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

Wibble said:
Sounds like bollocks as the proof seems to be,

1) Bio-engineering is possible
2) A bio-engineering lab exists near the Wuhan wet market
3) QED is was bio-engineered in that lab and escaped somehow.

Not totally impossible but ...........
Click to expand...
The most interesting part for me was that there are no colonies of that type of bat within a few hundred km of Wuhan, and that they interviewed dozen of people who frequented the market and all of them said that they don't sell bats there.

Which leaves a few possibilities (I would say in order of likelihood, but just a hunch):

a) their analysis is wrong
b) bio-engineered or natural, but leaked from Wuhan lab which experiments with bats.
c) came from an intermediate species who was infected in nature from a bat.
 
Revan said:
The most interesting part for me was that there are no colonies of that type of bat within a few hundred km of Wuhan, and that they interviewed dozen of people who frequented the market and all of them said that they don't sell bats there.

Which leaves a few possibilities (I would say in order of likelihood, but just a hunch):

a) their analysis is wrong
b) bio-engineered or natural, but leaked from Wuhan lab which experiments with bats.
c) came from an intermediate species who was infected in nature from a bat.
Click to expand...

All human coronavisuses that have bat origins have infected humans through intermediate hosts (Civet and camel I think) so the location of the bat population is irrelevant. Assuming infection was in the Wuhan wet market the intermediate host would presumably have been sold/butchered there.
 
mu4c_20le said:
A mask does not guarantee protection from the virus, but it's a pretty cheap and effective way defend against it. In that scenario you posted, if you weren't wearing a mask on the train, then the droplets coughed/sneezed by maskless people will directly contaminate your mouth and your face. The only downside I can see, besides panicking the public into hoarding them up like toilet paper, is when it gives people a false sense of security. But if I knew there was an outbreak in the city or town I'm in, I'd definitely wear it as an added precaution amongst other things.
Click to expand...

What you've done is just assumed a worst case-scenario.

TLDR - provided you obey the social distance rules, you don't need a mask.

Long answer:

Most of the droplets, even the small ones, will likely fall to a surface because they have sufficient momentum (from coughing/sneezing) to avoid "becoming suspended" in the surrounding non-moving air. "Becoming suspended" means that the droplets remain within the air for some period of time before they fall (or more technically settle) in the ground. The only likely way you can become "contaminated" on a train via this mechanism is if you don't obey the social distance instructions or someone deliberately coughs/sneezes in your face.

Admittedly there is some ambiguity as to how far apart you should be from an infected individual. This is because there are a range of different droplet sizes and each has different momentum for various reasons. In essence this means droplets can go off along different paths from the mouth, potentially reaching different distances away from the infected individual. But in non-moving air, the droplets will fall to the ground (settle) pretty quickly, regardless of the paths they follow when they leave the mouth. As long as the social distancing of 6ft or whatever is obeyed, you won't need a mask to protect you from others coughing/sneezing because the distance proposed is likely to be conservative.
 
0le said:
What you've done is just assumed a worst case-scenario.

TLDR - provided you obey the social distance rules, you don't need a mask.

Long answer:

Most of the droplets, even the small ones, will likely fall to a surface because they have sufficient momentum (from coughing/sneezing) to avoid "becoming suspended" in the surrounding non-moving air. "Becoming suspended" means that the droplets remain within the air for some period of time before they fall (or more technically settle) in the ground. The only likely way you can become "contaminated" on a train via this mechanism is if you don't obey the social distance instructions or someone deliberately coughs/sneezes in your face.

Admittedly there is some ambiguity as to how far apart you should be from an infected individual. This is because there are a range of different droplet sizes and each has different momentum for various reasons. In essence this means droplets can go off along different paths from the mouth, potentially reaching different distances away from the infected individual. But in non-moving air, the droplets will fall to the ground (settle) pretty quickly, regardless of the paths they follow when they leave the mouth. As long as the social distancing of 6ft or whatever is obeyed, you won't need a mask to protect you from others coughing/sneezing because the distance proposed is likely to be conservative.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree but aerosol transmission is possible, t stops you touching your face to some degree and other people often aren't good at social distancing. But to me the biggest advantage is that if you are infected it significantly reduces your ability to infect others. And all of this is about reducing risk of infection.

That said I'm not wearing one yet and being paranoid about social distancing.
 
91555801_2575313892575124_538230032925982720_o.jpg

Some years ago, this was were FC Porto's hockey, basketball, handball, and other sports team played. Since FC Porto now has its own pavilion, it has been used a general arena for concerts, fairs, etc, probably the most iconic in the city.

