I know, right? The other crazy thing to think about if this hit us 10-20 years ago is vaccines. There’s been a massive leap forward in the technology of vaccine development in the last 5-10 years. If this pandemic hit us before that we’d be looking at a minimum of several years to get a vaccine to market and whole classes of vaccine that had not yet been invented (e.g. the Oxford vaccine).
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
I know, right? The other crazy thing to think about if this hit us 10-20 years ago is vaccines. There’s been a massive leap forward in the technology of vaccine development in the last 5-10 years. If this pandemic hit us before that we’d be looking at a minimum of several years to get a vaccine to market and whole classes of vaccine that had not yet been invented (e.g. the Oxford vaccine).
Hold up, there's free porn now?
Yep. If this hits us in 1998, I think we carry on and they basically just tell us 'wear a mask, and good luck'.
I wouldn't even go that far. I think 2010 we'd do that. I remember my firm just had a very primitive and slow remote access setup back in 2012, that very few people even had access to.
On the plus side, I think if it hit in 1998 then it would have led to a much better community effort and more sustained action by people to help decrease transmission.
Plus we wouldn't have all felt that nauseating ache in the back of our brains that we're missing out on living life to the max.
Plus we wouldn't have all felt that nauseating ache in the back of our brains that we're missing out on living life to the max.
Last edited:
That sounds promising. I heard that the virus appears to be mutating only relatively slowly too.
Yes, it is atrocious. I live in the Netherlands but have friends in Belgium who I regularly meet(online for drinks and card games) and they tell me the situation is absolutely dire.
Anyone know why it is so bad in Belgium?
If its anything like NL, people dont care, no policing. Simple as that
Some good news about t-cell longevity https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...er-first-infection?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
This is the key....and I hope I don't sound insensitive, but the way we are living, spending our time and money, and how, has been changing rapidly for the past 5-6 years. Covid has just sped it along.
Re the Mental Health aspect, I do feel people are using it too frequently as it's the strongest argument they can think of. The frustration for me is that its being repeated so frequently that more and more people are beginning to think they're mentally weak, or have no resilience, and that's putting even more fear into them. I work with a suicide prevention charity and of course lots of calls mention Covid, but I've not had a single one where that was the start of their problems, it's something that has made life even more difficult.
So for me, the conversation here needs to be along the lines of, 'Right, this is going to be shit for some people, so let's help them the best we can But at the same time, more attention needs to go into the root causes so there is a lasting positive impact from this.;
Don't people get colds and flu all year round just less often? I've also always assumed that when it is summer in Europe colds and flu are holidaying in the southern hemisphere
Last edited:
How is that good news? Only 6 months? So we would need 2 vacines a year.
They have only tracked them for 6 months so far so they may well last much longer. Every person was found to have t-cells even if they had low or even no symptoms. People with worse symptoms had even more and hopefully the longevity as a result of a vaccine will be as good or better than these cases. So I'd say very good news as far as it goes.
Edit: Pogue posted about this yesterday as well.
I hope so.
I always thought around 60% and you wouldn't be far off. That would be just over 35m in England.
Not to speak that travelling between countries was a fraction. visas, currency exchange no low cost air companies, etc...
The best paper I've read so far (and that isn't that many to be fair) puts the Ro at 5.7 which pushes HIT above 80%. However as young kids aren't as susceptible that will bring the HIT down a bit. The other thing is that if super spreaders are both important to the spread of covid in a way that things like flu aren't AND there is something physiological different about superspreader, which may mean they get infected first and early, that may also functionally bring the HIT down. However, there is a chance that superspreaders are random event based occurances in which it won't make much/any difference. And we (or at least parts of the community) may still behave in ways that brings R down e.g. masks, social distancing, elderly people isolating while a vaccine is rolled out - still assuming we get a vaccine (looking very likely but we still aren't there) and that it is highly effective. The less effective a vaccine is the more we have to vaccinate to get to HIT (and that may not be possible if a vaccine isn't very effective.
That all said you don't need to get to HIT to still have a huge effect. 50% of people with immunity would make a huge difference even if HIT was 85%.
Last edited:
By implication, 5 or 6 lockdowns then.
Make sure you get access to support if you're feeling low mate.
And at the cost of how many lives?
I think there should be a strong consideration for gyms, some gyms at least, to stay open as long as they pass a Covid compliance test and can prove they have sufficient process to ensure distancing and hygiene measures are adequate.
Gyms and working out are in my view essential for some people’s mental health, mine included. I’m fortunate that I have a gym at home and have been able to carry on working out but I’d be struggling if that wasn’t the case.
