Generic Virus Thread

[VillaJ100]

56 minutes ago, Genie said:

Is it just a coincidence that Wuhan is now the worlds leading research centre for coronavirus? Do they have some advantage?
 

Link

It really pisses me off that life there is effectively totally back to normal whereas here we will be dealing with it for years. And it will be truly expensive, not like the bailout (gov bonds converted to bank shares sold at a smallish loss years later) but like world war expensive. It does make you think if they knew much more than they were letting on. It appears approximately 20% of people are already immune as well as they have had a similar enough coronavirus in the past, a bit like people who had the 1895 Russian Flu coped better during the Spanish Flu.

I really feel like the first lockdown should have been complete and total isolation of the whole country unless your job is truly essential, like NHS or working in a nuclear power plant. Army on the streets and a government issued food parcel delivered once a week and lasting for 3-4 weeks. £5000 fine if caught outside without a permit. It would have total shit for those weeks but would have completely broken the transmission of the virus. The impose a very strict quarantine/screening on anyone coming into the country.

[Xann]

[HanoiVillan]

@bickster did you see this?

more on thread.

[blandy]

9 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

@bickster did you see this?

 

Need to be a bit careful with a self selecting survey. Students were invited to participate by answering the questions, and of then of those who responded...

I mean it can't show for example [if there were] a group who behaved differently and didn't reply. You'd expect the type of person who does respond to be more likely to follow precautions and so on.

That goes for any survey of that nature.

[Enda]

3 hours ago, darrenm said:

About 2 weeks after the kids went back to school in September I had the worst cold I've ever had. It properly knocked me for 6 for a few days. I knew it was a cold and not COVID because I had the snot, blocked nose, all the symptoms of rhinovirus. But also with a high temperature and fever. And I never lost my sense of taste and smell.

A couple months ago, I had a stuffed nose, a few sneezes, bit of a headache, but normal temperature. Sense of taste was fine. I went to work, assuming it was nothing more than hay fever. The lady had the same symptoms, also felt fine to work, but said she’d get a test as a precaution.

At noon I got a phone call from herself, telling me to come home right away. It wasn’t hay fever - she’d tested positive for COVID.

I spent the next week in bed, flattened. Slept like a log, well over 12 hours a day. Never did get a positive test, either. A similar thing happened to my brother: exposed to a choir group that had it, knocked out for a week, but no positive test.

All of which is to say the textbook symptoms aren’t a perfect guide and neither are the tests. I reckon a lot of people had it, and spread it, thinking they had a cold.

[HanoiVillan]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

Need to be a bit careful with a self selecting survey. Students were invited to participate by answering the questions, and of then of those who responded...

I mean it can't show for example [if there were] a group who behaved differently and didn't reply. You'd expect the type of person who does respond to be more likely to follow precautions and so on.

That goes for any survey of that nature.

This is the way the ONS gather statistics, and kind of hard to see how they could do so much differently. I contribute to ONS statistics because they send me letters in the post; it's true that their surveys conducted that way will not capture data from people who don't open their post, but what are you going to do.

The results are clear enough that reporting bias is unlikely to be the whole story IMO.

[blandy]

11 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

This is the way the ONS gather statistics, and kind of hard to see how they could do so much differently. I contribute to ONS statistics because they send me letters in the post; it's true that their surveys conducted that way will not capture data from people who don't open their post, but what are you going to do.

The results are clear enough that reporting bias is unlikely to be the whole story IMO.

Sure, it is hard to see how else they could have (under the current circs) conducted a/the survey. It's a common method.

But the reporting bias assumption is (I think) valid. I strongly suspect for any survey which asks a question "did you do a bad thing" the responses will under-play the reality. I'm not discounting what it reveals, just cautioning that it cannot be definitive and needs to be understood with the obvious caveats. I mean if you e mail football fans of a club and ask if they're misbehaved at matches you'll get a response where the bad boys will not reply, or if they do some will fib, which will skew the outcome of the survey.

[HanoiVillan]

8 minutes ago, blandy said:

Sure, it is hard to see how else they could have (under the current circs) conducted a/the survey. It's a common method.

But the reporting bias assumption is (I think) valid. I strongly suspect for any survey which asks a question "did you do a bad thing" the responses will under-play the reality. I'm not discounting what it reveals, just cautioning that it cannot be definitive and needs to be understood with the obvious caveats. I mean if you e mail football fans of a club and ask if they're misbehaved at matches you'll get a response where the bad boys will not reply, or if they do some will fib, which will skew the outcome of the survey.

Nothing in this field can be 'definitive'. Only God can know the exact whereabouts and intentions of 100,000 people. What we have is a large-sample survey (100,000 students invited to participate) and participants will have been secure in the knowledge that any answer they gave would not lead to any negative outcome. No, it's not some ontological 'truth', but it's the best that can be done and the ONS don't just pump out crap. 

