Coronavirus Thread

[SpacedX]

7 minutes ago, danny. said:

Please do point out when I'm spreading cr4p, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...(Joking)

[danny.]

2 minutes ago, Line-X said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...(Joking)

This is just proof you are a shapeshifter TBH, get back to your hollow moon spaceship 

[whoareyaaa]

3 hours ago, Line-X said:

This is not as you seem to think some sinister global political agenda to increase state control, although I do agree we need to be very wary of the future implications of the proposals already effected and those proposed - and this has been discussed in great detail on here. This is a war against nature, with one shape shifting common foe.

 

Personally, I am more concerned about the security threats from China and Russia who are investing billions in AI and biothech. Ultimately though, the average global temperature is likely to rise by more than 1.5°C within the next 20 years and if we do not take immediate action, very likely in excess of 2.5°C by the turn of the century. Trust me, if that happens, that certainly isn't a world anyone in the future wants to be part of. 

It has came out of a lab, the virus is man made there is an agenda going on... population decrease to help with climate change is my conclusion regarding conspiracy theories  

 

These variations and boosters are going to keep coming out and making people weaker over time.

 

That's my conspiracy theory of the whole thing obviously the virus is real and the jabs may help in the short term, what about long term? and the virus may effect people in different ways as we see, some may be fine others not so... I still don't think you should point fingers if people are not vaccinated not you personally but in general.

[Phil Bowman]

1 hour ago, Soup said:

Yes obviously I know that haha. I happen to listen to music all the time but not sure what your point is? Unless me refusing a booster will stop my Spotify account 

No point at all, other than to pretend I thought your profile pic meant you wanted there to be no music and no life.

[Buce]

53 minutes ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

Unfortunately, when society as a whole cannot come together and pull on one string for the sake of everyone else and it is 2 minutes to midnight, then the Governments have to step in. I don't see this as something that should be accepted forever, however, at the moment those countries are at breaking point when it comes to health services and action needs to be taken to protect thousands of people. Once the health system gets to a better state, I would expect rules to soften again and unvaccinated to be given back some freedoms.

 

It is very simple, get vaccinated if you want to enjoy all those freedoms. If not, then be prepared to have things taken away from you at least for a short period. We are lucky in the UK that uptake has been so high otherwise we might well be facing the same situation.

 

We had our "freedoms" taken away in March 2020. The majority of people accepted that it was needed. Doesn't mean that the Government control your life more than before.I bet there are people in America that would think their freedom is taken away if firearms were banned, but to most people it would be a safer/more sensible approach. Governments are there to make laws on certain matters that cannot be controlled by society alone. If you don't like a government's stance, make sure you vote for someone you think would do better and suit your views. And worst case, if your freedom rights are taken away and severely restricted (of which this is not one, at least just yet), then there is the opportunity to protest with likeminded people. Count yourself lucky that you do not live in Russia, China, North Korea or many other ruled countries like that.

 

The govt is legislating to curtail precisely that opportunity, and very few are speaking out.

 

https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/93/human-rights-joint-committee/news/156037/government-plans-to-change-law-to-restrict-demonstrations-breach-human-right-to-protest-says-jchr/

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

It has came out of a lab, the virus is man made there is an agenda going on... population decrease to help with climate change is my conclusion regarding conspiracy theories  

 

These variations and boosters are going to keep coming out and making people weaker over time.

 

That's my conspiracy theory of the whole thing obviously the virus is real and the jabs may help in the short term, what about long term? and the virus may effect people in different ways as we see, some may be fine others not so... I still don't think you should point fingers if people are not vaccinated not you personally but in general.

Tbh if we don't do something regarding the matter (not Malthusian solutions) then climate change will do a perfectly competent job of that population reduction by itself. Extremely competent, most likely.

[Dunge]

Regarding transmission and the virus still being transmissible even through vaccination, I think someone above who said not to deal in absolutes is correct, and it’s all to do with the R number again. I know this kind of thing has been said before and I imagine for many it’ll be preaching to the converted, but for anyone still wondering how it could work, hopefully this might help:

 

Imagine a scenario with people who are unvaccinated against people who are vaccinated. So here are the following people, unvaccinated, and how many other people they pass the virus on to:

 

Andy - gets virus, passes it on to 2 other people.

