Coronavirus Thread

[StanSP]

PCR test came back negative. 

Going on honeymoon tomorrow!!! 

 

Very anxious wait as NY broke and overnight. Woke up to the email from test centre saying its negative

 

 

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, shade said:

I confess I dont understand statistics and want to understand it better, I see it like this.

 

They said the vaccine was over 90% effective at stopping infection in trials, but this definitely isn't true right, you're basically just as likely to catch it so it must be in low double digits if not 0%?

 

The narrative changed to it stops you getting seriously ill, but 75% of hospitalisations are vaccinated in some form, from a population of 90%, I mean, is that great statistically?

I’m astounded that you admit this and yet are one of those on here banging the drum loudest about the vaccine being ineffective 

 

‘you're basically just as likely to catch it’ - this is absolutely not true. Stats/studies that you have posted on here show that 

 

‘75% of hospitalisations are vaccinated in some form, from a population of 90%, I mean, is that great statistically?’  - if we are discussing over 18’s only then vaccination uptake is around 85% afaik. even if we take your 90%, the efficacy of the vaccines in the original Wuhan/alpha studies was 90% /80% Pfizer/Az against infection. new strains of the virus have dropped these number with each notable mutation.  Omicron has these well below 50% to those who were jabbed more than four/five months ago.  we are fighting a different foe now.
the point about hospitalisations :  even if you take the numbers crudely without any adjustments for age and vulnerability, there are 18% of the population not double jabbed and 25% of those in hospital are not vaccinated (if your 75% figure is correct). 

 

I think a crucial part of the hospitalisations percentage that is missed is those in hospital for other reasons that test positive for covid on admission or contract it whilst in hospital. Up to a fifth of those in the data in hospital did not go in for covid reasons. Because over 80% of those entering hospital are double jabbed, that will skew the percentages to make it look even less worth being jabbed. 

finally, I agree with you about ICU stats/severe illness in hospital. But these seem to take months to be officially published. Last availability was, I think, from the period ending mid September. 

 

 

[shade]

6 minutes ago, z-layrex said:

I agree keeping fit and healthy is is a protection, of course it is, but this virus absolutely loves killing big muscley blokes who go to the gym a lot, you are just as at risk as many others despite you kidding yourself you're not.

 

Would you **** a prostitute with STI's? Why not if your immune system is so good?

 

So why wouldn’t you protect yourself and your country with a simple vaccine?

Because honestly, I don't trust that the vaccine won't have any long term implications (yes so might covid). Sure they're labelled as crackpots because they go against the narrative, but there are well qualified people (Dr Robert Malone, one of the inventors of MRNA technology and Dr Mike Yeadon, head of Pfizer respiratory division for years  amongst others) who have questioned the safety and efficacy of the vaccine.

 

Couple it with findings like the below (which is only an abstract and may not end up being correct if peer reviewed) and I would just rather ensure my natural immune system was functioning to its full capacity than rely on the vaccine, as should be my right.

 

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712

 

I also see these footballers having problems, sure it could be the effects of covid infection, but I would rather wait it out and see. Anyway, I have some protection now from having had the virus, so we'll see where we are in the summer I guess.

 

[st albans fox]

35 minutes ago, Apollo said:

Jabbed in June and august, got covid mid October.

 

1 hour ago, Sly said:

I had my last Pfizer jab in June. 
 

COVID on 20th November.

 

Had the booster 27th December. 

 

Thnks - nothing obvious from that because your infections were quite recent.  I was wondering if your infections had been some time ago, 

 

it’s a strange virus - affects everyone differently. What I have noticed from my household is reaction to the jabs and boosters seems to show the same side affects as was evident with covid. Those who had headaches or fatigue or fever  as major symptoms again had them as a response to the jabs. some of the jabs elicited a marked response, some didn’t. but no one had no response to any jabs, having suffered infection some time ago. 

[Big Dave]

13 hours ago, Rain King said:

How long did it take for people to have reactions to the Moderna booster?

 

Had mine at lunchtime today, no ill feelings yet.

Didn’t really have much of a reaction. Only some discomfort in my arm where I had the jab - felt like J had been punched in the arm.  Nothing more.

 

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, grobyfox1990 said:

Bit harsh to ask above poster to identify said posters when you’ve got Facebook jockeys calling people thick on this thread on an almost daily basis, and not identifying said posters

For what it's worth I think those folks who call people stupid should be more direct about it too.

 

Personally, I don't think there is anyone on here who wants this virus to stick around longer than it takes to get it appropriately under control, just people who think that it is necessary to get it properly under control (which takes time) rather than letting it run amok with all the risks to various areas of society that entails.

