Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[Enzo Chiefo]

50 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

The evidence is that we have more people in hospital with Covid-19 now than we did back in March before the first lockdown. We waited too long to lockdown back then and it all went tits up. 

A deliberate red herring.  Cases were doubling every 3 days back then. Now it's every 14 days. As official stats estimate less than 5% of transmission occurs in hospitality settings, Whitty and his diddy men have to search further afield and quote some high school study from the States. Policy is being made with a dodgy scientific dossier that would shame Tony Blair 

[Ray Gin]

5 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

How does it get in there?

 

Has the virus developed the intelligence to know not to strike at work, school, uni, on the bus or train or at Tesco? 

 

It gets in there from other households popping round to visit, and especially by people holding house parties. Undoubtedly it can spread in those other places too but to a far lesser extent.

 

 

[Ray Gin]

1 minute ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

A deliberate red herring.  Cases were doubling every 3 days back then. Now it's every 14 days. As official stats estimate less than 5% of transmission occurs in hospitality settings, Whitty and his diddy men have to search further afield and quote some high school study from the States. Policy is being made with a dodgy scientific dossier that would shame Tony Blair 

 

It's doubling slower because we have measures in place now that we didn't have back then. The measures that you are constantly moaning about.

5% is currently around 700 cases per day. That reduction helps keep higher priority services open.

 

[The Mighty Thor]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

It gets in there from other households popping round to visit, and especially by people holding house parties. Undoubtedly it can spread in those other places too but to a far lesser extent.

 

 

But we all sat in our houses through the summer with days and weeks of no cases or single digit cases. People popped round, quite often sometimes. 

Then August came round as did September and then the vectors where viruses spread quickly and freely reopened, then cases started to rise, then hospital admissions started to rise. 

Then the virus jumped from these institutions into the general population.

 

But its houses and restaurants right?

 

[Guest]

Watched an interview with the General Manager of  Musselburgh  Racecourse today. A sensible man, not known for outlandish claims.

 

The view given to him  by medical experts is that they expect a vaccine by Easter. He never said who the experts were.

 

A bit left field, but interesting  nonetheless.

[DETTY29]

9 minutes ago, Barack said:

Rishi throwing the cash about again.

Is it £1.3bn each for Scotland, Wales, NI or shared?

 

Kick in the baws for Scotland if each.

 

 

[Heartsmad1874]

1 minute ago, Barack said:

Rishi throwing the cash about again.

Lasting 6 months through to spring. Good to see people through Xmas and into the new year atleast.

[The Mighty Thor]

2 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Is it £1.3bn each for Scotland, Wales, NI or shared?

 

Kick in the baws for Scotland if each.

 

 

Shared.

 

Available if we decide to apply measures etc

[redjambo]

12 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

A deliberate red herring.  Cases were doubling every 3 days back then. Now it's every 14 days. As official stats estimate less than 5% of transmission occurs in hospitality settings, Whitty and his diddy men have to search further afield and quote some high school study from the States. Policy is being made with a dodgy scientific dossier that would shame Tony Blair 

 

Here's the graph of cases for Scotland, showing the rapid rise earlier this year and the rapid rise now. I'm not going to go away and calculate the exact rates of increase, but a look at the graph will show you that the angles of those rising slopes looks pretty similar.

 

[DETTY29]

9 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Shared.

 

Available if we decide to apply measures etc

Shame we (well England) spent £12bn on their spreadsheet test and protect system when scaling up and licencing options for existing systems could have been looked at.

Edited October 12, 2020 by DETTY29

[Ray Gin]

8 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

But we all sat in our houses through the summer with days and weeks of no cases or single digit cases. People popped round, quite often sometimes. 

Then August came round as did September and then the vectors where viruses spread quickly and freely reopened, then cases started to rise, then hospital admissions started to rise. 

Then the virus jumped from these institutions into the general population.

 

But its houses and restaurants right?

 

 

You weren't allowed to mix with other households indoors up until Phase 3, the same time as the other stuff started to open up.

 

 

[Enzo Chiefo]

17 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

It's doubling slower because we have measures in place now that we didn't have back then. The measures that you are constantly moaning about.

5% is currently around 700 cases per day. That reduction helps keep higher priority services open.

 

700 "cases", 80% of which may well be asymptomatic,  across the entire UK is not enough justification imo to risk decimating large parts of the hospitality industry.

