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

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,047
Location
Blitztown
I've got admit I've been a sceptic but I know of loads now going down with it, South Manchester is rife with it.
You’ve done the right thing to get tested. But you don’t have most of the symptoms.

Fingers still crossed.
 

Mr Pigeon

Illiterate Flying Rat
Scout
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
26,107
Location
bin
The Christmas thing is difficult because there's going to be a lot of folk who have abided by the rules since March and are now struggling with the idea of abiding for that day. Especially people who haven't seen their families for months. I get that some people are looking forward to a family free Christmas but as you get older that shit changes sometimes.

I can't imagine my mum, who has seen her grandson a grand total of four times since March (only when you were allowed in other people's houses) having Christmas alone. But, at the same time, she's old and her health isn't the best. She doesn't leave her house so the risk of anyone in our house being infected by her is next to zero, but the other way around is a different story (step kids will be at their bio dad's by the time she comes over so it'll just be me, my missus and the wee one).

I like @UnrelatedPsuedo way of doing it. Just wish we could pull the kids out of school the week before the holidays but that would also be wrong.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
119,444
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I ended up booking a drive through test at Manchester airport as I've been told the results come back quicker. The home delivery one has only just arrived I couldn't wait about that long.

Feel absolutely terrible at this moment, can defo feel my chest getting worse and I keep getting terrible headaches and feel fatigued. The way I currently feel I find it hard to believe I've not got it if I'm honest.
Good luck fella
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
119,444
Location
Dublin, Ireland
You’ve done the right thing to get tested. But you don’t have most of the symptoms.

Fingers still crossed.
He’s fatigued with headaches - that’s more than enough symptoms

my brothers wife in US had her birthday about a week ago. Her brother, partner and 2 kids cane over, they wore masks and socially distanced in the garden. Couple of days later, her brother rings to say he’s going to get tested because he’s really not feeling good, very fatigued. Positive result. Turns out he’d had a headache a few days before but came over anyway. So the guy (who owns a restaurant, and a bar), his partner (a teacher) and 1 of the kids all got infected. My brother and his wife tested negative, quite possibly because they are convinced they had it around May.
 

fergieisold

New Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
7,122
Location
Saddleworth (home) Manchester (work)
I ended up booking a drive through test at Manchester airport as I've been told the results come back quicker. The home delivery one has only just arrived I couldn't wait about that long.

Feel absolutely terrible at this moment, can defo feel my chest getting worse and I keep getting terrible headaches and feel fatigued. The way I currently feel I find it hard to believe I've not got it if I'm honest.
Good luck with the results. My friend had one at the airport and it came back in less than 12 hours. But this was summer when things weren’t so busy!
 

2cents

Historiographer, and obtainer of rare antiquities
Scout
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
16,174
Beginning to look like Ireland’s second wave may have peaked:

 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
25,496
The Christmas thing is difficult because there's going to be a lot of folk who have abided by the rules since March and are now struggling with the idea of abiding for that day. Especially people who haven't seen their families for months. I get that some people are looking forward to a family free Christmas but as you get older that shit changes sometimes.

I can't imagine my mum, who has seen her grandson a grand total of four times since March (only when you were allowed in other people's houses) having Christmas alone. But, at the same time, she's old and her health isn't the best. She doesn't leave her house so the risk of anyone in our house being infected by her is next to zero, but the other way around is a different story (step kids will be at their bio dad's by the time she comes over so it'll just be me, my missus and the wee one).

I like @UnrelatedPsuedo way of doing it. Just wish we could pull the kids out of school the week before the holidays but that would also be wrong.
We're doing something very similar although not as long. It's a bit annoying we can't just stay at the in-laws but i reckon one of their old curtain twitching neighbours would report them.

It would certainly be sensible of the government to release kids early for the holidays and have a national plan to isolate and see only one other household.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
It highlights the issue for areas like Manchester (that has been in special measures since July and only seen case numbers rise) - people won't self quarantine for "symptoms" or even if a "contact" tests positive, unless they can afford to and they won't self isolate at home (even after a positive test) unless their housing and family circumstances allow it. In April, the wide nature and relatively short duration of the lockdown helped with compliance but even that short term action depleted individual finances and care/support/housing backup plans. Instead of talking tiers, and which businesses to close, they have to look at why people don't react correctly to symptoms or to contacts' test results.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Was the takeaway not “All trials should be identified”?

