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

2cents said:
Yeah, the demographics least affected by the virus itself are those who are generally most affected by the measures taken to prevent its spread.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Asking someone in their late teens early 20s to basically kill their usual social life stone dead - indefinitely - is a massive sacrifice. And I don’t think antisocial old gits like me should be sneering at them for finding that sacrifice too much to bear, especially when they have so little to fear, personally, from the virus.

Obviously they put others at risk but I think there’s something about being that age which fundamentally change the way we see risk, to ourselves and to others. Which you can see by the fact we all drive slower as we get older. Driving faster than you need to is an objectively selfish and stupid thing to do - putting yourself and others at risk - but I don’t know anyone who didn’t go through that phase. At least temporarily. Even though we all grow out of it eventually.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I know. It’s a dreadful fecking pity, it really is. Although I’m conscious that being much older and more anti-social than I once was, I find limiting my contacts very easy. If I was in my 20s again I could see myself cutting out my social life for a few weeks or a few months but I don’t think I could have gone a whole half a year without partying. So I don’t want to be too judgmental. It does mean we’re in trouble though.
Click to expand...

I don't even think it's the partying, at least that's not what I've seen amongst my age group (although I haven't been young for a while!) Sure it's happening, but I don't know if it's as widespread as people make out, but what I do know is that people are really struggling with loneliness and have massive numbers of social contacts as a result. I had a relationship end because of lockdown (admittedly a relationship that was the impetus for the 'have you ever been in a toxic relationship thread' so I dodged a bullet), and I'm worried that a new one I am in might suffer the same fate.

Everyone I know who is in the next stage of their life (mostly with kids) has found lockdown an absolute breeze and, if anything, an improvement on their lives, everyone who is dating/living alone/living apart from a partner has had genuine struggles with their mental health. Inevitably, those people (me probably included) have been taking advantage of the opportunity to not feel like our lives are on pause and some people inevitably take that too far.
 
NinjaFletch said:
I don't even think it's the partying, at least that's not what I've seen amongst my age group (although I haven't been young for a while!) Sure it's happening, but I don't know if it's as widespread as people make out, but what I do know is that people are really struggling with loneliness and have massive numbers of social contacts as a result. I had a relationship end because of lockdown (admittedly a relationship that was the impetus for the 'have you ever been in a toxic relationship thread' so I dodged a bullet), and I'm worried that a new one I am in might suffer the same fate.

Everyone I know who is in the next stage of their life (mostly with kids) has found lockdown an absolute breeze and, if anything, an improvement on their lives, everyone who is dating/living alone/living apart from a partner has had genuine struggles with their mental health. Inevitably, those people (me probably included) have been taking advantage of the opportunity to not feel like our lives are on pause and some people inevitably take that too far.
Click to expand...
Same here, and I think there have been a lot of people who have found themselves in the same boat.
 
If schools and workplaces are open I’m sceptical to how much killing people’s social lives is going to help. But equally appreciate you can’t really close schools and workplaces again.

everyday i appreciate how lucky I am to be able to work from my sofa, this must be awful for so many people
 
Has anyone questioned why Sweden even in Stockholm is not seeing any rise in cases whilst the rest of Europe is?

Since cased peaked in late June there they have stayed down as have deaths, they're not wearing masks generally or trying suppression at all to any significant extent. Did they already get the virus to burn out naturally by simply doing very little?
 
MaxiPaxi said:
That’s probably wishful thinking. Again, could be that I know a lot of morons but I know a lot of people who exactly do the things you just mentioned. Go out barbecues, meet up in large groups and basically do the exact opposite of what the gov is telling them to do.

People cannot be trusted imo. Yes, there is a minority who do a very good job at protecting themselves and others, but most just don't adhere to the rules, at least not strictly enough anyway.


Again, as I mentioned yesterday, I was walking past a pub in my village and I could hear it hundreds of meters away, it was that loud and when I walked past it, it was packed to the rafters, well the outside area was. That’s been happening since the pubs reopened and now we’re on the cusp of a second wave. It’s now time to shut the shit down whilst we have time.
Click to expand...
The issue is in my opinion people want to live the best they can before a potential return to isolation.