[Francis Albert]

1 hour ago, Jambo 4 Ever said:

Why did you walk away from him?

To get to the table for table service. As he had just told me to do.

Why did he speak to me as if he was my mother? Or dare I say it wife.

[Enzo Chiefo]

7 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Here's the graph of cases for Scotland, showing the rapid rise earlier this year and the rapid rise now. I'm not going to go away and calculate the exact rates of increase, but a look at the graph will show you that the angles of those rising slopes looks pretty similar.

 

The figures I quoted were cited by Boris himself. Official figures on a graph back then only scratched the surface of infections,  due to very limited testing.

Edited October 12, 2020 by Enzo Chiefo

[The Mighty Thor]

6 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

You weren't allowed to mix with other households indoors up until Phase 3, the same time as the other stuff started to open up.

 

 

Which was June. 

So all June, all July most of August it was fine. Then institutions opened that changed it all. 

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, SE16 3LN said:

I've stumbled across a few dictators in pubs in the last few months but generally the staff have been brilliant. You should haver knocked him out.

I agree. 95% probably much  more have been brilliant. There are always arseholes who spoil things. 

For everyone in almost everything including the response to Covid19.

Edited October 12, 2020 by Francis Albert

[Whatever]

 

[Robbofan99]

15 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

The figures I quoted were cited by Boris himself. Official figures on a graph back then only scratched the surface of infections,  due to very limited testing.

Good point. 

[Robbofan99]

11 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Which was June. 

So all June, all July most of August it was fine. Then institutions opened that changed it all. 

Pubs etc opened up mid July so bang goes your theory that things changed then !  

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, Victorian said:

More to the getting hoyed oot the pub tale than has been 'remembered' imo.  Nap.   

What is your opinion based on?

[N Lincs Jambo]

19 minutes ago, Enzo Chiefo said:

700 "cases", 80% of which may well be asymptomatic,  across the entire UK is not enough justification imo to risk decimating large parts of the hospitality industry.

 

Exactly! As it was explained to me by a doctor, a positive test does not equate to a "case". A case is where sombody actually becomes ill and presents themselves to a doctor as being ill. The doctor should then A) diagnose the illness and then  prescribe treatment. A positive test for the mostpart nowadays happens when someone tests positive who is asymptomatic, ie NOT a case. Yet, by sleight of hand, all these "positives" are being reported unquestioningly as cases in the MSM.

 

And that's without the horrendous amount of false positives which alone, let's face it, are the sole driving force behind restrictions.

 

I mean, look around you, if it weren't for the non-stop media fear-mongering campaign and totally disproportionate gov't responses, how many people would actually be aware there was something going on??

 

 

Edit due to a capital B followed by ) getting changed to the shades smiley above

Edited October 12, 2020 by N Lincs Jambo
see above

[Victorian]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

What is your opinion based on?

 

No way to substantiate anything obviously as I have no first hand knowledge of the unsavoury incident but I believe there's a decent chance there's more to it.   I very much doubt you've insulted anyone but perhaps a bit of body language has been interpreted as a difficult customer.   

[Francis Albert]

Just now, Victorian said:

 

No way to substantiate anything obviously as I have no first hand knowledge of the unsavoury incident but I believe there's a decent chance there's more to it.   I very much doubt you've insulted anyone but perhaps a bit of body language has been interpreted as a difficult customer.   

So basically your opinion and implied accusation is based on nothing. 

[AlimOzturk]

[Victorian]

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

So basically your opinion and implied accusation is based on nothing. 

 

You asked.   I replied.   "Accusation"  

 

I reckon I'm on the right track.   

[N Lincs Jambo]

1 minute ago, Brian Dundas said:

So would people in hospital or ICU count as cases? Those numbers are going up, that’s why Nightingale hospitals in hot spots are being readied again. 

 

Yes, people in hospital or ICU would clearly count as cases if they had presented as ill. The problem you have is that the figures, which are being used to justify restrictions, are not being driven by these but by asymptomatic people testing "positive".

[Ray Gin]

31 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Which was June. 

So all June, all July most of August it was fine. Then institutions opened that changed it all. 

 

No it was mid July. 

[Francis Albert]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

You asked.   I replied.   "Accusation"  

 

I reckon I'm on the right track.   

Supposition. Inference. Whatever you prefer. You have absolutely no basis for it. You are on your track.

