So, coronavirus...

[fishfoodie]

US CDC now forecasting another 92,000 deaths .... in the next three weeks.

... and the piece of shit pretending to be POTUS lists this as an achievement of his Presidency

[Ymx]

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/14/heal ... index.html

Covid-19 infection grants immunity for five months, UK study suggests

Hopefully this not the case or same time period for vaccination else I’m going to have to jump in to the bimbo camp on this.

[Hong Kong]

[Raggs]

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/14/heal ... index.html

Covid-19 infection grants immunity for five months, UK study suggests

Hopefully this not the case or same time period for vaccination else I’m going to have to jump in to the bimbo camp on this.

What exactly is the bimbo camp? It's also 83% effective, which is lower than vaccine effectiveness. They are preparing to have yearly covid jabs I believe.

Why is this a problem?

[Saint]

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/14/heal ... index.html

Covid-19 infection grants immunity for five months, UK study suggests

Hopefully this not the case or same time period for vaccination else I’m going to have to jump in to the bimbo camp on this.

It's at least 5 months they say - largely because that's effectively how long they followed the group It could well be longer.

Bear in miond that vaccines tend to produce stronger responses, and we're going to be having a second dose as a "booster", it's extremely likely that the protection is MUCH longer. But we won't know how much longer until we start getting some age in the process. The whole thing right now from first infection in China till today is still only 15 months

[Tichtheid]

If we have to have an annual booster, count me in.

[Ymx]

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/14/heal ... index.html

Covid-19 infection grants immunity for five months, UK study suggests

Hopefully this not the case or same time period for vaccination else I’m going to have to jump in to the bimbo camp on this.

It's at least 5 months they say - largely because that's effectively how long they followed the group It could well be longer.

Bear in miond that vaccines tend to produce stronger responses, and we're going to be having a second dose as a "booster", it's extremely likely that the protection is MUCH longer. But we won't know how much longer until we start getting some age in the process. The whole thing right now from first infection in China till today is still only 15 months

I hadn’t appreciated there would be need for such regular shots. Especially as one roll out is likely to take longer than 9 months. Perhaps even a whole year.

[Raggs]

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/14/heal ... index.html

Covid-19 infection grants immunity for five months, UK study suggests

Hopefully this not the case or same time period for vaccination else I’m going to have to jump in to the bimbo camp on this.

It's at least 5 months they say - largely because that's effectively how long they followed the group It could well be longer.

Bear in miond that vaccines tend to produce stronger responses, and we're going to be having a second dose as a "booster", it's extremely likely that the protection is MUCH longer. But we won't know how much longer until we start getting some age in the process. The whole thing right now from first infection in China till today is still only 15 months

I hadn’t appreciated there would be need for such regular shots. Especially as one roll out is likely to take longer than 9 months. Perhaps even a whole year.

That rollout is for 2 doses, and is limited by production issues. There's not really an alternative anyway.

[Saint]

It's at least 5 months they say - largely because that's effectively how long they followed the group It could well be longer.

Bear in miond that vaccines tend to produce stronger responses, and we're going to be having a second dose as a "booster", it's extremely likely that the protection is MUCH longer. But we won't know how much longer until we start getting some age in the process. The whole thing right now from first infection in China till today is still only 15 months

I hadn’t appreciated there would be need for such regular shots. Especially as one roll out is likely to take longer than 9 months. Perhaps even a whole year.

That rollout is for 2 doses, and is limited by production issues. There's not really an alternative anyway.

Yeah.

The liklihood is that the vaccine will probably cover at least 24 months, if not longer. But we don't know for sure about any of this, because the virus hasn't even been in the wild for 24 months. The requirement for boosters long term is completely speculative at this point and is something we will only really start to understand over the next 3-4 years

[I like neeps]

If grabbing a coffee can kill why are coffee shops open? Hmm.

[Biffer]

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/14/heal ... index.html

Covid-19 infection grants immunity for five months, UK study suggests

Hopefully this not the case or same time period for vaccination else I’m going to have to jump in to the bimbo camp on this.

It doesn’t say five months, that’s it, bam. They’re confirming it lasts for at least five months, and that it’ll continue to be tracked. No scientist could say it definitely lasts longer than that currently because you don’t have a cohort of definite cases to track.

Also, effectively being infected is the same as getting a single dose of the vaccine. The second dose then provides further immunity.

[TheNatalShark]

If grabbing a coffee can kill why are coffee shops open? Hmm.

Sounds like the situation with pubs and clubs in March. We recommend you don't go to them, but we aren't going to tell them to close.

[tc27]

Finally:



11 months too late.

[I like neeps]

If grabbing a coffee can kill why are coffee shops open? Hmm.

Sounds like the situation with pubs and clubs in March. We recommend you don't go to them, but we aren't going to tell them to close.

