Could you please give me a link?
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
Could you please give me a link?
5 out of 38 million is very few indeed and a significant proportion of the 38 million weren't severe infections. Of the 5 cases 3 had mild or even milder symptoms the second time around and 2 had more severe symptoms. Of the 4 in the Lancet all 4 produced antibodies on reinfection but only 1 of these resulted in antibody production on initial infection and given that a vaccine (with booster if neccessary) is anticipated to produce a strong immune response in most people those 3 cases aren't therefore necessarily informative regarding the success of a vaccine. So not good news but far from disastrous news given that we are 9 months into the pandemic. If we had hundreds or thousands of re-infections in that 38 million it would be far more worrying.
The potentially bad news was in one of the other articles I quoted earlier where a study showed covid survived better in lower temperatures, albeit in a study that didn't address what that meant, if anything, for how temperature will affect infection rates in winter.
I read every word.
Yeah makes sense that it works both ways. I suppose the take home message is don’t assume you are definitely immune if you have had a mild/asymptotic case (although you still might be, these reports are not necessarily the norm). I wish we knew what level of neutralising antibodies were raised by the initial infections in these individuals my bet is very low. If we see immunocompetent people have a severe case, then a few months later have another severe case with a genetically different virus, then I might worry about vaccine efficacy.
It does make the people advocating for the “Great Barrington Declaration” look reckless. We need to know whether this is a common phenomenon before trying to achieve herd immunity without a vaccine. We also don’t know whether people being reinfected still transmit, which would negate the benefit of herd immunity for shielding the vulnerable. I think it’s a shit idea for a lot of reasons and this adds another.
Yeah, 100%.
And that’s what I find so disappointing. I’m no advocate of herd immunity but had assumed/hoped that the huge numbers of mild/asymptomatic cases might help take the edge off future waves.
We always knew that they don’t generate antibodies in any significant quantities (or for any significant length of time) but it was still possible that they might be immune despite this. If they’re all basically fresh tinder again, by the time the next wave sweeps over us that’s a kick in the balls.
I am isolating, I have no symptoms. I got told to be track and trace to isolate and get a test.
There are only a few places outside my house I have been leading up to being told, went out for a meal on the 3rd, my CrossFit gym, and seeing a few friends. I got told to isolate it on Friday 9th. I then got a test straight away. I also told my friends, housemates, and the CrossFit gym of the situation.
However, I don't know if I'm positive or negative. There is a period of time leading up to being told to isolate and get tested I have had close contact with a lot of people. So there is a period of time I could of spread it, and the longer I take to get results the longer it takes for me to report positive on the app and to track and trace and the longer anyone else I may of past it to are spreading it. Not to mention it takes a whilst for track and trace to contact people.
So you can see why the shitty test system and track and trace does not work.
You should say “see you in the next life”
This is what worries me, but for a different reason. I tend to think nature is sometimes smarter than we are, and if our bodies are deciding that it's best not to let antibodies stick around too long after infection, I'm left wondering why?
Of course it could be that for some reason it's difficult for the body to maintain the antibodies, or it could be that evolution has made it advantageous not to do so. The big worry would be that these types of coronaviruses are prime candidates for antibody dependent enhancement as the virus mutates, so our immune system has evolved to not risk hanging onto antibodies that could make future infections much worse. If that were the case, then a poorly designed vaccine that causes sustained presence of antibodies could compromise us over the long term. I believe this is what happened with the aborted dengue fever vaccination attempts.
As pro-vaccine as I am, I am concerned about the short time-frame over which the trials are being conducted, especially when the virus is still in the early stages of mutating. All that said, the scientists developing vaccines are much smarter than I am, and I'm sure are well alive to these concerns and the potential risks.
If a vaccine is approved, I will take my chances and get the jab.
If everyone is saying that this virus is going to be with us for a long time, don’t we need to find a balance that people can actually live with, rather than the draconian measures being put in? Otherwise, mental health issues and things like loneliness is going to be a bigger health problem for most people than the virus itself. For example, I haven’t been able to see my mates for weeks now.
Yeah when you put it like that it is bad. But we do need n>2 before extrapolating too much. Hurry up with a fecking vaccine already lazy virologists.
Even if it's one person from millions ?
exactly!I also just noticed how badly I mixed metaphors there. Fresh tinder not usually a big problem when waves come sweeping over...
This is still a big challenge. The prospect of a vaccine definitely shifted the thinking on measures and goals vs what those were in the earlier days of March and April. But if we'd have to live with the virus cyclically then I also think that the measures would definitely have to trends towards relaxation, even in the face of increasing cases.
Thats cute.
I went to a shrink this morning to get stronger meds to help me sleep, my current therapy doesnt work anymore.
