I think the researcher meant social distancing in some form. Things will ease up, but sporting events and concerts will still be cancelled. People who can work from home will probably keep doing so.
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
I think the researcher meant social distancing in some form. Things will ease up, but sporting events and concerts will still be cancelled. People who can work from home will probably keep doing so.
Except we currently have no real evidence that there is a lack of immunity or people getting it a second time.
Not that immunity is a given, but at least partial immunity is likely, at least until a vacine potentially speeds up the mutation of the virus that doesn't currently seem to be evolving very quickly.
Neither do I.
There's now a handful of European countries on the road to releasing lockdown in some shape or form, and more will follow. If there's a second wave, which is probably likely towards Autumn/Winter, there'll be another period of lockdown. Bottom line is even if a vaccine ever transpires, not EVERYONE will be entitled to get it anyway. It'll be prioritised for those considered to be seriously at risk - or at least, that's how I see it going down.
So young and relatively fit people will still be required to get on with their everyday lives as much as possible. We are not going to see an 18month worldwide quarantine or dystopian perverse fantasy that some people seem desperate to see happen.
And yeah, once other countries are working to some kind of normality (with some restrictions still, of course), you can bet Trump and Boris will want to join the party ASAP.
I definitely think I think 10k plus large concerts, top level sports and festivals will be on hold till late 2021. I think pubs, theatres, cinemas, theme parks, gyms, museums and restaurants might be a challenge to wait till late 2021.
There was a research paper from South Korea that looked at 300-400 recovered patients. The young adults in that group produced little to no antibodies, which suggests that immunity is rare for young people. This in return means that it could last until we have a vaccine
Happy for someone to correct my uneducated musings here but if patients that have had the virus are not producing antibodies, firstly how exactly did they recover from it and secondly how can we expect to produce a vaccine if people aren't even producing antibodies when exposed to the actual virus?
Another 293 deaths in Belgium today, 179 of them occured in a nursing home.
While I only condemn Trump cutting funding to WHO, certainly when they have a role to play in the world wide fight against Covid-19. Trump will not be the only world leader who cuts funding to charitable style organisations. Governments are going to be by necessity utterly desperate to save money everywhere they can and cutting funding to organisations that don't just benefit there population are going to be one of the first things to go.
https://figshare.com/articles/Serol...antibodies_collected_in_March_2020/12116778/2
fits with the 100X plus undetected cases. 0.6% of blood donors had antibodies in Scotland...this virus was obviously circulating for some time before cases grew enough to cause the noticeable fraction of severe cases?
fits with the 100X plus undetected cases. 0.6% of blood donors had antibodies in Scotland...this virus was obviously circulating for some time before cases grew enough to cause the noticeable fraction of severe cases?
Exactly, there is some immunity for people who have had it, the question is the degree. There would be many more cases of people catching it twice were this not the case.
To me looking at different news reports what becomes quite evident (to me) is that testing for this is fecking impossible. Nothing seems to be accurate at all.
WHO's advice has been a lot more useful to Americans than the federal government's advice in the past 4 months. The WHO benefits US citizen's, and that had been the bipartisan consensus for decades.
This is him trying to deflect blame by laying it at the feet of those more competent and capable than him.
I've got a friend who is an ICU nurse, took 2 weeks before she got tested and given results and then the result was inconclusive (both a positive and a negative) so she has to wait another week to be tested again.
You wonder how many are off longer than necessary due to poor tests.
On top of that there is very little guidance on testing for some of the labs that have offered to do it.
My company are meant to start testing as of next Monday. We have a PCR machine and an experienced operator. I was talking to her yesterday and there has been little guidance on receiving or disposing of the samples.
We‘re having to cobble together new working practices to ensure a portion of the building in sectioned off and no crossover of staff happens. She says the virus is ‘deactivated’ and shouldn’t be a problem but a lot of us aren’t so confident, there seems to be no risk assessments available.
0.60% of the Scottish population (5.5m) is about 33k. Scotland have about 6500 positive cases .
Not sure about the 100x math there..
5-10 times more .. about 1% infected.. likely.
My wife's best friend is a nurse. She currently lives with another nurse in Wythenshawe and work at Wythenshawe hospital.
The roommate had a temperature and a cough.So they both had to isolate. The NHS sent them to get tested the next day.
A week later neither of the nurses had received results. The first nurse had no symptoms so went back to work.My wife's friend has just returned after two weeks isolation. They had something back after ten days saying the initial results were negative but they needed further testing (?).
Pretty crazy really.
Well.. considering 2m out of 7500m+ have tested positive, the odds of the same person testing positive twice aren't that high.. a lot of the cases are probably asymptomatic.
I have no idea what the chances of reinfection are.... But even if there are 500 cases of people getting reinfected, probably shouldn't be ignored
Iceland median age 36.5, UK 40.5, Finland 42.5, Italy 45.5. Also just like Germany and S Korea, Iceland's numbers will probably rise. Having said that, obviously not everyone gets tested. But there is a real reason for Iceland's number in this moment, they are very young population.