I find this creepy, despite the emptiness.
 
Revan said:
I couldn't find the paper, so yes, it is more from what I read on other sources mentioning the paper, rather than the paper.

The citation you mentioned comes from a US lab, but does the removed paper I am talking about comes from Wuhan/China? I cannot comment on the language of the paper, but isn't it strange that it comes from a Chinese university, and then was removed entirely? Shame that it was not put in arxiv (well, I guess biorxiv, which I assume is the arxiv equivalent for biology), where a paper cannot be removed.
Click to expand...

The research gate one comes from China, but Guangdong not Wuhan. It's copied fully in the blog that was linked here. You can read it and decide, just from the style I think it was written as a blog not as a paper.
 
Fridge chutney said:
@Leroy The Red

UK has been behind the curve on this and they did not need to be. It's tragic.
Click to expand...
Yeah like I said in the other thread...

Not sure why you’re talking about the government. Its clear I’ve been referencing the general population. You made out as if you were ahead of things and were criticising people for ‘not taking it seriously’ and telling me to listen to Charlie Austin when literally you yourself only took a ‘serious’ stance at the start of the month, which is completely fine btw. I just don’t really understand why you’ve taken this whole Gandalf the wise stance.
 
Wibble said:
I don't disagree but aerosol transmission is possible, t stops you touching your face to some degree and other people often aren't good at social distancing. But to me the biggest advantage is that if you are infected it significantly reduces your ability to infect others. And all of this is about reducing risk of infection.

That said I'm not wearing one yet and being paranoid about social distancing.
Click to expand...

I think I should have added and made clearer in the post you quoted of mine and my other posts (@Revan) that I am arguing based on probabilities, not absolutes. You are correct that regardless of where you are and what the surrounding conditions are, you can't gurantee zero transmission, but the possibility of transmission will reduce with increasing distance from the infected patient.

I agree with what you said, masks can stop those already infected from spreading the disease. My point of view here though is that people who are sneezing/coughing should be self-isolating already and should not be in public. People who have the infection but don't have obvious symptoms may exhale droplets when they breathe. If you are practising social distancing than it shouldn't really be an issue indoors. This could potentially be more problematic outdoors because it would be simpler for the droplets to become suspended in the air. But I'm not sure if you can exhale droplets through normal breathing.

We must also reiterate the points about masks:
  • Some offer little to no protection for inhalation of droplets e.g. surgical masks.
  • Some respirators offer fair protection to inhalation (FFP1), others are better (FFP2) and some better still (FFP3).
  • The reusable ones have a better quality seal than the disposable ones. But both seals depend on facial features like hair.
  • There are half respirators (cover nose/mouth) and full respirators (cover your entire face).
  • It becomes difficult to breathe through some masks as the filters clog up, so you shouldn't really offer a mask to someone who is already ill. See the description here.
  • The majority of people won't care or bother to look up which type of masks they have, nor look up how to wear them properly. This means that many may still inhale droplets, giving them a false sense of security.
  • A lot of people will also keep re-using the same desposable mask. Whether this is a good idea or not is anyones guess, I certainly don't know and if I went to the trouble of buying and wearing these masks for this purpose, then I wouldn't risk it.
I agree that some people will be incapable of social distancing/ self isolation. I guess a lot of this discussion is then about how you view the risk for each individual.
  1. NHS Keyworkers: I think we all agree they will definitely need it. As stated above, this must be the focus. NHS workers are trained professionals and much more likely to use the appropriate masks properly. They have a non-negligible probability of exposure, at some point, via aerosol transmission.
  2. Those already infected (wth symptoms): Masks for people already infected won't help the infected individual, as already explained above. The filter(s) will clog up and may make it even more difficult for these individuals to breathe. I'm not sure if integrated oxygen masks exist but if they do they would be more expensive/complex to use.
  3. Other individuals: Those who find themselves surrounded either by idiots (people refusing to self isolate and/or refusal to practice social distancing) e.g. at a supermarket may feel they need it as well.
But we do need to draw a line somewhere. You almost certainly won't need to wear a mask going for walks. You probably won't need to wear a mask at home if everyone in your household is following instruction. And the chances are, you probably won't need a mask for the supermarket because lots of people are actually listening to the advice, at least for now.
 
Wibble said:
I only have a few so I'm wary of using them up too soon.
Click to expand...
I've been re-using the same single mask since it all started, one I had spare from when I did some decorating last year. I bought some new ones from Amazon back in Feb which never arrived. I've now got a few n95 masks on their way from the USA - perhaps they'll arrive before it's all over.

