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

FireballXL5 said:
Covid-19 vaccine: Allergy warning over new jab

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55244122
Click to expand...
Not particularly surprising given that the workers in question already have severe enough allergies to something else - enough to carry an epipen. In my opinion, it's pretty bold of these guys to get first in line considering they're already atopic. That's an individual decision.

An mRNA vaccine which stimulates an immune response goes a bit overboard in people known to have an overactive immune reaction to other allergens? Meh. The thing that annoys me is that this will be blown out of proportion by anti-vaxxers etc.
 
Camy89 said:
Not particularly surprising given that the workers in question already have severe enough allergies to something else - enough to carry an epipen. In my opinion, it's pretty bold of these guys to get first in line considering they're already atopic. That's an individual decision.

An mRNA vaccine which stimulates an immune response goes a bit overboard in people known to have an overactive immune reaction to other allergens? Meh. The thing that annoys me is that this will be blown out of proportion by anti-vaxxers etc.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I carry an epipen (when I remember) for a paper wasp allergy but I don't react to vaccination. So I'd have the shot but also have a slightly elevated risk of a severe creation. I'd take the risk without a second thought.
 
4bars said:
If I remember well they started to vaccinate in August as approved only in Russia while rolling the 3rd phase. In November their data showed 92% (edit) effectiveness

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54905330
Click to expand...

I guess if they collected the data from the roll out in a way that was as rigorous as a normal phase 3 trial that might be good enough. However I'd guess most countries would want a proper study rather than what is likely at best normal post-approval monitoring.
 
Posted this in the Trump Presidency thread as well.

GBvukOYddm.jpeg
 
Pogue Mahone said:
That’s a little disingenuous tbf. I’m sure there’s been days where the number of people dying of, say, heart disease or cancer would make that list.
Click to expand...

Hardly. heart disease and cancer are 1st and 2nd cause of death in US and are around 650,000 a year, meaning under 1,800 a day. could be a huge peak in a day, but statistically unlikely as they are not contagious diseases
 
Pogue Mahone said:
That’s a little disingenuous tbf. I’m sure there’s been days where the number of people dying of, say, heart disease or cancer would make that list.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t be surprised on such.

But, all these events minus the covid death days were one off tragedies where there was minimal ability for most of the fatalities to have been saved.

But to think that enough is being done by this government & the nation’s populace to stem the tide of these deaths is just not true. The acceptance that this is potentially the norm or should be the cost of doing business is such a shame.
 
Apparently more people per day are dying in the US than they did from 9/11. Just in the number of deaths, that is incredible that it seems to be swept under the rug in the States

Also I think in the UK, I think we have had more civilian deaths due to COVID than during WW2.

If both true, the sheer scale of these numbers is incredible
 
4bars said:
Hardly. heart disease and cancer are 1st and 2nd cause of death in US and are around 650,000 a year, meaning under 1,800 a day. could be a huge peak in a day, but statistically unlikely as they are not contagious diseases
Click to expand...

Well there you go. An average of 1800/day means it’s inevitable there will have been days where the numbers were well over 2k. These things aren’t perfectly evenly distributed.

Anyway, I’m just being pedantic. The US is getting a staggering death toll from covid and the fact that so many are down to blatant mismanagement must be infuriating.
 
acnumber9 said:
I’d argue a 10pm curfew is only going to make people more likely to go back to somebody’s house afterwards.
Click to expand...
In all honesty, those people will likely go back to someone's house regardless.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Can't remember exactly who I had this debate with at the time in this thread. Some were disagreeing that closing the pubs 1hr earlier would make feck all difference to transmission.

Well...

"'No hard evidence' behind curfew"
https://www.bighospitality.co.uk/Ar...its-Patrick-Vallance-Coronavirus-restrictions
Click to expand...

Is there much hard evidence behind any of the UK's decisions during this? Most of the rules have been done in complete isolation from what the rest of Europe and the world has been doing.
 