It's to shift the blame. They should tell coffee shops to close, they could if they wanted to. But they won't. Because people will now just blame people for going to coffee shops and not the govt.

[JM2K6]

Err I mentioned virulence not transmissibility and clarified why in my response.
Transmissibility and virulence are completely different.

I see, guess you can take your pick of which is more threatening.

No there is no question that virulence is more threatening

No? A virus that is half as virulent but twice as transmissable is a far, far bigger problem than the reverse.

[C69]

I see, guess you can take your pick of which is more threatening.

No there is no question that virulence is more threatening

No? A virus that is half as virulent but twice as transmissable is a far, far bigger problem than the reverse.

No not where the variants discussed is concerned imho in the context I gave.

If a virus is so contagious that almost everyone gets it with no effect upon morbidity or mortality then I would take that over an extremely virulent virus that causes serious illness and death in greater amounts than the more contagious almost benign virus for instance.

Speaking generally not about Covid specifically.

[Hong Kong]

Finally:



11 months too late.

11 months too late and giving everyone a 4 day warning as well! It is fucking ludicrous the way they have responded to this virus

[JM2K6]

No there is no question that virulence is more threatening

No? A virus that is half as virulent but twice as transmissable is a far, far bigger problem than the reverse.

No not where the variants discussed is concerned imho in the context I gave.

If a virus is so contagious that almost everyone gets it with no effect upon morbidity or mortality then I would take that over an extremely virulent virus that causes serious illness and death in greater amounts than the more contagious almost benign virus for instance.

Speaking generally not about Covid specifically.

It certainly depends on what numbers you're talking about. "Incredibly contagious virus, almost everyone gets it, no effect" isn't really meaningful. Obviously everyone would take a virus that doesn't harm us in any way!

The original post talked about these variants being a threat because they're more transmissable. It's a fact that it's *more* dangerous for them to be more transmissable than more virulent until you get to the extremes, because that's how maths works. There was a great thread on this by an epidemiologist but I can't find it because Twitter sucks, but, yeah, no-one's really seen much in the way of reduced virulence so any increase in transmission rates from new variants is bad news. It's just maths (and we're ignoring that higher infection counts guarantee a higher number of mutations...)

[Margin__Walker]

It's to shift the blame. They should tell coffee shops to close, they could if they wanted to. But they won't. Because people will now just blame people for going to coffee shops and not the govt.

Yeah, the situation being shit because people aren't being responsible and are not doing what they are told is clearly something the government are trying to foster where they can.

Understandably, as it conveniently shifts the blames from their own failings in introducing clear and timely controls at every turn.

[JM2K6]

It's to shift the blame. They should tell coffee shops to close, they could if they wanted to. But they won't. Because people will now just blame people for going to coffee shops and not the govt.

Yeah, the situation being shit because people aren't being responsible and are not doing what they are told is clearly something the government are trying to foster where they can.

Understandably, as it conveniently shifts the blames from their own failings in introducing clear and timely controls at every turn.

And the evidence from actual studies and that appears to be that people are overwhelmingly following guidelines.

[Slick]

It's to shift the blame. They should tell coffee shops to close, they could if they wanted to. But they won't. Because people will now just blame people for going to coffee shops and not the govt.

Yeah, the situation being shit because people aren't being responsible and are not doing what they are told is clearly something the government are trying to foster where they can.

Understandably, as it conveniently shifts the blames from their own failings in introducing clear and timely controls at every turn.

Well, it's true. The basics of this are "don't be a dick" and a decent minority of people don't seem to be able to manage that.

[I like neeps]

It's to shift the blame. They should tell coffee shops to close, they could if they wanted to. But they won't. Because people will now just blame people for going to coffee shops and not the govt.

Yeah, the situation being shit because people aren't being responsible and are not doing what they are told is clearly something the government are trying to foster where they can.

Understandably, as it conveniently shifts the blames from their own failings in introducing clear and timely controls at every turn.

And it's working according to the polls!

Hopefully this a coffee can kill policy backfires because people are surely, surely going to think we'll if so close the shops! We'll see how gullable Joe Public really is.

[JM2K6]

Found a variant (heh) of the thread I was talking about

[JM2K6]

It's to shift the blame. They should tell coffee shops to close, they could if they wanted to. But they won't. Because people will now just blame people for going to coffee shops and not the govt.

Yeah, the situation being shit because people aren't being responsible and are not doing what they are told is clearly something the government are trying to foster where they can.

Understandably, as it conveniently shifts the blames from their own failings in introducing clear and timely controls at every turn.

Well, it's true. The basics of this are "don't be a dick" and a decent minority of people don't seem to be able to manage that.

No policy is going to be followed by everyone and that is taken into account by everyone drafting these things to begin with, as was acknowledged before we even had the first lockdown. But it would appear that adherence to the regulations is very high.

[Slick]

Yeah, the situation being shit because people aren't being responsible and are not doing what they are told is clearly something the government are trying to foster where they can.