Ben - 1

Chris - 0

Dave - 1

Eli - 0

Fred - 5

Gavin - 0

Henry - 2

Ian - 0

Jim - 1

 

And then imagine the same people doing the same things, but this time vaccinated.

 

Andy - gets virus, still passes it on to 2 other people.

Ben - 1

Chris - 0

Dave - 0

Eli - 0

Fred - 3

Gavin - 0

Henry - 1

Ian - 0

Jim - 1

 

So in this, vaccinated people would still be passing the virus on, but the amount it’s happening is reduced. The first set would pass it on from 10 to 12 people (R = 1.2), the second set would pass it on from 10 to 8 people (R = 0.8).

 

Then imagine the same ratio happening through ten generations of the virus:

 

Unvaccinated: 10 x 1.2, ten times = Around 62 people presently infected.

Vaccinated: 10 x 0.8, ten times = Around 1 person presently infected.

 

It’s essentially the butterfly effect. Even if there is still some transmission between vaccinated people, the fact that there’s even just a degree less has a significant effect on the path of the virus over time.

 

So the question shouldn’t be whether the vaccines stop transmission. Even a 33% reduction of transmission (like in my example data above) is a significant help in trying to stop the spread over time.

[yorkie1999]

3 hours ago, RoboFox said:

I'd genuinely be curious to see if any studies have been done into whether there's a link between political leaning and likelihood to reject the vaccine. 

 

I'd bet my house (If I owned one) that if the pool of people was big enough there's a correlation to be found between Brexit favourability and vaccine hesitancy, for example.

 

It all has an anti-establishment familiarity to it. 

 

The people who i know who don't want the vaccine are all fitness fanatics or health freaks and a fair few of the people who i know who've had the vaccine you would class as your typical brexiteer 

[yorkie1999]

26 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Regarding transmission and the virus still being transmissible even through vaccination, I think someone above who said not to deal in absolutes is correct, and it’s all to do with the R number again. I know this kind of thing has been said before and I imagine for many it’ll be preaching to the converted, but for anyone still wondering how it could work, hopefully this might help:

 

Imagine a scenario with people who are unvaccinated against people who are vaccinated. So here are the following people, unvaccinated, and how many other people they pass the virus on to:

 

Andy - gets virus, passes it on to 2 other people.

Ben - 1

Chris - 0

Dave - 1

Eli - 0

Fred - 5

Gavin - 0

Henry - 2

Ian - 0

Jim - 1

 

And then imagine the same people doing the same things, but this time vaccinated.

 

Andy - gets virus, still passes it on to 2 other people.

Ben - 1

Chris - 0

Dave - 0

Eli - 0

Fred - 3

Gavin - 0

Henry - 1

Ian - 0

Jim - 1

 

So in this, vaccinated people would still be passing the virus on, but the amount it’s happening is reduced. The first set would pass it on from 10 to 12 people (R = 1.2), the second set would pass it on from 10 to 8 people (R = 0.8).

 

Then imagine the same ratio happening through ten generations of the virus:

 

Unvaccinated: 10 x 1.2, ten times = Around 62 people presently infected.

Vaccinated: 10 x 0.8, ten times = Around 1 person presently infected.

 

It’s essentially the butterfly effect. Even if there is still some transmission between vaccinated people, the fact that there’s even just a degree less has a significant effect on the path of the virus over time.

 

So the question shouldn’t be whether the vaccines stop transmission. Even a 33% reduction of transmission (like in my example data above) is a significant help in trying to stop the spread over time.

What should  the question be then?

[z-layrex]

1 hour ago, whoareyaaa said:

It has came out of a lab, the virus is man made there is an agenda going on... population decrease to help with climate change is my conclusion regarding conspiracy theories  

 

These variations and boosters are going to keep coming out and making people weaker over time.

 

That's my conspiracy theory of the whole thing obviously the virus is real and the jabs may help in the short term, what about long term? and the virus may effect people in different ways as we see, some may be fine others not so... I still don't think you should point fingers if people are not vaccinated not you personally but in general.

Yeah you're right. We'll just carry on slogging it in the ICU as critical care in this country gets worse and worse. Wouldn't want to judge anyone. Let's hope no one we love will need an icu bed for non-covid reasons and will have to get worse care because of all the unvaccinated patients. It's their right after all.

