker, but with some slight apprehension about how quickly its being pushed through.

I've said from the beginning of these processes that a vaccine that ends up being used and either being total shite or having intolerable side effects will do more long term damage to how vaccines as a whole are viewed. And let's not forget that there are a whole host of other infectious diseases that we've mostly gotten under control with vaccines that could flare up again if more people become averse to them.

Johnson and Johnson trial also now paused while they investigate an 'unexplained illness'. FFS.
 
Of the 5 cases 2 have been worse and 3 mild or milder. Of the 4 in the Lancet article all 4 produced antibodies after reinfection. As this is better than you would predict, and there are so few cases, I don't think there is anything that suggests the need to be too downbeat.

You can basically ignore the numbers. We’re so early in the epidemic it’s bad news to have any confirmed reinfections at all. Plus there’s absolutely no doubt in my mind that we’re only picking up the tiniest % of the real number here. In the early months we were ignoring reinfections because of the “persistent shedding of viral debris” hypothesis. No doubt hundreds, if not thousands, of cases worldwide missed on that basis alone. It’s only recently that the virus has mutated enough that we can confirm when people have become reinfected with a different version and we’re getting cases like the 5 discussed in the article in The Lancet.

Plus, if you think about it, the chance of identifying a reinfection is very unlikely. Especially if the first or second illness is very mild/asymptomatic. We’re not routinely testing very mild/asymptomatic cases so it’s going to be incredibly rare for someone to a) have a mild illness yet still be tested and b) become exposed twice to a virus that is still (thankfully) not very widespread.

All that really matters when it comes to understanding the significance of these cases is whether reinfection is possible (yes) how soon it can happen (within a few weeks, apparently) and whether previous infection consistently means subsequent infections are mild/asymptomatic (evidently not)

All of which is a bit of a downer, to put it mildly!
 
Last edited:
My worry is that countries like the US, Poland, the Balkan countries and most of Africa (and no doubt lots of other places) where there is significant vaccine resistance, will help to massively slow the world's recover from this even if we get a highly effective vaccine.

If the vaccine requires annual boosters etc. it will probably be out of reach for the majority of the world's population for financial reasons.
 
I agree. Although, whilst other Governments have evidently done a better job, (as much as it pains me to say it, being very firmly left on centre) I'm not sure anyone has really done all that much better. Certainly, post-lockdowns, nobody has really got this cracked and we're all awaiting a vaccine to get back to any semblance of normality.

The contact tracing issue is a big one and if people don't co-operate then how can we expect it to succeed?

My opinion, as a society, we were largely willing to co-operate at the start in the face of an unprecedented threat, with warnings that half a million could die and stadiums being turned into hospitals with death on an industrial scale. The reality is, that (for whatever reason, and clearly locking down had a major impact) that never came to pass and I believe most (and especially the young) have no fear of the virus anymore since statistically they think they're very unlikely to suffer. The fear factor is gone, there is no force of will and without that you're into having to enforce with neither the resources, nor the mandate to do it. I suspect that is now the same the world over.

This seems to make clear that the government has been taken balanced choices which go against public health officials' recommendations to protect the economy (while also weighing up the health and social costs).
Released shortly after the announcement, minutes from the meeting of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) - which feeds into UK government decision making - stated the advisers had called for the immediate introduction of a short national lockdown three weeks ago.

The papers also showed the scientists suggested:
  • banning all contact inside homes with members of other households
  • closing all bars, restaurants, cafes, indoor gyms and hairdressers
  • requiring all university and college teaching to take place online
Of all the measures proposed by the advisory group, just one - advising those who can work from home to do so - was implemented by the government at the time.

...

Cases are increasing across the whole of the country and the number of people in hospital is now higher than before the full lockdown in March. We are at a critical stage in the epidemic. It is at this moment the gulf between the official scientific advice and the decisions made by government has been laid bare.

It is the case that "advisers advise and ministers decide". When considering new measures to stop Covid, government must also take into account the harms they cause to our health and the economy. But there is some concern the government is doing too little, too late. And that we can either choose the terms for controlling the virus now, or wait and the virus will force our hand as it did with lockdown in March.

...

The newly released Sage documents also showed advisers said NHS Test and Trace was only having a "marginal impact" and this would "likely decline further" unless the system expanded to keep up with the rise in cases and people were given support to enable them to self-isolate.