 

56 minutes ago, shade said:

Because honestly, I don't trust that the vaccine won't have any long term implications (yes so might covid). Sure they're labelled as crackpots because they go against the narrative, but there are well qualified people (Dr Robert Malone, one of the inventors of MRNA technology and Dr Mike Yeadon, head of Pfizer respiratory division for years  amongst others) who have questioned the safety and efficacy of the vaccine.

 

Couple it with findings like the below (which is only an abstract and may not end up being correct if peer reviewed) and I would just rather ensure my natural immune system was functioning to its full capacity than rely on the vaccine, as should be my right.

 

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.10712

 

I also see these footballers having problems, sure it could be the effects of covid infection, but I would rather wait it out and see. Anyway, I have some protection now from having had the virus, so we'll see where we are in the summer I guess.

 

The "narrative" is the scientific consensus, backed by empirical data and peer review and changing as those do - nothing more. It is not dogmatic, as much as people would like it to be so they may use it as a strawman in the style of religion.

 

Also, it is the prerogative of people to not take the vaccine; likewise, society is likewise free to then take measures to protect themselves from people they deem a threat. It works both ways.

[Foxdiamond]

1 hour ago, Big Dave said:

Didn’t really have much of a reaction. Only some discomfort in my arm where I had the jab - felt like J had been punched in the arm.  Nothing more.

 

No reaction at all really. Just a slightly sore arm but nothing to speak of.

[shade]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

For what it's worth I think those folks who call people stupid should be more direct about it too.

 

Personally, I don't think there is anyone on here who wants this virus to stick around longer than it takes to get it appropriately under control, just people who think that it is necessary to get it properly under control (which takes time) rather than letting it run amok with all the risks to various areas of society that entails.

 

The "narrative" is the scientific consensus, backed by empirical data and peer review and changing as those do - nothing more. It is not dogmatic, as much as people would like it to be so they may use it as a strawman in the style of religion.

 

Also, it is the prerogative of people to not take the vaccine; likewise, society is likewise free to then take measures to protect themselves from people they deem a threat. It works both ways.

It's strange though how people that question the scientific consensus, with different science end up getting deplatformed. This isn't one maverick falsely claiming the MMR causes autism, this is well respected scientists getting removed from social media, it's the British Medical Journal getting fact checked by Facebook (most of the fact checkers are journalists).

 

We've seen societies dealing with people they (correctly or not) thought were a threat before. It doesn't end well for anyone.

 

 

[Guest Col city fan]

1 hour ago, z-layrex said:

I agree keeping fit and healthy is is a protection, of course it is, but this virus absolutely loves killing big muscley blokes who go to the gym a lot, you are just as at risk as many others despite you kidding yourself you're not.

 

Would you **** a prostitute with STI's? Why not if your immune system is so good?

 

So why wouldn’t you protect yourself and your country with a simple vaccine?

I fear with some you are just hitting your head against a wall mate. That’s the sad part for me. Not that people have to have the vaccine, but that they would choose to in order to protect THEMSELVES and others.

Society really has become very selfish in so many ways I’m afraid 

[shade]

2 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I fear with some you are just hitting your head against a wall mate. That’s the sad part for me. Not that people have to have the vaccine, but that they would choose to in order to protect THEMSELVES and others.

Society really has become very selfish in so many ways I’m afraid 

How is me having the vaccine protecting society? My wife gave it to our family, she's vaccinated, the selfish mare.

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, shade said:

It's strange though how people that question the scientific consensus, with different science end up getting deplatformed. This isn't one maverick falsely claiming the MMR causes autism, this is well respected scientists getting removed from social media, it's the British Medical Journal getting fact checked by Facebook (most of the fact checkers are journalists).

 

We've seen societies dealing with people they (correctly or not) thought were a threat before. It doesn't end well for anyone.

 

 

With respect to the first paragraph, the "deplatforming", such as it is going on (if it is), has nothing to do with the scientific consensus itself - if they're getting booted from social media, that's down to the social media outlets. If these mavericks do have legit, empirical and verified evidence that what they're saying is true, it will be believed and verified and become scientific fact - as such mavericks have with hypotheses that were deemed "crackpot" in the past. If you have a problem here with this specific situation, it isn't with the scientific method and people should perhaps stop confusing it with other areas.

 

With respect to the second paragraph, mandates in the name of "safety" where society protects itself from people being reckless to the public good have been abused by governments throughout history, yes. They've also saved lives with no malicious intent; see seat-belt and drink-driving mandates. As a thought on this, mandates that are applied to combat acts of nature tend to belong more in the latter than the former simply because there is no point in a government using something it cannot control (in this case, a virus) as an instrument to further its control.