[Nalis]

1 hour ago, Dunge said:

Regarding transmission and the virus still being transmissible even through vaccination, I think someone above who said not to deal in absolutes is correct, and it’s all to do with the R number again. I know this kind of thing has been said before and I imagine for many it’ll be preaching to the converted, but for anyone still wondering how it could work, hopefully this might help:

 

Imagine a scenario with people who are unvaccinated against people who are vaccinated. So here are the following people, unvaccinated, and how many other people they pass the virus on to:

 

Andy - gets virus, passes it on to 2 other people.

Ben - 1

Chris - 0

Dave - 1

Eli - 0

Fred - 5

Gavin - 0

Henry - 2

Ian - 0

Jim - 1

 

And then imagine the same people doing the same things, but this time vaccinated.

 

Andy - gets virus, still passes it on to 2 other people.

Ben - 1

Chris - 0

Dave - 0

Eli - 0

Fred - 3

Gavin - 0

Henry - 1

Ian - 0

Jim - 1

 

So in this, vaccinated people would still be passing the virus on, but the amount it’s happening is reduced. The first set would pass it on from 10 to 12 people (R = 1.2), the second set would pass it on from 10 to 8 people (R = 0.8).

 

Then imagine the same ratio happening through ten generations of the virus:

 

Unvaccinated: 10 x 1.2, ten times = Around 62 people presently infected.

Vaccinated: 10 x 0.8, ten times = Around 1 person presently infected.

 

It’s essentially the butterfly effect. Even if there is still some transmission between vaccinated people, the fact that there’s even just a degree less has a significant effect on the path of the virus over time.

 

So the question shouldn’t be whether the vaccines stop transmission. Even a 33% reduction of transmission (like in my example data above) is a significant help in trying to stop the spread over time.

That doesnt fit the narrative of Tracy on Facebook knowing someone who got covid despite being vaccinated and using it as an excuse not to get a jab.

[SpacedX]

12 minutes ago, Nalis said:

That doesnt fit the narrative of Tracy on Facebook knowing someone who got covid despite being vaccinated and using it as an excuse not to get a jab.

Or amongst some on this thread. 

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, Innovindil said:

Any big brains around that know the time between "contact" with one of the great unclean and actually being able to test positive if you've managed to catch it? Takes a couple of days right? Or did I imagine reading that somewhere? 

No hard or fast rules 

it’s usually a couple days but

 

one of the kids at school got it and his brother after a couple days and then his father within a further 5 days.  The mother managed to avoid it and then on day 16 after the dad got it - she tested positive on LFT (and began to feel ropey).  That’s got to be unusual. 
 

when we first had it, my eldest felt dodgy a full fortnight after we first showed symptoms 

 

just keep checking on lft 

[RoboFox]

1 hour ago, Dunge said:

Regarding transmission and the virus still being transmissible even through vaccination, I think someone above who said not to deal in absolutes is correct, and it’s all to do with the R number again. I know this kind of thing has been said before and I imagine for many it’ll be preaching to the converted, but for anyone still wondering how it could work, hopefully this might help:

 

Imagine a scenario with people who are unvaccinated against people who are vaccinated. So here are the following people, unvaccinated, and how many other people they pass the virus on to:

 

Andy - gets virus, passes it on to 2 other people.

Ben - 1

Chris - 0

Dave - 1

Eli - 0

Fred - 5

Gavin - 0

Henry - 2

Ian - 0

Jim - 1

 

And then imagine the same people doing the same things, but this time vaccinated.

 

Andy - gets virus, still passes it on to 2 other people.

Ben - 1

Chris - 0

Dave - 0

Eli - 0

Fred - 3

Gavin - 0

Henry - 1

Ian - 0

Jim - 1

 

So in this, vaccinated people would still be passing the virus on, but the amount it’s happening is reduced. The first set would pass it on from 10 to 12 people (R = 1.2), the second set would pass it on from 10 to 8 people (R = 0.8).

 

Then imagine the same ratio happening through ten generations of the virus:

 

Unvaccinated: 10 x 1.2, ten times = Around 62 people presently infected.

Vaccinated: 10 x 0.8, ten times = Around 1 person presently infected.

 

It’s essentially the butterfly effect. Even if there is still some transmission between vaccinated people, the fact that there’s even just a degree less has a significant effect on the path of the virus over time.

 

So the question shouldn’t be whether the vaccines stop transmission. Even a 33% reduction of transmission (like in my example data above) is a significant help in trying to stop the spread over time.