[Ray Gin]

19 minutes ago, N Lincs Jambo said:

 

Exactly! As it was explained to me by a doctor, a positive test does not equate to a "case". A case is where sombody actually becomes ill and presents themselves to a doctor as being ill. The doctor should then A) diagnose the illness and then  prescribe treatment. A positive test for the mostpart nowadays happens when someone tests positive who is asymptomatic, ie NOT a case. Yet, by sleight of hand, all these "positives" are being reported unquestioningly as cases in the MSM.

 

And that's without the horrendous amount of false positives which alone, let's face it, are the sole driving force behind restrictions.

 

I mean, look around you, if it weren't for the non-stop media fear-mongering campaign and totally disproportionate gov't responses, how many people would actually be aware there was something going on??

 

 

Edit due to a capital B followed by ) getting changed to the shades smiley above

 

People who are asymptomatic can still be contagious. It is dangerous to just completely ignore these cases. 

[The Mighty Thor]

3 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

No it was mid July. 

OK then so mid July was fine most of August was fine then it all fell apart end Aug into September. 

So its either got a 2 month incubation or its not pubs and houses that have us where we are today. 

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Supposition. Inference. Whatever you prefer. You have absolutely no basis for it. You are on your track.

 

I do have basis to it.   An opinion based on extensive experience of dealing with people.   Let's call it an educated guess.

 

Sounds like the other party has over-reacted though.  Nae luck.  Nae pint.

[N Lincs Jambo]

Just now, Ray Gin said:

 

People who are asymptomatic can still be contagious. It is dangerous to just completely ignore these cases. 

 

Not according to several doctors, virologists and epidemiologists I have been following since this shitstorm started. Many are of the opinion based on their professional experience that it can only be passed on by people who are symptomatic, ie ill. They cite this as being in line with all other viruses etc.

[Ray Gin]

5 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

OK then so mid July was fine most of August was fine then it all fell apart end Aug into September. 

So its either got a 2 month incubation or its not pubs and houses that have us where we are today. 

 

Numbers were extremely low in mid July. It takes time for the virus to pass around again and creep back up before accelerating.

[The Mighty Thor]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Numbers were extremely low in mid July. It takes time for the virus to pass around again and creep back up before accelerating.

Quite. 

From mid August there was an uptick. From early September onwards its exploded to the point now where that genie is not going into the box again. 

[Victorian]

There's quite obviously much more complexity to the analysis of how and where it's spreading,  including the age profile of where the virus was a number of weeks ago and where it is now.   Whitty's slides concentrated on infections in the over 60s and it's corresponding graph of hospital admissions.   They are very much aware of the virus moving back into the older ages.   Naturally the hospital admissions and deaths took time to translate from the time,  not long ago,  when the virus was more prevalent in the young.   

 

Naively fixating on supposedly low percentages of infections being attributed to hospitality will tell you nothing.   The effect these particular chains have in other settings is where the concern is.

[Bull's-eye]

17 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I do have basis to it.   An opinion based on extensive experience of dealing with people.   Let's call it an educated guess.

 

Sounds like the other party has over-reacted though.  Nae luck.  Nae Jack Daniels Black Label.

 

Sorted that post for you. 

 

Pint?   Ppppfffffttttt.

[Ray Gin]

14 minutes ago, N Lincs Jambo said:

 

Not according to several doctors, virologists and epidemiologists I have been following since this shitstorm started. Many are of the opinion based on their professional experience that it can only be passed on by people who are symptomatic, ie ill. They cite this as being in line with all other viruses etc.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/health/coronavirus-asymptomatic-transmission.html

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

25 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

No it was mid July. 

Still around 10 weeks for the infections to be in hospitals...thought it was meant to be 2/3 weeks 

[Back to 2005]

18 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/health/coronavirus-asymptomatic-transmission.html

 

 

Isn't it convenient to the government narrative that asymptomatic people can spread this virus. What's the chances....

[Francis Albert]

31 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

I do have basis to it.   An opinion based on extensive experience of dealing with people.   Let's call it an educated guess.

 

Sounds like the other party has over-reacted though.  Nae luck.  Nae pint.