A separate document from 17 September stated that Sage believed curfews in bars, pubs, cafes and restaurants were also "likely to have a marginal impact". A 22:00 closing time was introduced for all hospitality venues in England from 24 September.

A Sage document from 21 September warned that "single interventions by themselves are unlikely to be able to bring the R below one" and both local and national measures are needed.

However, a document examining measures including a "circuit-breaker" of two to three weeks, said this step, if it was "as strict and well-adhered to as the restrictions in late May", could "put the epidemic back by approximately 28 days or more". "Multiple circuit-breaks might be necessary to maintain low levels of incidence," it added.

So when it seems like the government aren't doing enough to protect the economy, that should be contextualised against the fact that public health officials are recommending multiple circuit-breaks (aka short-term lockdowns) at a time when people are complaining about pubs being asked to close an hour earlier.

And while these conversations aren't happening in the public sphere in real-time, we shouldn't turn our nose up at the fact they release this level of detail while the pandemic is ongoing. It certainly doesn't happen everywhere.

I think there will be a big question in a few weeks why many of the Western governments have rejected recommendations to enact the circuit-break given the way things are going.
 
The problem is vaccine uptake if and when one is developed. Anti-vaxers seem to have exponentially grown over the last few months.

As long as we can make it compulsory for u18s and it’s safe for vulnerable people to take, I say we Darwin the anti-vaxx movement once and for all.

I do love how many middle aged anti-vaxxers are terrified they’re suddenly going to come down with Autism though.
 


The stupidity is mind-boggling.

@KirkDuyt you there? :D

Yeah for sure, Willem Engel is my hero. This Covid hoax should come to an end. I refuse to stay inside, just because Bill Gates wants to inject me with his Nanobots. Damn those shadowcabal pedophile billionaire illuminati.
 
Of the 5 cases 2 have been worse and 3 mild or milder. Of the 4 in the Lancet article all 4 produced antibodies after reinfection. As this is better than you would predict, and there are so few cases, I don't think there is anything that suggests the need to be too downbeat.

I think this is the key point, we're trying very hard to find these re infection cases but we don't really see evidence of it on any meaningful scale. Pogue will know more than me but from everything we know about immunity we must end up with some protection long term? Or is our immune system based on constant exposure?
 
You can basically ignore the numbers. We’re so early in the epidemic it’s bad news to have any confirmed reinfections at all. Plus there’s absolutely no doubt in my mind that we’re only picking up the tiniest % of the real number here. In the early months we were ignoring reinfections because of the “persistent shedding of viral debris” hypothesis. No doubt hundreds, if not thousands, of cases worldwide missed on that basis alone. It’s only recently that the virus has mutated enough that we can confirm when people have become reinfected with a different version and we’re getting cases like the 5 discussed in the article in The Lancet.

Plus, if you think about it, the chance of identifying a reinfection is very unlikely. Especially if the first or second illness is very mild/asymptomatic. We’re not routinely testing very mild/asymptomatic cases so it’s going to be incredibly rare for someone to a) have a mild illness yet still be tested and b) become exposed twice to a virus that is still (thankfully) not very widespread.

All that really matters when it comes to understanding the significance of these cases is whether reinfection is possible (yes) how soon it can happen (within a few weeks, apparently) and whether previous infection consistently means subsequent infections are mild/asymptomatic (evidently not)

All of which is a bit of a downer, to put it mildly!

You would expect that we would have found far more than 5 cases of reinfection with 38 million diagnosed cases to work with if reinfection was very widespread.
 


The stupidity is mind-boggling.

@KirkDuyt you there? :D


The more I read comments on here about this lasting forever the less stupid these people seem to me.

Also, I suspect that more and more people will start behaving like this when/if it becomes clear that this will go on for years/decades/etc. And rightly so.
 
Last edited:
Yeah for sure, Willem Engel is my hero. This Covid hoax should come to an end. I refuse to stay inside, just because Bill Gates wants to inject me with his Nanobots. Damn those shadowcabal pedophile billionaire illuminati.

Friends of mine who live in Holland told me that as of tonight all bars and restaurants will probably close for 2 weeks? I live about 5km from the border, it will be busy at our side of the border next few weeks... :)
 
As long as we can make it compulsory for u18s and it’s safe for vulnerable people to take, I say we Darwin the anti-vaxx movement once and for all.