I've been semi guilty of that myself, I've stuck to appropriate precautions (washed hands, avoided hugely crowded places, stayed clear of elderly/vulnerable) but I've tried to enjoy every second of this summer knowing it's the most 'free' we will be for quite some time.
 


Looks like shit is about to start getting real in Sweden. Took longer than the rest of Europe but my guess is that this was down to their tradition of mass emigration from cities to wide open spaces in the countryside every August. Which was only ever going to be a temporary relief.
 
Mb194dc said:
Has anyone questioned why Sweden even in Stockholm is not seeing any rise in cases whilst the rest of Europe is?

Since cased peaked in late June there they have stayed down as have deaths, they're not wearing masks generally or trying suppression at all to any significant extent. Did they already get the virus to burn out naturally by simply doing very little?
Click to expand...

See above.
 
Pogue Mahone said:


Looks like shit is about to start getting real in Sweden. Took longer than the rest of Europe but my guess is that this was down to their tradition of mass emigration from cities to wide open spaces in the countryside every August. Which was only ever going to be a temporary relief.
Click to expand...

Regulus Arcturus Black on his way to this thread like

tenor.gif
 
Pogue Mahone said:
See above.
Click to expand...

Will be watching the case numbers and deaths with interest. From what I can see on the Sweden Covid 19 wiki page deaths are not moving for the last 8 days and infections barely rising either.

If immunity is short lived then a higher R rate might actually be a good thing, not a bad one.
 
Mb194dc said:
Will be watching the case numbers and deaths with interest. From what I can see on the Sweden Covid 19 wiki page deaths are not moving for the last 8 days and infections barely rising either.

If immunity is short lived then a higher R rate might actually be a good thing, not a bad one.
Click to expand...
So I’ve read this sentence a number of times and I’m still super confused by it. What am I missing?
 
Mb194dc said:
Will be watching the case numbers and deaths with interest. From what I can see on the Sweden Covid 19 wiki page deaths are not moving for the last 8 days and infections barely rising either.

If immunity is short lived then a higher R rate might actually be a good thing, not a bad one.
Click to expand...

Deaths and hospitalisation won’t change for weeks even if cases increase massively over the next few days. But they will increase eventually. It’s the exact same pattern everywhere.

A higher R rate is never a good thing. Under any circumstances.
 
It was always going to happen because rather than returning slightly to normality it's been lockdown or fully open. Why couldn't schools, businesses, offices reopen part time?

If we end up in full lock down again it'll be a massive failure of government because this was preventable.
 
Smores said:
It was always going to happen because rather than returning slightly to normality it's been lockdown or fully open. Why couldn't schools, businesses, offices reopen part time?

If we end up in full lock down again it'll be a massive failure of government because this was preventable.
Click to expand...
Well the narrative Boris is pushing is that it wasn’t.
 
MaxiPaxi said:
Covid-19: UK faces 50,000 cases a day by October without action - Vallance

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54234084

Edit: could someone teach me how to make that headline into a link. I seen some posters do it, I’ve no idea how.
Click to expand...
Twitterati now calling for Vallance and Whitty to be sacked (most with #KBF hashtags in their display name along with balloons).
 
Mickeza said:
So I’ve read this sentence a number of times and I’m still super confused by it. What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Need infections to bolster immunity in the rest of the population before they lose it, like a vaccine booster shot. Higher R rate means it will burn out quicker again as the virus only has very small amount of non sterilised hosts left to infect.

This is probably why infections suddenly plummeted from late June without Sweden doing anything. What other explanation can there be for that?

For a virus that the human body only holds immunity to for 3 months or so, suppression without total elimination is the worst possible strategy. Simply resetting the pandemic to square one as soon as you lift restrictions. You either have to totally eliminate it (globally so it can't be reseeded endlessly, probably impossible now?) or let her rip like Sweden has done and let it burn out. Vaccination will also inevitably fail because even if you have a safe vaccine, it'll need to boosted indefinitely to stay effective.
 
First confirmed cases at a secondary school in our MAT, was helping the CEO when she mentioned it. The Best bit... confirmation was on Thursday, School only found out today, good job parents.
 
Mb194dc said:
Need infections to bolster immunity in the rest of the population before they lose it, like a vaccine booster shot. Higher R rate means it will burn out quicker again as the virus only has very small amount of non sterilised hosts left to infect.