Understandably, as it conveniently shifts the blames from their own failings in introducing clear and timely controls at every turn.

Well, it's true. The basics of this are "don't be a dick" and a decent minority of people don't seem to be able to manage that.

No policy is going to be followed by everyone and that is taken into account by everyone drafting these things to begin with, as was acknowledged before we even had the first lockdown. But it would appear that adherence to the regulations is very high.

OK, my statement is still true

[JM2K6]

Well, it's true. The basics of this are "don't be a dick" and a decent minority of people don't seem to be able to manage that.

No policy is going to be followed by everyone and that is taken into account by everyone drafting these things to begin with, as was acknowledged before we even had the first lockdown. But it would appear that adherence to the regulations is very high.

OK, my statement is still true

I can't agree. The situation is bad because the virus has become more transmissable and yet we have less strict measures than for the first lockdown.

[I like neeps]

Well, it's true. The basics of this are "don't be a dick" and a decent minority of people don't seem to be able to manage that.

No policy is going to be followed by everyone and that is taken into account by everyone drafting these things to begin with, as was acknowledged before we even had the first lockdown. But it would appear that adherence to the regulations is very high.

OK, my statement is still true

You're always going to have people who are dicks. But the government are being stupid by the messaging of "it's your fault". If you make people believe there's widespread breaking of the rules it makes breaking the rules less bad. It's a self fulfilling prophecy.

And the coffee thing is stupid a coffee outside with a friend is legal. If it can kill ... Ban it!

[C69]

I'm not going to argue over this matter.
I've seen enough deaths from Covid to last me a lifetime.

I would just hope it fizzles out.

[Slick]

JMK, Neeps, yup, good points. I do think there has to be some responsibility though, everyone knows it's a bit daft to be going into a coffee shop at the moment, just don't do it.

[JM2K6]

JMK, Neeps, yup, good points. I do think there has to be some responsibility though, everyone knows it's a bit daft to be going into a coffee shop at the moment, just don't do it.

I think we're agreeing, but the regulations allow for it, right? So the problem isn't really "people aren't following the rules" but "the rules are dangerously lax".

[Denny Crane]

How might this interpretation of the science be understood? Is it flawed?

[Insane_Homer]

[JM2K6]

How might this interpretation of the science be understood? Is it flawed?

Hey uh it takes two seconds to google if someone is a source to be trusted or not and you've posted a few things "casting doubt" now

https://factcheck.afp.com/new-zealand-d ... ed-youtube

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health ... unreliable

[I like neeps]

JMK, Neeps, yup, good points. I do think there has to be some responsibility though, everyone knows it's a bit daft to be going into a coffee shop at the moment, just don't do it.

I think we're agreeing, but the regulations allow for it, right? So the problem isn't really "people aren't following the rules" but "the rules are dangerously lax".

I don't agree. If going for a coffee was dangerous and driving transmission they'd shut coffee shops. If you think coffees are killing people it's a no brainer. Shops are shut, schools are shut, why is takeaway coffee more essential? It isn't and they aren't so making coffee shops being dangerous a talking point so everyone thinks people are going to coffee shops to congregate and that's why we have sky high death rates right now is very cynical messaging.

I agree with slick that people are dicks but the government messaging is irresponsible and intent on causing division.

[Raggs]

How might this interpretation of the science be understood? Is it flawed?

Hey uh it takes two seconds to google if someone is a source to be trusted or not and you've posted a few things "casting doubt" now

https://factcheck.afp.com/new-zealand-d ... ed-youtube

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health ... unreliable

I wouldn't bother JMK, it's becoming apparent that despite the fact I'm sure he'd assure us "He's just asking questions." much like every conspiracy nut, he's not actually wanting answers. He has the answers he wants (someone posted a really nice link on how Qanon works in the US thread I think by a game designer).

Again, though, for those at the back.

Australia. ~30000 cases. 12.25M tests.

Total positivity = 0.24%

It's basically impossible, therefore, for false positives to be higher than 0.24%, otherwise we'd be seeing even more cases in Australia.

EDIT - ANd unless the PCR has a 100% false negative, most of those cases caught in Aus are likely covid sufferers, so it's almost certainly less than that.

[tc27]

250k vaccinated today in England.

Growing towards the 300k we need

[Ymx]

250k vaccinated today in England.

Growing towards the 300k we need

[JM2K6]

The adorably crotchety old lady in the downstairs flat got hers today I assume - a special bus picked her up and dropped her off later.

My mum's due for hers tomorrow.

[Openside]

Apropos of nothing my my late fathers wife died in hospital today, I will be very interested what goes on the death certificate.

[Raggs]

Apropos of nothing my my late fathers wife died in hospital today, I will be very interested what goes on the death certificate.

Was she tested for coronavirus, or you're just hoping to be able to lower the charges to manslaughter?