I do love how many middle aged anti-vaxxers are terrified they’re suddenly going to come down with Autism though.

2 of my brothers and my sister are against vaccines and have already said they won’t get a covid one.....
 
Friends of mine who live in Holland told me that as of tonight all bars and restaurants will probably close for 2 weeks? I live about 5km from the border, it will be busy at our side of the border next few weeks... :)
Yeah, forecast is all bars and restaurants either close entirely or close at 18:00. Amateur team sports will be banned and you can only be 4 people in total with guests.
 



I can see why the track and trace system is shit, also testing is terrible. I'm now into day 4 of waiting for my result. So these 3 days are a delay that anyone I've come into contact with, potentially having it and walking around.
 
Does anybody know of people not taking a test and getting a positive result? I thought it was bullshit at first but after doing some digging it seems to be a problem, particularly at drive thru style centres in the US. Bit like a fast food drive thru mix up. Someone leaves the line because they don't want to wait...gets somebody else results.
 
People can just start drinking and attend earlier. Reducing opening hours by 1 hour will have minimal impact, if any.

In my opinion our scientists are being bullied by the government into accepting compromises in the name of the economy which are ineffective at controlling the virus.
@Pogue Mahone
@stepic

Looks like, as suspected, this post was accurate.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/no-10-ignored-warning-10pm-22835774

"No 10 ignored warning that 10pm pub curfew would have 'marginal impact' on coronavirus spread
Documents from SAGE revealed that experts said the measure - which has been criticised by MPs, council leaders and business owners - would do little to contain the virus"
 
I think this is the key point, we're trying very hard to find these re infection cases but we don't really see evidence of it on any meaningful scale. Pogue will know more than me but from everything we know about immunity we must end up with some protection long term? Or is our immune system based on constant exposure?
The jury is out but flu mutates far faster than SARS-CoV-2 is doing, antibodies only last up to 150 days yet the main reason the annual flu shot doesn't do a much better job is the very low takeup rate.

How long immunity is is highly variable with some vaccines producing almost lifetime immunity and others needing boosters at varying frequency. If I remember correctly infection with one of the recent Coronaviruses (I forget which one) has been found to produce long term immunity and certainly studies of SARS-CoV-1 have shown immunity lasting 2+ years. So there is some hope that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (subject to all the usual caveats) will work long enough to do their job, even if a booster is required every year or two. Far from certain of course and we won't know for sure until we get a vaccine and roll it out.
 
@Pogue Mahone
@stepic

Looks like, as suspected, this post was accurate.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/no-10-ignored-warning-10pm-22835774

"No 10 ignored warning that 10pm pub curfew would have 'marginal impact' on coronavirus spread
Documents from SAGE revealed that experts said the measure - which has been criticised by MPs, council leaders and business owners - would do little to contain the virus"

Are you suggesting that a Band-Aid isn't enough to stem the flow of blood when you have lopped a limb off with a Samurai sword?
 
The jury is out but flu mutates far faster than SARS-CoV-2 is doing, antibodies only last up to 150 days yet the main reason the annual flu shot doesn't do a much better job is the very low takeup rate.

How long immunity is is highly variable with some vaccines producing almost lifetime immunity and others needing boosters at varying frequency. If I remember correctly infection with one of the recent Coronaviruses (I forget which one) has been found to produce long term immunity and certainly studies of SARS-CoV-1 have shown immunity lasting 2+ years. So there is some hope that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (subject to all the usual caveats) will work long enough to do their job, even if a booster is required every year or two. Far from certain of course and we won't know for sure until we get a vaccine and roll it out.

Thanks, there's hope then! If it does become endemic hopefully it'll be milder and maybe we'll only need a vaccine to cover this initial outbreak.
 
I was considering doing something similar recently as I need a break, but would still be very nervous with regards to the hygiene of the home owner, if they've just had guest leave a few hours before you arrived, if someone had the virus who stayed in the bed the night before and was coughing on it, thus leaving bacteria dug into it..