The study is of clinical and health care workers of whom only 100 tested positive in March and April, not of the general population and is therefore totally useless in my view.
These people will very likely have had multiple exposures to Sars Cov 2, so there immune response will also be totally atypical compared to the general population who wouldn't in most circumstances. Quite possibly further exposure after the first boosts the immune response again.
It's also not clear if t cell immunity even stops reinfection. More likely T cell immunity causes asymptomatic infection in my view. It's not sterilising.
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4257
You can't expect a study to give answers it can't answer and was never intended to do. Vaccination will hopefully produce a response at least as strong as that shown here with the more majorly symptomatic cases in this study especially as a booster will be given if required. Sterilising would of course be nice but it isn't necessary for a vaccine to be successful e.g. polio and Hepatitis C.
While this study doesn't prove that the T-cells give some immunity the expectation is that they will. So it still qualifies as good news imo.
While this study doesn't prove that the T-cells give some immunity the expectation is that they will. So it still qualifies as good news imo.
Last edited:
Apologies, completely forgot about replying to these posts.
Its true that those other countries are having a terrible time of it too, though perhaps only Iran and Israel of those have had true second waves, as opposed to continuations of first waves. The likes of Mexico and Argentina have never properly gotten case numbers down in the way that we managed across much of Europe and are just stuck in an increasingly severe 1st wave it seems.
I think the bolded part is certainly very important, though it is still pretty galling that we sacrificed so much in the first set of lockdowns and seemingly have been unable to use that and subsequent lull to build systems to deal with it, on top of what should already be very efficient PH infrastructures.
Saw this interesting....and slightly inflammatory! article yesterday in the Irish times that describes what I was trying to say in a more articulate manner. The first comment is just so classic as well.
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/...-made-a-mess-of-handling-the-crisis-1.4395473
The West has failed – US and Europe have made a mess of handling the crisis
Western leaders have been insular slow learners at every stage of the Covid pandemic
Thanks for this data, very interesting.
Doesn't the second set show that flights in the AP region are down by the same amount as Europe for domestic travel but more for international travel?
Regardless, I was being a little flippant. It isn't so much that I was saying that flights and travel are the major driver of new infections, more the impression that it gave off generally that we'd beaten the virus and could essentially go back to something like life as normal across the continent.
The article I posted in the comment above says a bit more eloquently what I was trying to say generally I think.
I think the general pattern is Europe are flying more internationally, Asia are flying more domestically, Asia are flying overall. Those are the trends before covid and now, and Asian travel is consistently increasing while Europe's is now on the decline. But like you say it was more about the sentiment than the specifics. Asian travel gradually increasing while Europe's spiked in the summer, in line with the theory that things were back to normal here while in Asia it was a cautious return.
The point we differ on is what this signals. Your view is this is a cavalier attitude in Europe and measured realism in Asia, among the general population as well as the decision makers. I think it is mostly a direct result of government restrictions. The majority of people in either continent did not go on holiday, many because they couldn't afford to, many others because they were afraid to. Those who could afford to and wanted to travel in both regions decided to jump on a plane in similar numbers. It's just that in many of the Asian countries they weren't allowed to cross borders, so they had domestic holidays, but still jumping on a plane and covering a similar distance to European flights. If there were fewer domestic flights then we could infer that they were more cautious but there have been many more.
The notion that people thought we beat the virus in Europe while they didn't think that in Asia seems entirely unfounded. From what I've seen there are more people in Asia that were more optimistic about the virus situation in their own country in August, and more confidence in shopping, travelling, etc. The difference is they have better control of the spread so their optimism is closer to reality. But the assumption that if the roles were flipped, they would be acting completely differently...I just don't see the evidence for it.
What we saw in europe in the summer was a deeply human trait. We're overconfident and underestimate the severity of large, complex problems. There's only so long we can go without hope before we create reasons for hope, whether they're delusional or rational. Blaming Europeans for thinking that way after suffering the most severe economic and social attack in most people's lifetimes seems a little churlish. In Wuhan they're partying away with the tourists and in Tokyo even when the virus was spreading they were hitting the usual clubs while ours were closed down. The difference was they had the infrastructure to deal with the problem.
If the criticism applied to the UK only then I would see why people want to say look what the government and the people have done wrong. But it's happened in so many places around Europe, with so many different political positions driving it, so many different economic considerations influencing it, and a wide range of cultural attitudes. If they are all facing that problem then maybe there's more to it than individual decision making failure. Maybe we need to reckon with the scale of the problem in a different way.
