Typical, even the virus follows the boom bust cycle
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
They definitely were in my neighbourhood last year, but there didn't seem to be any uptick. You'd hope that with vaccination in the mix the same would be true this year.
St Helens, I thought after I posted that question that it might have something to do with fasting. I didn't mean any disrespect.
Just walked by a huge protest going through parliament square. Fecking idiots.
You weren't disrespectful at all mate, I wouldn't worry.
https://nicholaswade.medium.com/origin-of-covid-following-the-clues-6f03564c038
Long read. But it’s convinced me it was a lab leak. Although I’m admittedly only red the arguments in favour of it so far!
Long read. But it’s convinced me it was a lab leak. Although I’m admittedly only red the arguments in favour of it so far!
Read a book
I’ve said it from the beginning that I feel the most logical conclusion is that something they were working on in a coronavirus lab in Wuhan accidentally escaped somehow. The other theory in my opinion is a cover story. I mean how could you tell the world that you are responsible for working on viruses that there was no vaccine for, and once they got out was responsible for killing millions
We know for certain is wasn't genetically engineered. A naturally evolved virus and an genetically engineered one are so obviously different that they can't be mistaken for each other. The similarities to the SARS and MERS also strongly suggest that this is just another similar event.
Finally this sort of virus would also be a terrible bio-weapon.
I’m not saying it was made, I’m saying it was worked on.
min the Wuhan lab, which happens to work with coronavirus, which happens to be funded by one of the top scientists who denied it
Last edited by a moderator:
You weren't disrespectful, I just find it mad in the UK how in most schools things like Eid isn't taught at a young age!
It probably is nowadays, but it didn't used to be.
I dunno. I'm 27, and I thought everyone my age were taught about different cultures and what not. Not until I got to uni I realised this was far from the case.
Out of interest have you read the article I posted yesterday in here? It contradicts the sentence in bold - though well aware for all I know you may have more knowledge on virology than myself
What he writes goes against what the scientific community in general, and virologists specifically, think the evidence suggests.
As a retired science journalist he writes well but he employs a trick that got his last book on human evolution slammed by the science community and all of the scientists whose work he used to allegedly support his opinion. What he does is decide on an outcome and uses snippets of information to back his predetermined opinion up. What a scientist does is the opposite. They use the evidence to form a hypothesis then test that hypothesis. Evidence builds and a synthesis of understanding builds and adapts with the evidence.
I'm not a virologist (and neither is he) but I suspect that an actual virologist would dissect his thesis very quickly.
What I read, and he avoids, is that if this were genetically engineered it would be entirely obvious to anyone who studied it. A bit like looking at a horse and another horse with a leg from a zebra grafted on. His arguments also seem highly similar to the God of the gaps approach that creationists use to try to "prove" that evolution isn't real. Avoid all the actual evidence and find some minor thing the evidence doesn't (yet) prove.
Some of his arguments are just plain silly. For example he seems to think that because we found the intermediate host for SARS and MERS the fact we don't know the intermediate host for SARS-CoV-2 yet means something dodgy has occurred. This is simply a ludicrous assertion. We still don't know the intermediate host for HIV FFS. And we aren't 100% sure that SARS was transmitted to humans by civets, likely but not 100% sure.
I think he shows his hand towards the end where he seems to head into conspiracy theory territory by blaming a cabal of self interested virologists, the Chinese and US governments with Dr Falchi specifically name checked. It is also probably telling that the only place that will publish his article is his own blog.
Last edited:
Whats the deal with Ivermectin? Hearing a lot about it.
Seems like the HCQ equivalent of this year. Being prescribed en masse here in India upon symptoms onset.
A mystery really. Loads of supposed "clinical trials" that turn out only to a have tiny numbers of participants, and no placebo group. Bigger trials (400 patients) that seen to show marginal effects like mild/moderate cases recovering a day or so earlier - particularly when it's used in conjunction with other drugs.
A couple that suggest some protection against progression to more serious disease, but when you look closer the trials don't have enough over 50s to get statistically valid data. The most dramatic trial included placebo group patients who went into hospital the day after the trial started - which is more like coincidence than evidence.
It's real enthusiasts recommend it as a preventative, taking it daily for months. Again there's a lot of anecdotal stuff on it working, but the enthusiasts are mostly young healthy adults, with an interest in health and nutrition. Again no blinded, randomised placebo group though. Just meta-analyses that compare them to groups that don't necessarily match them in terms of comorbidities or behaviours.
Personally, I don't know why people would want to take a drug daily, rather than have a vaccine. But then I don't take any drug daily, so maybe I'm the odd one.
There are some effects that on the face of it look worthy of a bigger (properly managed, broadly based, randomised, placebo controlled) trial of its use as part of a "covid lemsip" type approach for newly diagnosed patients. But so far the only trials that look like properly run drug trials have seen no statistically significant benefit. So it hasn't inspired anyone to go from hundreds of trialists to thousands.
TLDR
I have no idea why people want to take a random drug used off label without any proper evidence on efficacy.
Not disagreeing with what you wrote, just pointing out that I for example am not saying it was engineered. I’m saying they already had it in their coronavirus lab and were studying it
Of course there isn't a substitution for vaccine - but who are these doctors that are advocating for it's use? There are apparently doctors alliance stressing that it be approved asap. Not talking about the annoying conspiracy theorists.
Essentially they're doctors who desperately want something they can do to help their patients.
There's a nice background piece at:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAMegQIIxAC&usg=AOvVaw3NfUChG0BO7zBCl7u2bAam
The trouble is the clinical evidence. It mostly started with individual GPs etc trying it on 10 people and saying they all got better. Bigger trials either saw minimal results or they had no placebo group, making the results hard to interpret without bias.