It's very clear when you go out here that people have one mask which they're using all the time, as they're all looking a bit worn-out now.
 
Wibble said:
We are all stressed I think is the answer. I know I'm not managing my stress that well.

I didn't think your original post deserved more than someone saying why log scales were used and I think under normal circumstances that is what would have happened.

So lets all let this lie and carry on shall we (that was directed to everyone BTW)?
Click to expand...

Yes, I guess you're right, and why I didn't further engage when another poster had try to reignite the conversation last night. I figured the conversation had been carried to its conclusion to be honest.
 
Revan said:
Anyone can find the paper form South China University of Technology on the origin of covid-19 virus, which concludes that the virus most likely came from a Wuhan laboratory?
Click to expand...

Have you read the title of this thread?
 
Revan said:
The most interesting part for me was that there are no colonies of that type of bat within a few hundred km of Wuhan, and that they interviewed dozen of people who frequented the market and all of them said that they don't sell bats there.

Which leaves a few possibilities (I would say in order of likelihood, but just a hunch):

a) their analysis is wrong
b) bio-engineered or natural, but leaked from Wuhan lab which experiments with bats.
c) came from an intermediate species who was infected in nature from a bat.
Click to expand...

Based on our past experiences with coronaviruses this is the one. As an example MERS-Cov came to humans from dromedaries but they were only an intermediary species which is generally required for the evolution of the virus from its original host to humans. So there is most likely one animal, exotic or not, that was infected by Covid-19 and infected someone from that point it's a simple interhuman contamination.
 
JPRouve said:
Based on our past experiences with coronaviruses this is the one. As an example MERS-Cov came to humans from dromedaries but they were only an intermediary species which is generally required for the evolution of the virus from its original host to humans. So there is most likely one animal, exotic or not, that was infected by Covid-19 and infected someone from that point it's a simple interhuman contamination.
Click to expand...
I read an article the other day suggesting the intermediary species was a pangolin. I don't think it's accepted as a fact yet, but apparently based on similar viruses that pangolin are known to carry, it's a strong contender.

Incidentally, that same research also suggested that the jump from animal strain to human strain, was followed by a further mutation that made it much more deadly to humans.
 
How the hell did he get voted as president. And what's worse, he will almost certainly be voted again this Fall.
 
cyberman said:
Hes a dickhead but hes not wrong. The Tories actions cant be swept under the carpet by Murdoch etc despite how inappropriate it is to bring it up
Click to expand...

Who isn’t wrong? Trump?

Hahha, cnut said it was a democrat hoax in Feb, a few days ago he wanted to open in Easter.

He’s been wrong about fecking everything, except that he understands his whataboutism will fool idiots.
 
Adisa said:
His deflections don't even make sense. Don't have a clue why they always work.
Click to expand...


I love the country of America in itself, but the hoardes of right-wing Americans who voted this guy in, are now seeing the full hell of what they voted for begin to show itself.

This is what happens when you vote for a narcissistic businessman, a PR machine and a salesman and expect him to be a leader. He is reverting to what he knows best - self-preservation and 'protecting his brand' by deflecting attention away from the matter at hand and talking about other countries.

There will be many a right-wing, older American gasping for breath on their deathbed thinking what might have been had they not voted for someone just because he was an open racist.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Who isn’t wrong? Trump?

Hahha, cnut said it was a democrat hoax in Feb, a few days ago he wanted to open in Easter.

He’s been wrong about fecking everything, except that he understands his whataboutism will fool idiots.
Click to expand...

You can take what he said in isolation and as preposterously hypocritical as it is, that quote is objectively correct.
 
JPRouve said:
Based on our past experiences with coronaviruses this is the one. As an example MERS-Cov came to humans from dromedaries but they were only an intermediary species which is generally required for the evolution of the virus from its original host to humans. So there is most likely one animal, exotic or not, that was infected by Covid-19 and infected someone from that point it's a simple interhuman contamination.
Click to expand...
pangolin seems to be mentioned a lot.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Too early for that Pex.

This thing will “play out” over a long time. A vaccine in 2021 at the earliest.
Click to expand...

Its not too early at all. We already have the facts, they were using the wrong data model and working against international consensus. They realised they had screwed things up and changed course quickly. The whole “timing” narrative is typical governmental spin.
 
Pexbo said:
Its not too early at all.
Click to expand...

Of course it is, if a vaccine comes in say July 2021, lockdowns will have to stop in the next 2 months and then what?

There is a long long time for this to play out, and sadly, lots of people will die.