Are South Africans dealing with the situation better than Italy? South Africans wouldnt say so, they've got loads of complaints, and lots of distrust in the logic behind the decisions. The fact they're suffering less from the virus right now doesn't mean they're dealing with it better. They're just dealing with a different version of the problem under different conditions. If things suddenly go out of control there in 6 months, when they're in winter and they have the same problem the Europeans did, in that a second lockdown was an absolute last resort because it's an economic catastrophe, I don't think it would be right to blame them. It's easier to blame people than to blame the virus but we have to recognise how hard it is to deal with the problem. Did the countries that avoided the worst of the Spanish flu deal with the situation better? Not really. Some measures worked better than others to control the spread but what dictate the worst hit countries wasn't policy or populace. So we should demand the right measures at the right time but we shouldn't blame those measures for failing to deal with a problem that was overwhelmingly big in the first place, IMO.
Don't know if this has been shared on here yet, but for those that are interested here is the week 44 report from Public Health England.
https://assets.publishing.service.g.../Weekly_Flu_and_COVID-19_report_w44_FINAL.PDF
https://assets.publishing.service.g.../Weekly_Flu_and_COVID-19_report_w44_FINAL.PDF
Nah. One of my neighbours is severely autistic and goes and sits in the same cafe every single day at the same time. Closing that cafe is destroying her mental health, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't close cafes.
If gyms are closed, go for a run.
Cafe's not quite the same in my opinion, hard as I'm sure it is on your neighbour and the thought of your neighbour is heartbreaking. Gyms are of great benefit, both physical and mental, to us as individuals. They're not just a pointless tentacle of capitalism and in my view are bordering on necessary as some people use them for pure health reasons. I've seen how some (some, though not all) gyms have dealt with the current situation and don't feel they are necessarily a Covid breeding ground.
Even so, I understand it can't be a totally selective endeavour, and I am very pro-lockdown but I wouldn't be concerned, or surprised if some gyms we allowed some slack if they could prove compliance. Going for a run isn't possible for some people.
Covid vaccine programme in UK to arrive in December apparently, front line workers and those over 80 are prioritised.
Take with a pinch of salt - this is from a CCG meeting for GP surgeries so it's coming from a rep. It was apparently kept under wrap by NHSE for a while.
Take with a pinch of salt - this is from a CCG meeting for GP surgeries so it's coming from a rep. It was apparently kept under wrap by NHSE for a while.
I just don't really see what can be done in a gym that can't be mirrored in some way at home or outside? Sure, you might not have access to heavy weights or specific machines at home or in the park, but you can quite easily do a decent workout that gets the heart going and the muscles working. Is it ideal? No. We're all having to give up cherished routines and adapt to this shitty situation. Someone might not be able to obtain their peak physique or rack up the gains or play their favourite sport at home... but that's hardly the priority in a pandemic. Keeping fit is perfectly possible.
There's a very clear playbook to dealing with the virus - get the incidence very low with early (NZ) or harsh lockdowns (China). Keep incidence low with extremely tight border / quarantine requirements. And when you do get cases that pop up, take a local blanket approach to testing and strict lockdowns (Australia).
Unfortunately we didn't have the appetite/will to make the sacrifices in the West. So we're going to be stuck in this paradigm of teetering between soaring infections and constraining the economy. Whereas other countries with the will to pursue an eradication approach have much better health and economic outcomes.
And I agree but there are lots of old people using gyms to retain health and some muscular strength under supervision of qualified professionals. Lots of people in some kind of rehab. I was / still am a well qualified PT with a medical referral qualification and there will be lots of people affected physically by the closure of gyms.
But, I'm not contesting the decision, just pointing out that gyms could be considered necessary business.
It's a fair point. I'm not denying there are health consequences to closing gyms and other sports facilities. Hopefully they're not shut too long.
Like your neighbours cafe eh? There's so many heartbreaking stories currently.
On a sidenote, I have a friend who moved to Surrey 16 years ago to live with a woman he met. He left all of us close friends behind and set up a new life. Over the years, although he and his Mrs are still together and happy, he has really started to feel detached from his true home. He misses us lot and where we live. He's such a great guy but has always struggled with moods over the years and recently got properly diagnosed as being bi polar. He is / was a dental technician, he makes teeth, and lost his job straight away back in April. He is struggling so much now, he feels he won't get another job at 48, feels lost and isolated and we are all genuinely worried for him.
Can't wait to still be working in the office from new regs Thursday despite there being absolutely no need for us to be there and all being capable of working from home fine. Been personally around 3 cases/outbreaks in the past 5 weeks and all could have been avoided if people were allowed to work from home ffs.
Why won't they let you work from home?