MERS Coronavirus warning

Gaza's health system is apparently days away from being overwhelmed.
Gaza's health system days away from being overwhelmed by COVID-19, advisers say

Seventy-nine of Gaza's 100 ventilators have been taken up by COVID-19 patients, said Abdelraouf Elmanama, a microbiologist who is part of the enclave's pandemic task force.

"In 10 days the health system will become unable to absorb such a hike in cases and there might be cases that will not find a place at intensive care units,"
 
In France during lockdown you must have a written "attestation" with you saying why you are out of your home, in order to show that you are out for legitimate purposes.

Apparently however the police feel that going out to "smash a guy's face in" is not considered a legitimate reason for breaking lock down in France, even if you've filled out the correct paperwork giving this as your reason.

Frenchman fined for breaking lockdown to 'go and smash a guy's face in'
 

DieHard

LE
Book Reviewer
I was gobsmacked back in April when admitted to hospital after a heart attack to find 4 patients in the emergency assessment ward and then the half empty coronary care unit. The same two weeks later after another incident led to another week in Luton before a quick rush to harefield for a triple bypass. Everyone took the virus serious and I can't fault either hospital.
After lockdown and after being admitted with pericardial effusion the waiting room and A&E were jam packed solid with people suffering from not being able to get a doctor's appointment going to the hospital instead. They have worked hard and up until just a couple of weeks ago, have saved my life 3 times and rightly proved some people wrong who mistook my high temp, effusion and shortness of breath as civic 19. This kept me in the hospital green zone
 

3ToedSloth

War Hero
What a very Branch Covidian response.
Don't like it so ignore it, next step is usually looking for spulling mistocks to further aggrandise your world view, if you're really unhinged you'll go back over 10 years of my posts to do this.

Well as you can't answer the retail staff question I'll answer yours.
Don't you have this the wrong way round? The thing with conspiracy theorists is they tend to distort all facts to suit their narrative and victimhood rather than go with the most likely explanation. You claim I've actively ignored you and that maybe I'll dedicate hours to reviewing your posting history. Someone else might observe that your question wasn't obviously directed to me seeing as there were more than 100 posts separating your 'response' to my message, you didn't copy me into it and it wasn't particularly relevant to my post.

Anyway, now that I realise you were asking me ... I have no information about the covid-19 death rate amongst supermarket workers and it would appear that neither does PHE. How many supermarket workers have died from covid 19 in England - a Freedom of Information request to Public Health England
A googling does suggest that supermarket staff were 5 times more likely to have covid-19 than the general public.

I'd do what any switched on NCO would do and go into the Pam store and get the book off the shelf.
The book would be the WHO's Boy own guide to influenza pandemics. Then ignore the word flu and follow that.
It really is quite good, covers a novel virus so there is no vaccine and quite a lot on ethics, transparency and reviews - so you can check you are actually making progress.

Sort of like how we started out, as though we we're following the book for a few weeks.
Wouldn't a "switched on NCO" simply defer to the medics and scientists who've spent their whole careers preparing for such an event?

Can you really see no merit in adapting procedures to specific circumstances as more information becomes available?

Oddly enough it doesn't say lock up the healthy to protect the sick, wear face nappies, wave around hastily produced 'studies' from Oxford that are actually just a round up of recent pro mask wearing studies that discount every over study since 1946 that suggest that masks don't work at all.

What are you suggesting is the motivation behind the policies and 'studies' - incompetence, malicious conspiracies, or those with the responsibility of actually making the decisions that will impact the lives of millions doing their best under the circumstances?

In the fullness of time we'll see how wise these decisions were. Plenty of mistakes will have been made. If an inquiry finds that masks weren't necessary then it's not going to be the biggest story and it'll be easily forgiven. Endlessly calling them 'face nappies' comes across as puerile and weakens your argument, even if it does amuse you.
 
Last edited:

3ToedSloth

War Hero
With regards masks, I've changed my position from 'useless' to 'no-one knows' and supported that position with the latest published science.

Why have I changed my position?

Because I'm open minded and led by the science.

Facemasks are so effective that the science can't decide on how effective they are.

That's quite a move from yesterday. If you keep on at this rate you'll be demanding full biohazard suits for everyone by Thursday.

1606180138059.png


But seriously, if "no-one knows" the effectiveness of face masks, then why wouldn't the authorities err on the side of caution for such a simple and cheap measure?
 
Last edited:

JCC

LE
...

And yes - your final point, I don't understand why a pandemic has been polarised to such an extent that it's sent some previously normal people into claiming things like its a political conspiracy etc etc, and also drawn up clear dividing lines.
They were fairly polarised before C19 has merely exacerbated things. What happens next will be far more interesting than this wretched bug: globalisation, big/small state, immigration etc.
 

JCC

LE
I have been repeatedly explaining to a certain site member (not you) the difference between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic. A truly asymptomatic case is one that never develops noticeable symptoms. A pre-symptomatic case is one that hasn't developed noticable symptoms yet, but will later. The incubation period is variable, and could be anywhere from a few days to a couple of weeks.