Every single government in the World lost their chance at a quick “easy” solution by not shutting out China in January.
 
jojojo said:
I read an article the other day suggesting the intermediary species was a pangolin. I don't think it's accepted as a fact yet, but apparently based on similar viruses that pangolin are known to carry, it's a strong contender.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's the original suspect but it's worth mentioning that officially we don't know who is the first human infected. For SRAS-covid 1 the suspected intermediary species is the Asian palm civet but even then it's not accepted as fact, just a strong possibility.

If people are interested Ebola and bats is an interesting subject to google, there is a lot of reading material. People may start to understand that we don't know as much as we think, for example the 800km argument used in one of the earlier tweets makes little sense when you consider the idea that for a while we thought that Ebola-Marburg like viruses were only from central Africa, now we know that some bats in West Africa(Liberia) and China have that type of filoviruses, the chinese one is named Mengla virus(MLAV) and genetically a filovirus between Ebola and Marburg.
 
Wibble said:
I don't disagree but aerosol transmission is possible, t stops you touching your face to some degree and other people often aren't good at social distancing. But to me the biggest advantage is that if you are infected it significantly reduces your ability to infect others. And all of this is about reducing risk of infection.

That said I'm not wearing one yet and being paranoid about social distancing.
Click to expand...
Trust me it really doesn't and people are better at social distancing rather than knowing how to use and put a mask on.

There are couple of important things to be noted(most of which are already covered):
1. reusable masks have to be changed every 1-2 hrs or as soon as it picks up moisture as they do zero prevention otherwise.
2. it builds bacteria on the inside and especially in hot days they become contaminated/damp very quickly.
3. large number of people don't know how to wear it or don't wear it properly because it impedes their normal breathing.
4. most people begin to touch their face more often to fix their mask or they touch the mask inside and out when they remove it temporary.
5. masks(ffp2 and ffp3) that actually prevent the droplets to come through are significantly more expensive and there is a shortage everywhere at the moment.
6. they also give you a false sense of security and in this way you won't distance yourself from others in the same mould of when you are not wearing one.
7. there are also other masks with ventilation which only protects you and doesn't let that much moisture to build on the inside but lets all droplets outside which is exactly the opposite of what masks should do.
 
Wibble said:
I don't disagree but aerosol transmission is possible, t stops you touching your face to some degree and other people often aren't good at social distancing. But to me the biggest advantage is that if you are infected it significantly reduces your ability to infect others. And all of this is about reducing risk of infection.

That said I'm not wearing one yet and being paranoid about social distancing.
Click to expand...

Unless the virus is instantly destroyed when a droplet evaporates to the surroundings then aerosol transmission is certainly possible. I'd have to calculate to be certain but many of the small droplets coughed/sneezed into dry air are going to evaporate in seconds - leaving the virus in open air?

A quick google suggests the mean size of a cough drop is about 8 microns. If I were guessing I'd say most don't ever reach the ground due to their small size, they are more likely to evaporate leaving the virus aerosolised.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Of course it is, if a vaccine comes in say July 2021, lockdowns will have to stop in the next 2 months and then what?

There is a long long time for this to play out, and sadly, lots of people will die.

Every single government in the World lost their chance at a quick “easy” solution by not shutting out China in January.
Click to expand...

Its all about time. This virus spreads exponentially, if you stop the spread earlier the number of cases is drastically lower and then you buy yourself time which is absolutely invaluable. Time to figure out what treatments are effective, time to manufacture PPE equipment and medical equipment like ventilators, time to get emergency wards in place, time to train healthcare staff up to date on the specific protocols required for the pandemic, time to negotiate international deals for the raw materials required to produce equipment, time for new equipment to be developed, tested and rolled out.

Our initial response was to allow a large majority if the population to get the virus and accept the fact that a few million would die. That response would have overwhelmed our health service and it wouldn’t have “just” been the old and vulnerable dying, as if that’s acceptable in a compassionate society anywaym
 
Pexbo said:
Its all about time. This virus spreads exponentially, if you stop the spread earlier the number of cases is drastically lower and then you buy yourself time which is absolutely invaluable.
Click to expand...

Oh absolutely, I’m not arguing that, but locking people in has never ever been done before. It worked in Wuhan seemingly but that’s one city, not an entire country and they had the biggest army in the World to enforce it.

I think Italy is in big fecking trouble, bigger than what they have seen so far, despite their drastic actions.

There’s no evidence SO FAR that locked in countries like Ireland and UK won’t end up with massive problems regardless in 3-4 months.

So that’s why I say it’s too early.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.