This is probably why infections suddenly plummeted from late June without Sweden doing anything. What other explanation can there be for that?

For a virus that the human body only holds immunity to for 3 months or so, suppression without total elimination is the worst possible strategy. Simply resetting the pandemic to square one as soon as you lift restrictions. You either have to totally eliminate it (globally so it can't be reseeded endlessly, probably impossible now?) or let her rip like Sweden has done and let it burn out. Vaccination will also inevitably fail because even if you have a safe vaccine, it'll need to boosted indefinitely to stay effective.
Click to expand...
So you believe immunity is short lived and your solution is to infect 70% of Stockholm and get to herd immunity as fast as possible. And then do it all again when that immunity wears off three months down the line? It’s certainly a different take on the situation, I’ll give you that.
 
Mb194dc said:
Need infections to bolster immunity in the rest of the population before they lose it, like a vaccine booster shot. Higher R rate means it will burn out quicker again as the virus only has very small amount of non sterilised hosts left to infect.

This is probably why infections suddenly plummeted from late June without Sweden doing anything. What other explanation can there be for that?

For a virus that the human body only holds immunity to for 3 months or so, suppression without total elimination is the worst possible strategy. Simply resetting the pandemic to square one as soon as you lift restrictions. You either have to totally eliminate it (globally so it can't be reseeded endlessly, probably impossible now?) or let her rip like Sweden has done and let it burn out. Vaccination will also inevitably fail because even if you have a safe vaccine, it'll need to boosted indefinitely to stay effective.
Click to expand...

Just like loads of other, very effective, vaccines then.
 
Mickeza said:
So you believe immunity is short lived and your solution is to infect 70% of Stockholm and get to herd immunity as fast as possible. And then do it all again when that immunity wears off three months down the line? It’s certainly a different take on the situation, I’ll give you that.
Click to expand...

Some studies are suggesting antibodies are detectable for 3+ months and another Icelandic study found antibodies hadn't declined after at least 4 months.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2026116

Given the low rate of mutation, SARS immunity lasting a long time and hopefully t-cell memory existing well after antibodies are no longer detectable, I think we can be increasingly hopeful that a successful vaccine won't need more than annual application, and maybe far less often.

Lets just hope we have a vaccine and can then roll it out rapidly before too long.
 
decorativeed said:
What's this now?
Click to expand...
"Keep Britain Free". Some excerpts from their website (the founder of it is currently calling Whitty a dictator on twitter and seems to be a big Farage fan)

We believe that the Govt has acted illegally and disproportionately over the COVID 19 lockdown and we are taking action.

By forcing people to stay at home, and forcing businesses to close, they are, we believe, in contravention of basic Human Rights offered under English Law, that of the right to enjoy your property peacefully.
Click to expand...

We are not a political party. We are a group of independent thinkers who seek to influence politicians come polling day.

We stand for Freedom: of speech, choice and thought. We champion life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

A government exists to protect its citizens. We need to get back to this simple premise and judge them on this.

By co-ordinating our efforts we can ensure that our voice is heard at the heart of government and bring about real change.
Click to expand...

Also people on their forum calling Covid a "psyop" and mentions of David Icke.
 
Manchester's had a "no visitors" to houses/gardens since the end of July. It hasn't brought infection rates down, (though maybe it reduced the growth rate). Certainly it didn't offer the quick tap on the brakes that people were hoping for. Sustainability of measures is a massive issue now, and I think part of the reason why Manchester is seemingly misbehaving so badly is that the no visitors rule isn't viable for very long.

People coped in the initial phase, but as weeks turn to months, the Dominic-Cummings School of "I'm using my best judgment" - as a parent, or as someone with older or vulnerable relatives who need support, or just as someone living alone and who starts to find it stifling. Personally I liked the simplicity of the 6-person rule, I just think the simplicity arrived too late to become a routine. Worst still there's a big chunk of the country where different rules were already in play, and it just sounds like another irrelevance.

I now think we're at the point where too many people are looking for loopholes, or they're resigned to extra restrictions and are making hay while the sun shines. I also worry that as the rules intensify (and so do the fines etc) we'll actually see people becoming more hesitant about answering the contact tracer's questions, or even to get tested, which won't help anyone. I know people are demanding restrictions but you only have to look at the restrictions that are already in place to know that compliance with rules matters, and for that people have to find the rules easy to follow over months.
 