I guess I'm a slight hypochondriac, but better to be safe :lol:
take some bedding with you
 
This whole rapid and severe reinfection thing is a crushing disappointment.
Two reports of severe disease after reinfection following a mild initial infection isn't great but maybe not the end of the world. For me it suggests a mild initial infection may not always generate an immune response robust enough for lasting immunity. From what I've read the leading vaccine candidates prompt an immune response with antibody titres higher than those found in convalescent serum. So its not unreasonable to think they will prompt longer lasting protection that mild infection. Maybe people that have had a diagnosed mild case can't assume they are immune, but we still don't know how frequent severe reinfections are.

To quote directly from here.

" Does immunity protect an individual from disease on reinfection? The answer is not necessarily, because patients from Nevada and Ecuador had worse disease outcomes at reinfection than at first infection. It is important to keep in mind that the reinfection cases in general are being picked up because of symptoms and are biased towards detection of symptomatic cases... we are probably severely underestimating the number of asymptomatic reinfections."
 
First death from reinfection in Netherlands, an 89 year old women with underlying conditions

"Dutch virologists have now released a report detailing the death of an 89-year-old woman, after catching the virus two months after she was admitted to hospital with Covid infection. That is the first such report worldwide.

The woman's immune system was compromised by a rare bone marrow type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma called Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia. She was first admitted to hospital with a fever and severe cough but recovered and went home.

Fifty-nine days later, and just after she started a new course of chemotherapy, she developed coronavirus again. She was admitted to hospital, tested negative for antibodies, and died two weeks later"


Netherlands has also seen a very big rise in cases. Up to 6-7k daily now which is equivalent to 25k in UK or France
z0IxkmA.jpg
 
Two reports of severe disease after reinfection following a mild initial infection isn't great but maybe not the end of the world. For me it suggests a mild initial infection may not always generate an immune response robust enough for lasting immunity. From what I've read the leading vaccine candidates prompt an immune response with antibody titres higher than those found in convalescent serum. So its not unreasonable to think they will prompt longer lasting protection that mild infection. Maybe people that have had a diagnosed mild case can't assume they are immune, but we still don't know how frequent severe reinfections are.

To quote directly from here.

" Does immunity protect an individual from disease on reinfection? The answer is not necessarily, because patients from Nevada and Ecuador had worse disease outcomes at reinfection than at first infection. It is important to keep in mind that the reinfection cases in general are being picked up because of symptoms and are biased towards detection of symptomatic cases... we are probably severely underestimating the number of asymptomatic reinfections."

We’re almost certainly severely underestimating the number of asymmetric reinfections. My worry is that we’re also severely underestimating the number of serious reinfections. In the latter scenario it’s not the reinfection that’s being missed, it’s the fact that they’ve already had an symptomatic/mild infection several weeks/months before the illness that prompts their diagnosis.
 
You would expect that we would have found far more than 5 cases of reinfection with 38 million diagnosed cases to work with if reinfection was very widespread.
Why? They'd have to have had two sets of symptoms serious enough to get two tests and then some researcher would have had to pick up their data and review it for mutation in the virus.

We're in a period where only a few percent of the population have had the virus once and most of them caught it in the first wave. In the UK for example someone who caught it in March probably wasn't tested at all unless they ended up in hospital. Of the ones who did, they'd be desperately unlucky to have caught it again during the summer (when rates were low).
 
Last edited:
I'm so frustrated with people not having basic ability to understand the numbers. We are now reporting people with underlying conditions separately from those who had none and everyone's perception is that people with conditions did not die from coronavirus but those conditions. Vast majority of deaths are in 65+ group. Almost everyone in that group has an 'underlying condition'.
 
I can see why the track and trace system is shit, also testing is terrible. I'm now into day 4 of waiting for my result. So these 3 days are a delay that anyone I've come into contact with, potentially having it and walking around.

Who have you come into contact with? Surely if you have symptoms and have had a test that you’re isolating?
 
Why? They'd have to have had two sets of symptoms serious enough to get two tests and then some researcher would have had to pick up their data and review it for mutation in the virus.

We're in a period where only a few percent of the population have had the virus once and most of them caught it in the first wave. In the UK for example someone who caught it in March probably want tested unless they ended up in hospital. Of the ones who did, they'd be desperately unlucky to have caught it again during the summer (when rates were low).

Thank you. It was almost as though he hadn’t read the post he was quoting.