[Foxdiamond]

4 minutes ago, shade said:

How is me having the vaccine protecting society? My wife gave it to our family, she's vaccinated, the selfish mare.

Hopefully much less chance of serious illness and thereby not being in hospital and putting strain on NHS etc. I would ask non vaccinated what the situation be if there was no vaccine? 

[Carl the Llama]

10 minutes ago, shade said:

How is me having the vaccine protecting society? My wife gave it to our family, she's vaccinated, the selfish mare.

I guess this is empirical evidence that being vaccinated gives you the virus.

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, shade said:

How is me having the vaccine protecting society? My wife gave it to our family, she's vaccinated, the selfish mare.

You weren’t 

hence the chance that you would be hospitalised with severe illness (v small I know) was increased - when you multiply these v small chances by millions it does become of some relevance. 
 

and because you weren’t vaccinated, the period in which you were infectious was likely longer than if you had been vaccinated. without knowing what your viral load was it’s difficult to say how much of a danger that was to others. 
 

and finally, the virus can mutate by finding a host where it can replicate many millions of times and one of those copies of itself is different. 
 

an unvaccinated host is more likely to provide the best conditions for this to happen, of course we are talking about very very small chances but it does happen - clearly it has over the past two years.  If everyone in the world was vaccinated, then the chances of mutations would be greatly reduced

this is why it’s actually more important that your jab goes to someone in the third world who cannot get access to a jab rather than you who is recently infected. but we, as individuals cannot have any influence over that. 
 

in conclusion, your being unvaccinated likely makes no difference to society.  But the more people who have this stance when all added together does have an effect. 

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

I guess this is empirical evidence that being vaccinated gives you the virus.

100% in this case so extrapolated it is conclusive proof ! 

[shade]

4 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

Hopefully much less chance of serious illness and thereby not being in hospital and putting strain on NHS etc. I would ask non vaccinated what the situation be if there was no vaccine? 

The flippant and immature side of me would say let it rip and cull the weak, but I have elderly parents so obviously would never do that. I recognise that the vaccine has been effective, I'm thankful we have it, I just don't like religiosity and propaganda that's been generated around it.

 

3 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

I guess this is empirical evidence that being vaccinated gives you the virus.

No, but the only first hand data I have is wildly encouraging, the only two unvaccinated people I know both take care of themselves had the illness extremely mildly, their vaccinated partners had it pretty rough.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, shade said:

The flippant and immature side of me would say let it rip and cull the weak, but I have elderly parents so obviously would never do that. I recognise that the vaccine has been effective, I'm thankful we have it, I just don't like religiosity and propaganda that's been generated around it.

 

No, but the only first hand data I have is wildly encouraging, the only two unvaccinated people I know both take care of themselves had the illness extremely mildly, their vaccinated partners had it pretty rough.

I'm sorry to keep coming after you on this one, but kindly see above - the scientific method is not dogmatic in the way that most organised religion is and the two shouldn't be compared. Please.

 

Saying that for everyone's benefit.

.

Edited 1 January 2022 by leicsmac

[shade]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm sorry to keep coming after you on this one, but kindly see above - the scientific method is not dogmatic in the way that religion is and the two shouldn't be compared. Please.

 

Saying that for everyone's benefit.

.

Okay apologies, I'll accept it's not by the science itself but by others, the singing of songs about getting vaccinated by James Cordon and Stephen Colbert on their popular shows, it's creepy and bordering on cult like propaganda.

 

11 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

You weren’t 

hence the chance that you would be hospitalised with severe illness (v small I know) was increased - when you multiply these v small chances by millions it does become of some relevance. 
 

and because you weren’t vaccinated, the period in which you were infectious was likely longer than if you had been vaccinated. without knowing what your viral load was it’s difficult to say how much of a danger that was to others. 
 

and finally, the virus can mutate by finding a host where it can replicate many millions of times and one of those copies of itself is different. 
 

an unvaccinated host is more likely to provide the best conditions for this to happen, of course we are talking about very very small chances but it does happen - clearly it has over the past two years.  If everyone in the world was vaccinated, then the chances of mutations would be greatly reduced

this is why it’s actually more important that your jab goes to someone in the third world who cannot get access to a jab rather than you who is recently infected. but we, as individuals cannot have any influence over that. 
 

in conclusion, your being unvaccinated likely makes no difference to society.  But the more people who have this stance when all added together does have an effect. 

Thank you for this, it's insightful. Isn't there evidence also that leaky vaccines can put pressure on viruses to mutate as well though?