I had a pint across the road.  By coincidence I saw impeccable treatment of a truly difficult customer. A woman

totally out of her mind whether through drink drugs or mental illness. The manager or landlord spent 15 minutes with her trying to establish her name and where she lived and ordered a cab to get her home and agreed  to.pay for it. A bit of a contrast with being thrown out for not meeting the high standard of politeness and tolerance for rudeness required across the road. The staff even apologised to me for putting up.with it and I  congratulated them.for the way they handled the problem

 

[Ray Gin]

14 minutes ago, Back to 2005 said:

Isn't it convenient to the government narrative that asymptomatic people can spread this virus. What's the chances....

 

It's an American article on a Hong Kong study, which government are you referring to?

 

[Victorian]

5 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

I had a pint across the road.  By coincidence I saw impeccable treatment of a truly difficult customer. A woman

totally out of her mind whether through drink drugs or mental illness. The manager or landlord spent 15 minutes with her trying to establish her name and where she lived and ordered a cab to get her home and agreed  to.pay for it. A bit of a contrast with being thrown out for not meeting the high standard of politeness and tolerance for rudeness required across the road. The staff even apologised to me for putting up.with it and I  congratulated them.for the way they handled the problem

 

 

There you go.   The difference between a total cock working in a bar,  over-reacting to a situation and making things more difficult for himself and a bit of responsible management of a situation.

[N Lincs Jambo]

24 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/health/coronavirus-asymptomatic-transmission.html

 

 

 

Cheers for the reply RG. I have read your article and I guess that means we're the opposite side of the divide on this one. I'm going to quote a section from an article by a doctor Mike Yeadon, formerly Chief Scientific Officer and VP at pfizer, which is pretty relevant to this discussion and a link to the full article. Hisarticle was published September 20th. Anything in bold is my emphasis.

 

Part of the ‘project fear’ that is rather too obvious, involving second waves, has been the daily count of ‘cases’. Its important to understand that, according to the infectious disease specialists I’ve spoken to, the word ‘case’ has to mean more than merely the presence of some foreign organism. It must present signs (things medics notice) and symptoms (things you notice). And in most so-called cases, those testing positive had no signs or symptoms of illness at all. There was much talk of asymptomatic spreading, and as a biologist this surprised me. In almost every case, a person is symptomatic because they have a high viral load and either it is attacking their body or their immune system is fighting it, generally a mix. I don’t doubt there have been some cases of asymptomatic transmission, but I’m confident it is not important.

 

That all said, Government decided to call a person a ‘case’ if their swab sample was positive for viral RNA, which is what is measured in PCR. A person’s sample can be positive if they have the virus, and so it should. They can also be positive if they’ve had the virus some weeks or months ago and recovered.

 

Full article:

 

https://lockdownsceptics.org/lies-damned-lies-and-health-statistics-the-deadly-danger-of-false-positives/?s=09&fbclid=IwAR0V44esmfOUWhI_ZKKLCtePiWrZXqA3pOW-H9deh8_ZVUOR0-inqbgcE6g

 

 

[Ray Gin]

5 minutes ago, N Lincs Jambo said:

 

Cheers for the reply RG. I have read your article and I guess that means we're the opposite side of the divide on this one. I'm going to quote a section from an article by a doctor Mike Yeadon, formerly Chief Scientific Officer and VP at pfizer, which is pretty relevant to this discussion and a link to the full article. Hisarticle was published September 20th. Anything in bold is my emphasis.

 

Part of the ‘project fear’ that is rather too obvious, involving second waves, has been the daily count of ‘cases’. Its important to understand that, according to the infectious disease specialists I’ve spoken to, the word ‘case’ has to mean more than merely the presence of some foreign organism. It must present signs (things medics notice) and symptoms (things you notice). And in most so-called cases, those testing positive had no signs or symptoms of illness at all. There was much talk of asymptomatic spreading, and as a biologist this surprised me. In almost every case, a person is symptomatic because they have a high viral load and either it is attacking their body or their immune system is fighting it, generally a mix. I don’t doubt there have been some cases of asymptomatic transmission, but I’m confident it is not important.

 

That all said, Government decided to call a person a ‘case’ if their swab sample was positive for viral RNA, which is what is measured in PCR. A person’s sample can be positive if they have the virus, and so it should. They can also be positive if they’ve had the virus some weeks or months ago and recovered.