Many cases recorded as "asymptomatic" however were simply people who were tested prior to developing symptoms and were actually pre-symptomatic. According to the reports that I have read there's no exact data on the relative proportions of these, as doctors have been too busy dealing with the seriously ill to worry too much about people with mild symptoms.

The key point though is that for someone who has just tested positive there is no way to tell in advance if someone is actually going to be asymptomatic or whether they are presently simply pre-symptomatic and will develop symptoms later. You would need a time machine to look several weeks into the future to see how their case develops in order to tell the difference.

What this means is that even if there were reason to believe that asymptomatic cases won't transmit the virus to other people (although most studies say they can and do infect other people), that isn't an argument for saying they don't need to wear masks unless you are also claiming the ability to foretell the future. Because there is no way at present to distinguish between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic cases except to wait and see if they develop symptoms before they fully recover.

Which, for me, the inability to distinguish between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic undermines the mass testing strategy.

I wonder what correalation, if any, there is between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic and the Ct count?
 
But seriously, if "no-one knows" the effectiveness of face masks, then why wouldn't the authorities err on the side of caution for such a simple and cheap measure?

Well most didn't to begin with. UK CMO listed all the reasons why the public shouldn't wear masks, before they u-turned. Welsh gov did similar saying there was 'no high quality evidence' to support general mask wearing and held out for longer than England on the issue. Mounting pressure from the hysterical elements of the public made the Welsh u-turn too.

I'd much prefer an evidence-led approach than a hysterical-public-opinion-approach.

And the Norgies listed a lot of reasons why they wouldn't/haven't mandated mask wearing (incorrect dangerous use and getting lax with other stuff like hygiene and social distancing).

I'm sure everyone regularly sees people pulling on a mask as they go into supermarkets and walk straight past the sanitising stations.

I also think top-down heavy-handed legislation and enforcement, when there's a lack of high quality evidence that masks work, just divides and make large parts of the public push back.
 

JCC

LE
Well most didn't to begin with. UK CMO listed all the reasons why the public shouldn't wear masks, before they u-turned. Welsh gov did similar saying there was 'no high quality evidence' to support general mask wearing and held out for longer than England on the issue. Mounting pressure from the hysterical elements of the public made the Welsh u-turn too.

I'd much prefer an evidence-led approach than a hysterical-public-opinion-approach.

And the Norgies listed a lot of reasons why they wouldn't/haven't mandated mask wearing (incorrect dangerous use and getting lax with other stuff like hygiene and social distancing).

I'm sure everyone regularly sees people pulling on a mask as they go into supermarkets and walk straight past the sanitising stations.

I also think top-down heavy-handed legislation and enforcement, when there's a lack of high quality evidence that masks work, just divides and make large parts of the public push back.
 
Don't you have this the wrong way round? The thing with conspiracy theorists is they tend to distort all facts to suit their narrative and victimhood rather than go with the most likely explanation. You claim I've actively ignored you and that maybe I'll dedicate hours to reviewing your posting history. Someone else might observe that your question wasn't obviously directed to me seeing as there were more than 100 posts separating your 'response' to my message, you didn't copy me into it and it wasn't particularly relevant to my post.

Anyway, now that I realise you were asking me ... I have no information about the covid-19 death rate amongst supermarket workers and it would appear that neither does PHE. How many supermarket workers have died from covid 19 in England - a Freedom of Information request to Public Health England
A googling does suggest that supermarket staff were 5 times more likely to have covid-19 than the general public.


Wouldn't a "switched on NCO" simply defer to the medics and scientists who've spent their whole careers preparing for such an event?

Can you really see no merit in adapting procedures to specific circumstances as more information becomes available?



What are you suggesting is the motivation behind the policies and 'studies' - incompetence, malicious conspiracies, or those with the responsibility of actually making the decisions that will impact the lives of millions doing their best under the circumstances?

In the fullness of time we'll see how wise these decisions were. Plenty of mistakes will have been made. If an inquiry finds that masks weren't necessary then it's not going to be the biggest story and it'll be easily forgiven. Endlessly calling them 'face nappies' comes across as puerile and weakens your argument, even if it does amuse you.
My, my we are touchy aren't we?

Which conspiracy is it I ascribe too, I forget?

But I fully agree with your view on conspiracy theorists and wasn't suggesting that you should but merely its what a full on loon would (and did) do.

I honestly don't give a toss if you reply or not, the fact you feel you need to justify how long it took you to reply is again immaterial to me, I have far better things to do with my life.

So there is no conclusive evidence face nappies work, nor any evidence that, unaccountably, retail staff exposed to the general public for 8 hours a day on the shop floor suffered any disproportionate increase (I heard the same comment on Talk Radio last night) but there are no studies.
And therein lies the problem, because if there are studies/data about the larger effects of their policies the Government not only isn't publishing them but is refusing too, which implies reaction without any reason not due to a specific threat.

You asked me a specific question and I gave a specific answer. You seem to be confused how the WHO produce documents, they probably do engage experts in their various fields and ask them to produce the Pam in question.
Or do you imagine they follow some other course of action which makes their Boys Own copy of Pandemics worthless?
But I could be wrong.