Went for a first time in July after 4 months of fully respecting all distancing measures, never been to a shrink before that.
I think we would see AME in the timeframe of the phase 3? It’s not a bad hypothesis, but I prefer the idea that the immune system doesn’t waste resources on infections it deems not a significant threat. Immune responses to the common cold coronaviruses are short lived, and these are typically mild/asymptomatic infections. Immunity to SARS-CoV-1 is longer lived and this was a severe disease, which you did well to survive. I heard an immunologist talking about the idea that there is a correlation between immune memory and severity of infection. It seems to hold up to what we know about coronavirus immunity. All pretty speculative and wishy washy but I think there might be something in it.
What do you mean “it’s cute”?
I’ve also read about IgA vs IgG being important. If you just get a mild URTI first time round then you generate an IgA response only. Which would leave you without any kind of systemic protection if a subsequent dose gets through your mucous membranes (maybe due to greater viral load?) and makes its way to your lungs.
Haha I meant count your self lucky that you still arent badly affected. It can get much much worse
Oh yeah, I realise there are a lot of people worse than myself, but my point is that more and more people, including myself, could end up with problems like the ones you are experiencing. Sorry you’re struggling.
Yes I actually fully agree with you I wanted to amplify your point using my example. Thanks.
What link? I'm talking about general comments under virtually all coronavirus related news.
As for underlying conditions, sources I can find on the web state between 30% and 35% people over 65 have them, and hypertension is prevalent in 63-70% of 65+ people. I know it'll often be the same people having both but when you include all other conditions that are being included in 'covid victims with secondary diseases' then you'd be well over 80% and possibly in the range of 90%. Therefore only 6-7% without any other conditions dying makes sense, mathematically speaking.
Oh sorry I thought they did an exact breakdown for Poland
It seems like the entire world is arguing about how to balance mitigating spread with the economy and quality of life. It’s not an easy thing to do, there is no perfect solution. It should get easier with time, as we get better treatments, hopefully better at protecting the vulnerable, and eventually a vaccine. For me the second wave sweeping Europe now will require some draconian mesures to slow it. Such as closing pubs and/or schools, limiting/banning visits to other people’s houses, mandatory masks indoors.
I’m in Melbourne not seen mates for months (until last weekend)! Don’t think Europe needs a lockdown as severe as Melbourne though, it wasn’t explicitly stated but we were seemingly going for elimination here but sadly haven’t quite achieved it. I’m praying we’ve used the time to build contact tracing, testing etc so we can quickly contain the inevitable outbreaks over the next few months.
They are breaking down victims by those with underlying conditions and without any conditions daily now. Usually fully healthy people are 5-10% of daily numbers.
Not sure what the point you're making is but this is really old news as this data has been shown in April for western European countries.
It's about how the message is being given, instead of saying "X patients died of covid-19, out of which Y had underlying conditions and Z did not have underlying conditions" they are basically saying "Z patients died of covid-19, Y died of other diseases while having contracted covid-19". Difference is huge. It gives perception that people are dying of hypertension/diabetes/others and not covid and hence most people here think covid is much less dangerous than flu.
Or worse.. PlayStation owners
Some of us haven’t seen family since february, nor been able to attend funerals of parents and siblings. Suck it up buttercup
High rise today:
I see, it was unclear before.
Yes that won't help in the perception over in your country
I was waiting for someone to respond to that post. I understand people being frustrated at not being able to socialise with friends, but really that's the tip of the iceberg in terms of how bad its been for some people.
Of course there will be exceptions of isolation, and i don't want to downplay importance of seeing friends, but that definitely feels more on the "annoying inconvenience" end of the spectrum compared to the tragedy of missing funerals and not being able to support loved ones in their dying days.
Yeah I kinda regret it because it’s important to him. But in the grand scheme of things missing your mates for a few weeks is not a biggie. Or at least not from my perspective
Not good at all but it's been coming for a while. We got down to around 10 deaths on Tuesdays, now back to 143
The data was looking grim and on the path of Spain long ago.
I imagine we're seeing the output of the usual reporting lag from the weekend. We'll be up to 150 per day as an average next week if the trend continues.
Yes, but that was just an example, I know there are much worse examples, but this just proves my point.
Let's just try using a band aid until 10pm. Maybe the limb will grow back in that extra hour every day.
Yeah sorry fella I’m just having a bad day
My office colleague found out last Wednesday he had contact with someone who tested positive. He then got tested and was also positive.
Result was on Saturday, he said he spoke to test and trace that day but no one has contacted anyone else from our office.
We are all now self isolating. But it shows how ineffective Serco test and trace is.
As an aside I had raised the issue of our company not following government guidance for working from home, they agreed but too late, changed practice 1 day too late to avoid this debacle. Face palm.