Only way out of this mess is a proven vaccine/herd immunity or extensive testing&tracing but the later is only really a workable solution long-term in smaller countries imo.

My ex-boss has caught Covid at the beginning of the week, anyone who had a close contact with him at the office were traced and told to self-isolate and in the meantime they will get tested as well. I was in the office only once during past two weeks and even thought we work on the same floor I was not deemed at high risk due to not coming close, however, I’ll be keeping it tight in terms of my social activity for the next week just in case. Good thing our office currently operates on around 30% of capacity with everyone mostly working from their homes.

However, our test&trace system has been pretty successful so far though. In our case Lockdown has ended in early May. Night clubs/bars/festivals were open throughout the whole summer (still are) as well.
 
Last edited:
Stactix said:
First confirmed cases at a secondary school in our MAT, was helping the CEO when she mentioned it. The Best bit... confirmation was on Thursday, School only found out today, good job parents.
Click to expand...
Don't be so ignorant. If the parents had told school they would have to take time off work to care for their child, don't you know!! :rolleyes:
 
Berbaclass said:
I think the people who didn’t care before will still not care now unfortunately.
Click to expand...
I know a fair few people who aren't going to take this lockdown remotely seriously, citing that the first one didn't work so this one isn't going to either, so why bother even taking part. As you can imagine most of these people were on Facebook.
 
The Cat said:
Lockdown for our borough from 6 tomorrow.
Click to expand...
I’ve been in since last week, it’s not anywhere near as bad as last time though.

My concern is that I have a funeral to attend very imminently, but I believe I will be allowed to attend as one of the exemptions seems to be visiting family on compassionate grounds (at least that’s what my local councils website says). Providing that it takes place and I am allowed to attend in terms of numbers.
 
jojojo said:
Manchester's had a "no visitors" to houses/gardens since the end of July. It hasn't brought infection rates down, (though maybe it reduced the growth rate). Certainly it didn't offer the quick tap on the brakes that people were hoping for. Sustainability of measures is a massive issue now, and I think part of the reason why Manchester is seemingly misbehaving so badly is that the no visitors rule isn't viable for very long.

People coped in the initial phase, but as weeks turn to months, the Dominic-Cummings School of "I'm using my best judgment" - as a parent, or as someone with older or vulnerable relatives who need support, or just as someone living alone and who starts to find it stifling. Personally I liked the simplicity of the 6-person rule, I just think the simplicity arrived too late to become a routine. Worst still there's a big chunk of the country where different rules were already in play, and it just sounds like another irrelevance.

I now think we're at the point where too many people are looking for loopholes, or they're resigned to extra restrictions and are making hay while the sun shines. I also worry that as the rules intensify (and so do the fines etc) we'll actually see people becoming more hesitant about answering the contact tracer's questions, or even to get tested, which won't help anyone. I know people are demanding restrictions but you only have to look at the restrictions that are already in place to know that compliance with rules matters, and for that people have to find the rules easy to follow over months.
Click to expand...
It's because it doesn't really achieve anything. You just move your meetings elsewhere if you want to remain within the law, or just carry on as usual if you don't. The numbers of people (well, men, mainly) who don't bother wearing masks on public transport and in shops around Manchester shows that there is a large percentage of the public that will continue to do as they please, so these measures are very often ignored.

For people who do comply with all the rules, the flaws in the extra measures in Manchester are obvious. Especially when you're being told to get back in the office, so you can spend your days with a dozen or so people you don't care for or even trust to follow the rules, but you can't have your mum come and sit in your back garden. You can do that in a public park, on a bench where dozens of other people have sat, and you can 'bump into eachother' in a pub.

You can't travel in a car with a close friend you know has been working from home, nowhere with others, but you can cram onto a tram with dozens of strangers who are still coughing, and eating with no masks on. And your workplace can insist that you have to come in, so you have no choice but to use the trams and potentially pass on a virus you've caught on there to the people you work with.

There needs to be something else done that actually addresses the circumstances where the virus is spreading, and I don't believe that it is largely in peoples back yards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.