It's the only question our anti-vaxx friends keep parroting throughout this thread ad nauseum, almost as if they have very little else on which to base an argument.

 

Don't spoil it for them.

[Carl the Llama]

20 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

Two years ago hospitals would have been full to the brim with flu patients.  Noone batted an eyelid.

 

Until the health service is adequately funded and sorted out we will continue to have problems regardless of what people go in for.

 

@Line-X is this true?  Were your ICUs maxed out with flu patients each year before covid hit?  I feel like that would've generated a media backlash re underfunding NHS but I suppose most moguls are in with the regime so perhaps not

[SpacedX]

59 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

@Line-X is this true?  Were your ICUs maxed out with flu patients each year before covid hit?  I feel like that would've generated a media backlash re underfunding NHS but I suppose most moguls are in with the regime so perhaps not

You mean @z-layrex - his profession is far more noble than mine.

[Buce]

Government scientists issue stark warning on Omicron, saying could lead to 'very large wave of infections'

"Even if there continues to be good protection against severe disease for individuals from vaccination (including boosters), any significant reduction in protection against infection could still result in a very large wave of infections.

This would in turn lead to potentially high numbers of hospitalisations even with protection against severe disease being less affected.

The size of this wave remains highly uncertain but may be of a scale that requires very stringent response measures to avoid unsustainable pressure on the NHS.

If vaccine efficacy is substantially reduced, then a wave of severe disease should be expected. It is important to be prepared for a potentially very significant wave of infections with associated hospitalisations now, ahead of data being available."

[SpacedX]

6 minutes ago, Buce said:

Government scientists issue stark warning on Omicron, saying could lead to 'very large wave of infections'

"Even if there continues to be good protection against severe disease for individuals from vaccination (including boosters), any significant reduction in protection against infection could still result in a very large wave of infections.

This would in turn lead to potentially high numbers of hospitalisations even with protection against severe disease being less affected.

The size of this wave remains highly uncertain but may be of a scale that requires very stringent response measures to avoid unsustainable pressure on the NHS.

If vaccine efficacy is substantially reduced, then a wave of severe disease should be expected. It is important to be prepared for a potentially very significant wave of infections with associated hospitalisations now, ahead of data being available."

I’ve pretty much mixed everywhere with hundreds of people most weekends for the past 18 months and I’ve been ok. 

[Dunge]

3 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

What should  the question be then?

Essentially it’s not about stopping transmission as an absolute, but reducing it to the point where the virus wanes. So the better question to ask is how much being vaccinated reduces transmission across a population. And that’s where it’s important to look at larger datasets rather than individual anecdotes.

 

Like when Leicester won the league. We lost against Arsenal, twice, but that doesn’t mean those losses were extrapolated to the whole season.

Edited 3 December 2021 by Dunge

[adam]

56 minutes ago, Buce said:

Government scientists issue stark warning on Omicron, saying could lead to 'very large wave of infections'

"Even if there continues to be good protection against severe disease for individuals from vaccination (including boosters), any significant reduction in protection against infection could still result in a very large wave of infections.

This would in turn lead to potentially high numbers of hospitalisations even with protection against severe disease being less affected.

The size of this wave remains highly uncertain but may be of a scale that requires very stringent response measures to avoid unsustainable pressure on the NHS.

If vaccine efficacy is substantially reduced, then a wave of severe disease should be expected. It is important to be prepared for a potentially very significant wave of infections with associated hospitalisations now, ahead of data being available."

Are these the same people who were predicting 100k cases a day in the summer. 

Edited 3 December 2021 by adam

[Spudulike]

Oi, you anti's out there, get yourselves a false arm. Sorted. 

 

BBC News - Italian man tries to dodge Covid jab using fake arm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59524527

 

[kyleolly]

Read yesterday there was 8 covid patients in Icu across the 3 hospitals in Leicester I'm sure they were all unvaccinated 

[Farrington fox]

6 minutes ago, kyleolly said:

Read yesterday there was 8 covid patients in Icu across the 3 hospitals in Leicester I'm sure they were all unvaccinated 

8! In total?

[Izzy]

My two kids have just had their jab.

Honestly, the fvckin drama.

Pussies.

[fuchsntf]

50 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Oi, you anti's out there, get yourselves a false arm. Sorted. 

 

BBC News - Italian man tries to dodge Covid jab using fake arm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59524527

 

Souvenir seller.....😆😆