Bias is a huge issue for doctors, like everyone else. If you want to believe something, because you really hope it works, it becomes about what you've, "seen with your own eyes." Unfortunately that doesn't always lead to fair control comparisons, random choices of test subjects, or realism about what the actual advantages were. To the point where its enthusiasts don't actually want trials because, "people are dying without it."
Meanwhile the doctors who aren't impressed with the data so far, would actually need to be impressed to make them see the value in running a large scale trial themselves.
It's not the only drug where people leapt to use it, because then you could feel like you were doing something. Convalescent plasma sounded great until they trialled it properly.
That said, Remdesivir doesn't seem to have that much going for it when you look at the stats, and it's found a market, and a very profitable one.
In the UK the Indian variant seems to be surging but the overall numbers aren't. When this all shakes out could this just be the Indian strain replacing the Kent variant as the dominate one rather something that's going to necessarily lead to an huge increase in case numbers?
It does seem to be infecting younger people more but surely with vaccines the infection rates among unvaccinated is higher than among vaccinate groups with the Kent variant too?
It does seem to be infecting younger people more but surely with vaccines the infection rates among unvaccinated is higher than among vaccinate groups with the Kent variant too?
News reports suggesting heavily hit Bolton has only seen a rise in unvaccinated people ending up in hospital (so younger people). No increase in elderly admissions (the vaccinated).
It will only completely replace the Kent variant if it’s significantly more infectious or more resistant to vaccines. In both scenarios we’re likely to see some sort of surge, as restrictions are lifted.
If it’s only very slightly more infectious or very slightly resistant than there’s unlikely to be much of a surge but then it would be unlikely to replace the Kent variant.
Not sure this is enough evidence to support her conclusions but I’ve seen lots of similar tweets about mental health in the young during the pandemic. Eating disorders and self harm have gone through the roof. Hopefully we can all be a bit less judgemental the next time we see a gang of kids drinking cans in the park. I’ve even heard about people calling the police to stop a bunch of teenagers playing a game of football because “they weren’t social distancing”.
108 to 134 ... Even if we assume its directly linked to the lockdown, that isnt going to affect the policy regarding opening/shutting schools. it shouldnt.
If opening schools is safe, it should be open. If it is a risk, 26 more deaths over a year wont change that.
Also, as a side note, the tweet doesnt mention the numbers for the adult suicides.. I was curious so googled a bit..
apparently the numbers are usually 25-30 times higher than the youth numbers.. so a 11% decrease is pretty substantial
https://www.pe.com/2021/03/30/south...onavirus-pandemic-but-not-among-young-people/
If opening schools is safe, it should be open. If it is a risk, 26 more deaths over a year wont change that.
Also, as a side note, the tweet doesnt mention the numbers for the adult suicides.. I was curious so googled a bit..
apparently the numbers are usually 25-30 times higher than the youth numbers.. so a 11% decrease is pretty substantial
https://www.pe.com/2021/03/30/south...onavirus-pandemic-but-not-among-young-people/
Last edited:
You're right about tolerance, I've had to work to overcome being too judgemental myself, It's kind of human nature though, it's a hard thing to beat.
As for the figures, I'm guessing that in any period of history where there was a big increase in deaths, serious illness and continually mentioned threat to personal health then there might me a jump in youth suicide, so yeah, conclusions will be hard to draw.
108 to 134 ... Even if we assume its directly linked to the lockdown, that isnt going to affect the policy regarding opening/shutting schools. it shouldnt.
If opening schools is safe, it should be open. If it is a risk, 26 more deaths over a year wont change that.
Also, as a side note, the tweet doesnt mention the numbers for the adult suicides.. I was curious so googled a bit..
apparently the numbers are usually 25-30% higher than the youth numbers.. so a 11% decrease is pretty substantial
https://www.pe.com/2021/03/30/south...onavirus-pandemic-but-not-among-young-people/
It’s just a small piece of the jigsaw in isolation but I keep hearing similar stats from everywhere. In Dublin there was a 58% increase in child/adolescents presentations with mental health crises to A&E departments in the second half of last year compared to 2019. With a much higher % than usual either admitted or referred for urgent specialist assessment, which implies that even that dramatic increase is the tip of the iceberg.
There seems to have been calming of Indian variant panic
Not a surprise but good to confirm
https://www.miragenews.com/covid-19-virus-may-not-insert-genetic-material-562236/
https://www.miragenews.com/covid-19-virus-may-not-insert-genetic-material-562236/
As per my following post, this same pattern is being seen everywhere.
But are they statistically significant? They may well be but it wouldn't be a surprise if thay California data isn't.
I haven’t seen any formal analysis published yet but the trend is obvious. Or talk to someone working on the front line. They will all tell you the same thing. Child and adolescent mental health services are being completely overwhelmed.
I'm just talking about that data set. 126, 119, 108, 134 for an average of 121.75 out of a data set of about 10 million. I'd be really surprised if there was a significant statistical difference and if so there is no trend, just statistical noise. The 11% reduction in adults with a sample size of about 30 million is however likely to be statistically significant.
You’d need to do the actual statistics to make any sort of claim about significance, one way or the other.
Add stand error bars and if there isn't a decent gap between them they aren't going to be statistically significant different. In this case all 4 will almost totally overlap.
But you have to calculate the size of those error bars. And even if they overlap there could still be a statistically significant difference. Basically, it’s complicated and no reason to dismiss what looks like a trend worth discussing.
Add 1 SD error bars to that data and there is virtually 100% overlap. With SD error bars a significant gap (usually about half the size of the bars themselves), and not just no overlap between bars, will be present when there is a significant difference. In those cases the SD error bars are almost 100% overlapped for each data point so the chances of there being a significant difference is close to nil.