 

Full article:

 

https://lockdownsceptics.org/lies-damned-lies-and-health-statistics-the-deadly-danger-of-false-positives/?s=09&fbclid=IwAR0V44esmfOUWhI_ZKKLCtePiWrZXqA3pOW-H9deh8_ZVUOR0-inqbgcE6g

 

 

 

It doesn't sound like Dr Yeadon has carried out a study specifically on Covid-19 and is using guesswork based on his previous work as a biologist. I'm not sure that this gives his hypothesis more credence than the recent South Korean study.

 

He does however agree that there have been cases of asymptomatic transmission.

 

 

 

 

 

[Victorian]

I wonder if many of the rising number of hospitalisations have followed on from errant positive test results from dead virus particles,  etc.     Let's ask Mr Bert Smith (65) of Manchester... if he can speak in between not being able to catch his breath.    

[N Lincs Jambo]

25 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

It doesn't sound like Dr Yeadon has carried out a study specifically on Covid-19 and is using guesswork based on his previous work as a biologist. I'm not sure that this gives his hypothesis more credence than the recent South Korean study.

 

He does however agree that there have been cases of asymptomatic transmission.

 

 

 

 

 

If you read the full article, there is a link to the paper he published with two other scientists in there. It’s worth a read. Btw appreciate the fact that although we’re coming from opposite sides of the debate we’re both “playing the ball” in football parlance 👍

[Victorian]

8 minutes ago, jonesy said:

 

It was pretty much the same in March, to be honest. First the herd immunity, then the we don't want to lockdown, then the lockdown. The same narrative every time: do some kind of u-turn, tell the people we don't want to do the bad thing, then do the bad thing. It's hilariously bad, and yet people are still falling for it more than six months on. In fact, seven months of this pish has got folk more scared than ever.

 

Sturgeon and Johnson have become a laughing stock to anyone with an ounce of critical thinking ability. The only people now supporting their actions are the same people that get a surprise when the sun rises in the east again every morning.

 

There's a distinction to be made between supporting the current actions of the governments and supporting the governments' requirement to act.    A lot of recent decisions have been inadequate,  muddled,  rushed out.   You can recognise that while still recognising that they need to achieve their objectives.   The over-arching objective is to suppress the virus.   How that is achieved is the pertinent question.   Declaring the current strategies as shit and not remembering that the same problems still remain to be solved in some other way is just as inadequate as the governments' poor efforts.

[steve123]

Sage have released advise to UK government, they were advocating circuit breaker along with other measures back in late September very much like we have in Scotland now.

[N Lincs Jambo]

2 minutes ago, jonesy said:

 

Given that, statistically, the UK seems to be no further forward in this objective than it was in March, I would suggest that either a) the objective is unrealistic, b) those in charge are unable to make decisions and implement policies that can achieve this, or c) both a) and b).

 

I cannot support the governments' requirement to act when it quite likely does more harm than good. That is the opposite of good governance. Governments and public health don't make good bedfellows in an age of social media and 4-hour news cycles. There's no long-term view or strategy.

 

It's like when Sheen turns up to find Brando sticking folks' heads on spikes in the jungle.

 

Are my methods unsound?

 

I don't see any method at all, sir.

Not a bad analogy tbf

[Victorian]

10 minutes ago, jonesy said:

 

Given that, statistically, the UK seems to be no further forward in this objective than it was in March, I would suggest that either a) the objective is unrealistic, b) those in charge are unable to make decisions and implement policies that can achieve this, or c) both a) and b).

 

I cannot support the governments' requirement to act when it quite likely does more harm than good. That is the opposite of good governance. Governments and public health don't make good bedfellows in an age of social media and 4-hour news cycles. There's no long-term view or strategy.

 

It's like when Sheen turns up to find Brando sticking folks' heads on spikes in the jungle.

 

Are my methods unsound?

 

I don't see any method at all, sir.

 

Depends how you define 'no further forward'.   It's an epidemic of a virus that has one objective.   To transmit from host to host.   We've been in suppression since March so the measure of how far forward we are is measured in the number of prevented infections / deaths.

 

Is suppression realistic?    Of course it is.   Suppression is what it says on the tin.   Preventative action to slow the natural course of the virus.   It is not a policy to eradicate altogether.   You can suppress any pathogen,  no matter how deadly or infectious.

 

It's not much of a long term strategy without a shorter term intervention to come.   You only need remember the hospitals becoming busy again,  under suppression measures,  to see that suppression needs to continue.   

Edited October 12, 2020 by Victorian