In the wise words of Stuart Leslie Goddard.
Ridicule is nothing to be scared of.
 

Winnet

War Hero
Well most didn't to begin with. UK CMO listed all the reasons why the public shouldn't wear masks, before they u-turned. Welsh gov did similar saying there was 'no high quality evidence' to support general mask wearing and held out for longer than England on the issue. Mounting pressure from the hysterical elements of the public made the Welsh u-turn too.

I'd much prefer an evidence-led approach than a hysterical-public-opinion-approach.

And the Norgies listed a lot of reasons why they wouldn't/haven't mandated mask wearing (incorrect dangerous use and getting lax with other stuff like hygiene and social distancing).

I'm sure everyone regularly sees people pulling on a mask as they go into supermarkets and walk straight past the sanitising stations.

I also think top-down heavy-handed legislation and enforcement, when there's a lack of high quality evidence that masks work, just divides and make large parts of the public push back.

Hysterical? Top down heavy handed legislation and enforcement ? Bless.
 

I recently read 1984 after reading so many comments about it; it's a bit like an alternative reality. I thought Orwell was spot on when it came to the Thinkpol and how it's heretical to form opinions based on the evidence of your own eyes (you must believe what the party tell you).

And here we have police trying to stop people from actually going to work to make a living.

It's weird isn't it.
 
Which, for me, the inability to distinguish between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic undermines the mass testing strategy.
The point really is that the difference between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic is an after the fact judgement. You can only say that they were completely asymptomatic after they have fully recovered. It's' not something that can be predicted in advance, at least not with the knowledge that we have now.

So, when someone is not feeling any symptoms at the time of the test which confirms a positive case of COVID-19, the only thing you can do is to treat them as if they will develop symptoms later.

I wonder what correalation, if any, there is between asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic and the Ct count?

The following document is a bit long, but the short answer would be that with respiratory diseases Ct values have considerable variation due to the way the sample is collected, so they can only provide relative rather than absolute measurements. Blood borne diseases are easier because blood inherently gives a more consistent sample than swabbing. Different labs using different equipment will give different Ct values. So rather than trying to measure how much virus is present, all that is practical is to see if there is a measurable amount present when compared to standardised samples.

The longer answer is that its a very complex question with many factors and there's no simple answer about what Ct value is the right one. The PCR test results are therefore used in conjunction with other factors by knowledgeable health professionals.

 
Hysterical? Top down heavy handed legislation and enforcement ? Bless.

My favourite was when coppers were deploying drones in the Lake District to catch walkers out in the fresh air taking a walk.

At least we've not been tasering non-mask wears, like they do in the US, or strangle them like they do in Australia.

Not yet anyway:

 
My favourite was when coppers were deploying drones in the Lake District to catch walkers out in the fresh air taking a walk.

At least we've not been tasering non-mask wears, like they do in the US, or strangle them like they do in Australia.

Not yet anyway:

Wow, nutters assaulting cops get manhandled and arrested. Nothing like that ever happened before.
 

Winnet

War Hero
My favourite was when coppers were deploying drones in the Lake District to catch walkers out in the fresh air taking a walk.

At least we've not been tasering non-mask wears, like they do in the US, or strangle them like they do in Australia.

Not yet anyw
Give over . Those coppers from Stanley or wherever from your youth were much much less tolerant.
 
Here's a story on the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.
AstraZeneca says late-stage trials of its COVID-19 vaccine were 'highly effective' in preventing disease

The vaccine trial tried using two different doses. One method used a half dose followed by a full dose a month later. The second method used two full doses given a month apart. The first method (half dose then full dose) was 90 per cent effective. The second method (two full doses a month apart) was 62 per cent effective. The combined average was 70 per cent.


Given that the half dose followed by full dose was more effective, it's likely to be the method that will be used in practice.

Unlike some other vaccines, the Oxford-AstraZeneca one doesn't need very low temperatures and can be stored between 2C and 8C.


The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine is also cheaper than the ones from Pfizer or Moderna.


The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine is based on a weakened form of the common cold virus with the COVID-19 "spike" added onto it. This is a proven technology and different from the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, which use a new technique based on RNA.


Because the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have to be stored at very low temperatures, they may be used in institutional settings while the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine is used in more distributed community settings.


AstraZeneca say they can supply millions of doses starting in January.


The UK have ordered 100 million doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine. Canada has ordered 20 million (Canada has ordered vaccines from 7 different companies).
Wow so the AstraZenica vaccine is more effective in a smaller dose?
Surely the sensible thing to do is to reduce the dose even more then and see if it gets even more effective.
I mean that is following the science, which we always do, as long as its the right science.

I dunno though, summat is bubbling away at the back of my mind. You know back when the BBC used to produce actual educational programmes like Horizon.
Summat beginging with H?
Never mind I'm sure it'll come to me.

Damn shame about their share price though, you would have wanted to be ditching them shortly after the press release and before the FDA got their hands on actual data - though not too soon as it would seem suspicious.

I'm sure we'll go for it though and rush it through approval what with the backing of our medical expert Matty in charge, I mean you dont get your Masters for nothing do you?
 

Latest Threads

Top