Don't see how relevant citing 9/11 is. The US is among a long list countries in the 800+ deaths per million range, when you have a large area counted as one country it will generate large numbers. If the US reaches 1600-2000 deaths per million then that would be out of the norm. Multiple countries have posted around 900 deaths in Europe, per capita that would be around 5k deaths in the US, there's still another ~2k to go before being on par and without going into when the dates actually happened as it's relative and goes back days and weeks for every single day announcement.
 
zing said:
I think western media’s coverage of Russian and Chinese tech is extremely cynical and biased.
I don’t know if it is justified in this instance but when I read the news, I do not feel like it can be trusted.

Pfizer getting EUA was reported as being a huge positive milestone but when China or Russia do the same thing, it is reported as rushed/untested.
Click to expand...
Really? There is big money to be made for anyone who can make an effective vaccine..

If someone does, they'll share their data with everyone.. have it reviewed and start licencing it... or taking orders.

Where is the data for the vaccines from China and Russia? Have they submitted their data for peer review anywhere?
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Can't remember exactly who I had this debate with at the time in this thread. Some were disagreeing that closing the pubs 1hr earlier would make feck all difference to transmission.

Well...

"'No hard evidence' behind curfew"
https://www.bighospitality.co.uk/Ar...its-Patrick-Vallance-Coronavirus-restrictions
Click to expand...

Of course there isn’t any hard evidence. How do you generate hard evidence? Implement a curfew on every second pub and compare incidence rates between them? There’s not much hard evidence behind lots of measures. I mean, there’s hard evidence that closing all pubs permanently brings transmission down but when it comes to finding ways for them to keep trading, despite the obvious risk to the lives of staff/customers (which is the reason curfews etc were implemented) all you can do is try and apply some common sense. Which is what he explains in that interview.

If the hospitality trade are insisting on hard evidence to support every decision then they should never have been allowed to reopen. Because we know for a fact that this increases transmission of the virus.
 
I find the current method best in terms of pubs. All sales stop at 10pm and you have an hour drink up time. You find that people leaving is staggered, whereas before where you had to be out the doors by 10, you found everyone got that last drink and everyone left at the same time. Still remember the first Friday the curfew kicked in, the queues for supermarkets at half 10 were ridiculous.
 
Personally I'd have stopped it at 9pm at least then you're stopping a drinking session before it's begun. Pubs should be food only, no one needs a fecking pint in a pandemic.
 
Smores said:
Personally I'd have stopped it at 9pm at least then you're stopping a drinking session before it's begun. Pubs should be food only, no one needs a fecking pint in a pandemic.
Click to expand...
The people who work in them probably need their jobs though.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Well there you go. An average of 1800/day means it’s inevitable there will have been days where the numbers were well over 2k. These things aren’t perfectly evenly distributed.

Anyway, I’m just being pedantic. The US is getting a staggering death toll from covid and the fact that so many are down to blatant mismanagement must be infuriating.
Click to expand...

Yeah, over 3k a day is unacceptable and seeing the infection rates will not go down anytime soon. And then Trump saying that they are getting 16% heard immunity like "look at that". Is not mismanagement, is straight negligence and done on purpose to push their non science narrative
 
Just read 3000 died in the US in a single day. That's beyond mental. What a crazy place.
 
zing said:
I think western media’s coverage of Russian and Chinese tech is extremely cynical and biased.
I don’t know if it is justified in this instance but when I read the news, I do not feel like it can be trusted.

Pfizer getting EUA was reported as being a huge positive milestone but when China or Russia do the same thing, it is reported as rushed/untested.
Click to expand...

Russia and China haven't tested their vaccine to a level and/or in a way that allows them to be approved in countries with a rigorous approval process.

The press could throw a party for the Chinese and Russian vaccine makers and it still wouldn't get approved.
 
Is there any reason not to put London into tier 3 now? It's already miserable and dead anyway due to anything remotely cheerful being banned, even though you can still get on a packed tube whenever you feel like it. I don't see what real difference it would make other than making the trains a bit less busy.