The people who have tested positive are most likely to be in hotspots, which is how they contracted the disease initially, so you are not comparing against 7500m+. There are also lots of people who are stuck in hospitals/care homes and have recovered, and haven't got the virus again while it is still prevalent around them.
There was a research paper from South Korea that looked at 300-400 recovered patients. The young adults in that group produced little to no antibodies, which suggests that immunity is rare for young people. This in return means that it could last until we have a vaccine
Do you have a link?
Saxony has already said schools are reopening next week for years 10 and 12 to allow them to prepare for their final exams.
Social distancing isn’t the same thing as the current lockdown. There are less intense versions we can implement, with varying degrees of keeping people apart. The lockdown can’t go on much longer, whatever happens. The economic cost is too high. But we’re heading into at least another year or two of social distancing IMO.
And if we can’t make a vaccine or post-infection immunity doesn’t last (which are both very possible outcomes) then we may have to change the way we interact with each other permanently. Because otherwise we’re relying on the virus mutating into a less virulent form, which is unlikely considering how efficiently it reproduces right now.
This doesn't mean that on AVERAGE it can be detected only for 5 days, like you claimed when I asked you. It means that mild cases are detected for 5 days, so average case is detected for a lot longer, just as I suspected.
I told him this also already couple of days ago, but apparently because Swedish hospitals are so amazing, it wasn't possible.
Which is very close to the % quoted in a Danish study looking at blood donors. They came up with 1.5%.
My understanding is that this current wave is likely to end with 6.5% of the population infected (in the UK). Which means another 5-10 waves needed before herd immunity achieved without a vaccine.
And that’s only if immunity persists for a long time after infection. Which is a huge bloody “if” If not, we’re looking at cycles repeating once or twice per year, forever. Unless an effective long-lasting vaccine can be developed (another huge “if”)
I'm not so sure. The pic doesn't look very convincing, but then I read this article:
https://www.tpr.org/post/another-mega-drive-planned-after-10000-people-line-san-antonio-food-bank
Last edited:
Dear god. The test took place 3 days after on weighted average. I told you so, you are giving missinformation here, as well as being annoying.
I agree with what you say, if we do the same thing. I think we'll have to at some point bite the bullet and allow it to transmit through the least at risk population quite quickly, as we won't be able to afford 5-10 periods of lockdown.
Given the difference in how it affects men and women, I imagine that could mean allowing men under 40 and women under 60 back to normal life, with greater restrictions on everyone else. I doubt that would be politically feasible though.
Apparently theres studies that suggest that people who display little symptoms have few antibodies when they recover which means there is no herd immunity after all.
And God knows how bad it is if you get 2 or 3 infections. Each wave could erode our immune systems even further
I was accounting for the date of the testing - confirmed cases were about 100? Might be more than 100X based on that number. Puts the death rate close to the flu.
Believe it or not, the current UK policy is already intended to protect the most vulnerable. Yet we’re seeing thousands of people dying in care homes up and down the country. God help them if/when there’s a future cycle with even less of an effort made to minimise spread.
That’s another unknown. It’s actually much more likely that second and subsequent infections are less serious than the first. Although it’s not impossible that they get worse each time (which happens with Dengue fever).
If that does turn out to be the case - and we can’t develop an effective vaccine (which is not an unlikely outcome) - then we’re probably looking at humanity being wiped out completely.
oh that’s good then.
Its a horrible situation, but the only outcome in which loads of people don't die is if a vaccine is created. Bill Gates doesn't believe that will be for 18 months, and we can't afford to maintain the current situation for that long.
As soon as this virus made the jump to humans, the situation was always going to be awful. Its a really difficult problem to balance current deaths, near term death rates with healthcare capacity and then longer term economic problems.
On the bright side, Liverpool will never win another league title. So there’s always that.
I have read a lot of fear mongering on the topic, but this one takes the cake. Humanity was not wiped out by the plague, it will not get wiped out by this.
If what you wrote is true (and those are two big huge enormous ifs) it will obviously be very bad, but there is no chance of it wiping out humanity.
Also, if it turns out that the virus causes everyone who recover from it to cause a spontaneous Hiroshima-sized nuclear blast three months after testing negative; the Earth will become uninhabitable.
While I’m on a doom and gloom spree, the 18 month vaccine timeline really needs to stop being mentioned. This is the absolute best case scenario. Where nothing that can go wrong during development does go wrong. Every assumption is correct. Every decision made by the developers is the right one.
AND we somehow find a way to manufacture and distribute the vaccine at a scale that no pharmaceutical company has ever come close to achieving before. Which can only start in earnest when we know which candidate we’re going with, in which dose, via which route of administration.
Believe me, that best case scenario in drug development NEVER happens. Far too many moving parts. We have to constantly reevaluate and change our approach based on what we learn during the development process. And all too often, the whole thing needs to be scrapped completely. In fact that’s what happens to the vast majority of candidates that we test.
So yeah, vaccine in 18 months. Not going to happen. Absolutely no chance.
The “no vacccine if” is moderate to small, I’d say. The “worse with each infection if”, is very big, agreed. Thank feck! It’s definitely a possibility though.