From what I remember he started with a hypothesis of ‘Not reporting is bad’ with the assumption that Big Pharma was worse for it.

The conclusions being Academic institutions were worse.

But the additional conclusions ran to ‘Academic institutions struggle to fund research if they fail often’ and ‘Big Pharma has money to spend on failure as it doesn’t make them stop trying’.

Only trying to clarify as my brother was mates with him for a time. Always followed what he’s done.

Could be misremembering though.
That’s a fair summary actually. I just found it funny because his original hypothesis was so obviously about catching pharma with its pants down only for them to be setting a standard that academia (i.e. the organisations that pay his salary) was falling far below.
 
Last edited:

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
The chief exec of an NHS Trust in Warwickshire said that they've been asked to prepare a vaccination programme for NHS staff from around early december so not sure what data some of the managers are privy to.
I think they are aiming for phase 3 trials being completed this month (barring a setback) and all the countries who have contracted to buy and/or make the vaccine know that and are gearing up assuming success. The company in Melbourne recently said they were already manufacturing although the current scale of production wasn't articulated. So administration to front line heath workers late 2020 or early 2021 seems at least possible. Wouldn't that be a great Christmas present - the news of front-line health workers getting a vaccination would give the world a much needed boost.
 

Hugh Jass

Shave Dass
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
11,244
I am skeptical about the first vaccine being the golden bullet. Luckily we are manufacturing 150 of them, so one will certainly work.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
Any evidence?

I’d have thought there’s a decent chance lockdowns will cause a net reduction in non-covid deaths due to less pollution, car crashes and work place accidents.

I can’t find it now but there was at one study of the 2009 crash which showed a reductions in deaths due to those factors.
A very recent report fro the Australian Actuaries professional body found at least 400 deaths per month have been saved here. Of course there will be long term detrimental effects as well but no way will it be worse, especially not worse than letting the virus run free.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
I am skeptical about the first vaccine being the golden bullet. Luckily we are manufacturing 150 of them, so one will certainly work.
Statistically there are likely to be failures. However, the first one is still looking good so lets keep everything crossed that it passes phase 3 and is highly effective.
 

Hugh Jass

Shave Dass
Joined
Apr 16, 2016
Messages
11,244
Statistically there are likely to be failures. However, the first one is still looking good so lets keep everything crossed that it passes phase 3 and is highly effective.
Osterholm said that a vaccine might work, but only for a period of time, before it loses its effect.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,350
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Test and tracing has gone to shit. A lot less people who should be are not getting tested because of it.
It was struggling to cope with the surge. So as numbers got higher and higher we might underestimate more and more. However it shouldn’t cause total daily positives to decrease.

Total numbers aside, the positivity % has decreased from last week. Which also points towards things getting back under control. Mind you, I’d want to see more than just a few days data to have any confidence this is more than a blip in an upward trend.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
Osterholm said that a vaccine might work, but only for a period of time, before it loses its effect.
In one sense he is merely stating a truism. Antibodies do decline usually and how long immunity in general last varies. Coronavirus immunity from being infected by the virus (SARS/MERS) tends to be plenty long enough for an annual vaccination to work but of course for this cornoavirus and these potential vaccines we don't know for sure yet. Vaccination is likely to produce an immune response comparable to or better than that given by infection as low/asymptomtic infections don't seem to produce as strong/long an immune response as a vaccine hopefully will - partly speculative but also with some evidence to support it. Given the news today I think we have increased hope that a vaccine will do a good job even though we aren't there yet and rolling out a vaccine or vaccines is far from a trivial matter. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-astrazeneca-works-in-all-ages-trials-suggest
 
Last edited:

bonothom

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2014
Messages
843
"The number of deaths is still a far-cry away from the peak of the pandemic during the spring, when more than 9,400 patients died in the worst week. And to bring the figures into perspective, Covid-19 was only responsible for one in 16 total deaths in the UK in the most recent week, and flu and pneumonia killed twice as many people."
 