London is usually buzzing and full of life this time of year and we've turned it into a anxiety inducing dead zone. I went for a walk across Tower Bridge and along the Southbank today, and between the lack of anyone being allowed to do anything and military helicopters flying in between buildings it felt like a scene out of a zombie apocalypse movie. It's all a bit sad and I know it's saving the NHS from being overun but I can also understand how a lot of people have just had enough of it.
 
noodlehair said:
Is there any reason not to put London into tier 3 now? It's already miserable and dead anyway due to anything remotely cheerful being banned, even though you can still get on a packed tube whenever you feel like it. I don't see what real difference it would make other than making the trains a bit less busy.

London is usually buzzing and full of life this time of year and we've turned it into a anxiety inducing dead zone. I went for a walk across Tower Bridge and along the Southbank today, and between the lack of anyone being allowed to do anything and military helicopters flying in between buildings it felt like a scene out of a zombie apocalypse movie. It's all a bit sad and I know it's saving the NHS from being overun but I can also understand how a lot of people have just had enough of it.
Click to expand...

One of my favourite walks when I lived there :(
 
11101 said:
Is there much hard evidence behind any of the UK's decisions during this? Most of the rules have been done in complete isolation from what the rest of Europe and the world has been doing.
Click to expand...
True.

For example, my family had decided to have a 3 household Christmas Day. But also decided to all self isolate for 7 days prior to the 25th to reduce any risk. The UK government has never suggested this but it seemed wise. Then, yesterday I see a clip of Merkel asking German citizens to consider doing just that.

I struggle to think of a countries government other than Trumps USA who have handled this worse than our lot.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Of course there isn’t any hard evidence. How do you generate hard evidence? Implement a curfew on every second pub and compare incidence rates between them? There’s not much hard evidence behind lots of measures. I mean, there’s hard evidence that closing all pubs permanently brings transmission down but when it comes to finding ways for them to keep trading, despite the obvious risk to the lives of staff/customers (which is the reason curfews etc were implemented) all you can do is try and apply some common sense. Which is what he explains in that interview.

If the hospitality trade are insisting on hard evidence to support every decision then they should never have been allowed to reopen. Because we know for a fact that this increases transmission of the virus.
Click to expand...
You generate hard evidence by analysing track and trace data. Or run a survey. Or, better still, you use the hard evidence you already have, as you stated "there’s hard evidence that closing all pubs permanently brings transmission down". We chose the worst of both Worlds, viral spread and big economic damage due to harsher lockdowns being required to compensate for inadequate policy decisions.

I think everyone would appreciate hard evidence and logic behind the government's decision. Yes, the article i shared was hospitality focused but there are multiple news outlets covering it

Personally I think the government shouldn't have allowed hospitality to re open. The options were that, or leave them fully open. The closing 1 hour earlier was tokenism and would not have had an impact even it hadn't meant people cramming into pubs at the same time, drinking faster and then piling out into packed streets together. It was bloody obvious.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Of course there isn’t any hard evidence. How do you generate hard evidence? Implement a curfew on every second pub and compare incidence rates between them? There’s not much hard evidence behind lots of measures. I mean, there’s hard evidence that closing all pubs permanently brings transmission down but when it comes to finding ways for them to keep trading, despite the obvious risk to the lives of staff/customers (which is the reason curfews etc were implemented) all you can do is try and apply some common sense. Which is what he explains in that interview.

If the hospitality trade are insisting on hard evidence to support every decision then they should never have been allowed to reopen. Because we know for a fact that this increases transmission of the virus.
Click to expand...

If they want hard evidence perhaps data from Victoria should be used to justify a closure of all hospitality venues?

The bottom line is all restrictions are likely to help even if it is is just to make things less shit than they are.
 
3000 deaths a day!! :wenger: :eek: I'm just struggling to get my head around that in a poor African country for any reason let alone in the USA. That's 30,000 new deaths in 10 days. :( And it's 300,000 new deaths in just over three months.

Shiieeeet. I know lots die due to cancer, malaria, even alcohol/drug/nicotine abuse, but to die in that number because of simply not wearing a mask and keeping some social distance is mind numbing. What other species on earth goes through such mass suicide/murder? Lemmings? Surely, that's just a myth too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.