[sidcow]

21 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Nothing in this field can be 'definitive'. Only God can know the exact whereabouts and intentions of 100,000 people.

He really can't. 

[mjmooney]

6 minutes ago, sidcow said:

He really can't. 

Apparently he relies on some bloke called Rod, and his staff. 

[sidcow]

1 minute ago, mjmooney said:

Apparently he relies on some bloke called Rod, and his staff. 

 

[Mark Albrighton]

 

[Genie]

Yesterday Boris was telling the country that the number of stranded lorries was not the 500 reported but was reduced to something like 175 (due to their good work).

Today it’s reported there are 3,000 lorries stranded. 
The man is just on another level of idiocy.

[Genie]

Maybe we could clap for the lorry drivers?

In all seriousness though, it must be pretty grim.

 

Edited December 22, 2020 by Genie

[mjmooney]

This vaccine rollout is interesting. Over 80s are getting it round here now, ahead of NHS frontline staff. However... the doctor next door was telling me that she and a few colleagues had had them this week, simply because people hadn't been turning up for their appointments, and the vaccine has to be used up once it's been thawed out, or it goes to waste. She also said that they're not giving it to anyone who's had covid in the last 90 days, but longer ago than that, the antibody protection is uncertain, so those people can get the jab. I've no idea whether this official policy, so don't quote me. 

[choffer]

2 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

This vaccine rollout is interesting. Over 80s are getting it round here now, ahead of NHS frontline staff. However... the doctor next door was telling me that she and a few colleagues had had them this week, simply because people hadn't been turning up for their appointments, and the vaccine has to be used up once it's been thawed out, or it goes to waste. She also said that they're not giving it to anyone who's had covid in the last 90 days, but longer ago than that, the antibody protection is uncertain, so those people can get the jab. I've no idea whether this official policy, so don't quote me. 

That’s exactly how my niece got it. She’s a medical student and the hospital she’s at right now had a bunch of spares that had to be used that day. Makes me wonder if I should just hang about a hospital at the end of the day, on the off/chance they’ve got any spares knocking about. 

[Chindie]

I hear that works for valium as well.

[sharkyvilla]

30 minutes ago, choffer said:

That’s exactly how my niece got it. She’s a medical student and the hospital she’s at right now had a bunch of spares that had to be used that day. Makes me wonder if I should just hang about a hospital at the end of the day, on the off/chance they’ve got any spares knocking about. 

He said not to quote him.

[bickster]

Tony Blair being radical. I offer this without comment as I've not fully read it myself

Quote

We are in a race against time – we must change our vaccine policy now

...

Therefore, the present vaccination plan must be altered and radically accelerated.

As it is now, much of the country will not be vaccinated until spring or summer. The economic and health damage, physical and mental, caused by such a timetable will be colossal...

he Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency should clear the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine within days, to add to the Pfizer one. We have several million doses available and with perhaps another 15 million available in January. It is a two-dose vaccine, but even the first dose will provide substantial immunity, with full effectiveness coming with a second dose two to three months later – longer than originally thought...

 

We should consider using all the available doses in January as first doses, that is, not keeping back half for second doses. Then, as more production is rolled out, we will have enough for the second dose. Thirty million Johnson and Johnson vaccines – which is a one-dose vaccine – should also be with us by end of January. We should aim to use them all in February.

We should continue to prioritise frontline health staff and the most vulnerable, but let this not hold up vaccinating others. The aim should be to vaccinate as many people as possible in the coming months. The logic behind age is naturally heightened risk of mortality. But if it is the spread we’re anxious about, then it makes sense to consider vaccinating those doing the spreading, in particular certain occupations or age groups such as students.

Revisit the logistics plan to see if we can’t radically increase the volume of vaccination. If the vaccines are available, is it really impossible – given the gravity of our plight – to cover a majority of the population by the end of February?

Sort out the mass testing problem! I know it is argued that the rapid antigen tests are insufficiently accurate. My own sense – based on the research from my institute – is that yes, the PCR tests are the gold standard; but antigen tests have a crucial role. In Liverpool – which remains in tier 2 – the government has conducted a mass testing experiment where 25 per cent of all positive cases have been found in asymptomatic carriers through lateral flow rapid tests.

On a national scale this could identify and curtail significant spread. There is a risk of a false negative with rapid tests; but at present all untested asymptomatic Covid cases are essentially false negatives. A 30-year-old asymptomatic Covid sufferer, unaware of their condition, could have a high viral load and be helping the virus mutate.

...

The Indie on MSN

[villakram]

30 minutes ago, bickster said:

Tony Blair being radical. I offer this without comment as I've not fully read it myself

The Indie on MSN

Hardly surprising that Tony Blair has no shame. 

Simply amazing temerity displayed by this political creature. Imagine speaking up about public policy given his shameful record.