Tony Babangida

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
813
"The number of deaths is still a far-cry away from the peak of the pandemic during the spring, when more than 9,400 patients died in the worst week. And to bring the figures into perspective, Covid-19 was only responsible for one in 16 total deaths in the UK in the most recent week, and flu and pneumonia killed twice as many people."
Where is this quote from? So is the flu worse than COVID-19?
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
Where is this quote from? So is the flu worse than COVID-19?
And while the measures that reduce covid deaths also reduce flu deaths a bit the other causes of death are still there. It is additional so even if that statistic is true it is wildly misleading - most/all won't be contageous or be able to overwhelm our medical facilities etc etc etc
 

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
25,537
Location
Sydney
"The number of deaths is still a far-cry away from the peak of the pandemic during the spring, when more than 9,400 patients died in the worst week. And to bring the figures into perspective, Covid-19 was only responsible for one in 16 total deaths in the UK in the most recent week, and flu and pneumonia killed twice as many people."
stop trolling the thread dude it isn't helpful, this quote is meaningless without context

people ask you legitimate questions and you just ignore it, so why wouldn't they ignore you?
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
"The number of deaths is still a far-cry away from the peak of the pandemic during the spring, when more than 9,400 patients died in the worst week. And to bring the figures into perspective, Covid-19 was only responsible for one in 16 total deaths in the UK in the most recent week, and flu and pneumonia killed twice as many people."
I've reviewed your "contributions" to this thread and I'm thread banning you. I can't decide if you are trolling or in deluded covid denial. Either way .....
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
"The number of deaths is still a far-cry away from the peak of the pandemic during the spring, when more than 9,400 patients died in the worst week. And to bring the figures into perspective, Covid-19 was only responsible for one in 16 total deaths in the UK in the most recent week, and flu and pneumonia killed twice as many people."
:lol:

You are quoting a Daily Mail article AND somewhat out of context even thought the Mail Article is the usual Mail collection of turds for paragraphs rolled in glitter.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
jump to 6:23

If a vaccine gets approval it will be based on a successful phase 3 trial and not in the way that hydroxychloroquine was which was withdrawn when the data come in - so that bit isn't a real or fair comparison. If a vaccine is approved for emergency use initially it will just be in the interim until full regulatory approval is sought and presumably obtained. Only then will the general public get it. He later makes that point and is also partly making a point about the potential perception if we give "emergency approval" and that it could undermine confidence in it. That could be true but denying front line medical workers the vaccine (who I believe will be the main beneficiaries of emergency approval - could be wrong) on those grounds isn't a call I'd like to make or justify to those putting their lives on the line for us. His other main point is that safety isn't the issue but that we will be sending a vaccine to market with much shorter efficacy testing than usual. Given the urgency of our need the risk of a safe vaccine being less effective than the phase 3 trials show is something that is worth risking and is going to happen. No way we aren't going to use a safe vaccine for months or years to study efficacy further just to make sure we know exactly how effective it is in comparison to the phase 3 trial. We just don't have the luxury of time.

Nothing he says is wrong (barring the possibly inadvertently dodgy comparison with Hydroxychloroquine) but the conversation will no doubt be leapt upon by the anti-vax mob.
 
Last edited:

prateik

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
42,151
If a vaccine gets approval it will be based on a successful phase 3 trial and not in the way that hydroxychloroquine was which was withdrawn when the data come in - so that bit isn't a real or fair comparison.
There wasn't really a comparison.
He mentions HCQ and plasma therapy as they both had EUA as well, but goes on to say the bar will be different for this.. but people just reading that its an EUA might feel its being rushed.
If a vaccine is approved for emergency use initially it will just be in the interim until full regulatory approval is sought and presumably obtained. Only then will the general public get it.
He is on the advisory committee that will be advising the FDA.
they had a meeting last week and decided they cant give out a licence unless they have data for a couple of years.. so it will be an EUA.

Nothing he says is wrong at all. Just an update from someone who knows whats happening..
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,602
Location
Centreback
There wasn't really a comparison.
He mentions HCQ and plasma therapy as they both had EUA as well, but goes on to say the bar will be different for this.. but people just reading that its an EUA might feel its being rushed.

He is on the advisory committee that will be advising the FDA.
they had a meeting last week and decided they cant give out a licence unless they have data for a couple of years.. so it will be an EUA.

Nothing he says is wrong at all. Just an update from someone who knows whats happening..
If they are forced to give it to the public as an EUA that might well give the anti-vax nutjobs ammunition sadly. I wonder if that is going to be the same for elsewhere? I read that here in Australia an emergency approval would quickly follow with a full approval I think so assumed the process would be the same elsewhere. I'll have to check as I don't remember the source.

Edit: It looks like the normal pathway here is a provisional approval (less scary than an emergency one) which is already underway and now waiting for phase 3 results and that normally leads to a full one later, so it looks like the process will be similar here but without the scary language.