[grobyfox1990]

48 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

For what it's worth I think those folks who call people stupid should be more direct about it too.

 

Personally, I don't think there is anyone on here who wants this virus to stick around longer than it takes to get it appropriately under control, just people who think that it is necessary to get it properly under control (which takes time) rather than letting it run amok with all the risks to various areas of society that entails.

 

The "narrative" is the scientific consensus, backed by empirical data and peer review and changing as those do - nothing more. It is not dogmatic, as much as people would like it to be so they may use it as a strawman in the style of religion.

 

Also, it is the prerogative of people to not take the vaccine; likewise, society is likewise free to then take measures to protect themselves from people they deem a threat. It works both ways.

Yeh good point and inarguable. The original poster is surely misguided, no one wants the virus to hang around unless they’re making serious cash out of it, which I doubt posters on an lcfc forum are!

 

I guess my frustration comes from those calling others stupid etc on this thread. A sad mark of our society when a social media marketing assistant with a 2.2 from Aston university feels they have the right to take the intellectual moral high ground on others 

 

edit - apologies for the above person spec, it is completely made up example and not aimed at anyone!!! Completely hypothetical 

Edited 1 January 2022 by grobyfox1990

[st albans fox]

Just now, grobyfox1990 said:

Yeh good point and inarguable. The original poster is surely misguided, no one wants the virus to hang around unless they’re making serious cash out of it, which I doubt posters on an lcfc forum are!

 

I guess my frustration comes from those calling others stupid etc on this thread. A sad mark of our society when a social media marketing assistant with a 2.2 from Aston university feels they have the right to take the intellectual moral high ground on others 

Show off …….

[leicsmac]

Just now, shade said:

Okay apologies, I'll accept it's not by the science itself but by others, the singing of songs about getting vaccinated by James Cordon and Stephen Colbert on their popular shows, it's creepy and bordering on cult like propaganda.

 

Thank you for this, it's insightful. Isn't there evidence also that leaky vaccines can put pressure on viruses to mutate as well though?

I can understand the distaste of public figures who might not know much about science engaging in science communication. The only thing I'll suggest there is to please not let it blind you to the scientific facts we have and base decision-making upon it.

 

WRT the second sentence, mutations can occur at any time when the virus propagates - and in Covid that can happen in a vaccinated (to a lesser degree) as well as an unvaccinated host. However, as we're seeing (perhaps) with Omicron, such mutations are, as well as a threat, our best ticket out of this mess.

 

1 minute ago, grobyfox1990 said:

Yeh good point and inarguable. The original poster is surely misguided, no one wants the virus to hang around unless they’re making serious cash out of it, which I doubt posters on an lcfc forum are!

 

I guess my frustration comes from those calling others stupid etc on this thread. A sad mark of our society when a social media marketing assistant with a 2.2 from Aston university feels they have the right to take the intellectual moral high ground on others 

 

edit - apologies for the above person spec, it is completely made up example and not aimed at anyone!!! Completely hypothetical 

I can certainly understand the frustration - this virus has turned the lives of practically everyone on here and out there upside down - some more than others. Such disruption leads people to be afraid and often anger and confrontation result, which is not really what we need when the virus itself is enemy enough. Additionally, I'm sure there are people looking to make a buck from all this but they are rather misguided if they think that buck is going to protect them totally from the virus and what it can do.

 

I guess the only thing I can say is to hold on - better days are coming, Omicron (as per above) is a probable sign of that. Human strength lies, as it has always done, in its unity, when needed (last part italicised for emphasis).

[st albans fox]

7 minutes ago, shade said:

Okay apologies, I'll accept it's not by the science itself but by others, the singing of songs about getting vaccinated by James Cordon and Stephen Colbert on their popular shows, it's creepy and bordering on cult like propaganda.

 

Thank you for this, it's insightful. Isn't there evidence also that leaky vaccines can put pressure on viruses to mutate as well though?

 

@Line-Xhas been absent  for a while - hope all is ok there as he had covid issues across his family.  He may have read more up to date studies on it. I suspect that the fact vaccines are in the vast majority of people leading to weaker and shorter experiences likely means that less of that ‘copying’ is gong on.  Less copying = less opportunity to mutate.

 

there was debate on whether a vaccine that pretty much eliminated covid would force the virus to mutate to evade efficacy. The fact that the virus seems quite capable of existing alongside the vaccines would surely deal with that question. 

[shade]

7 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I can understand the distaste of public figures who might not know much about science engaging in science communication. The only thing I'll suggest there is to please not let it blind you to the scientific facts we have and base decision-making upon it.

 

WRT the second sentence, mutations can occur at any time when the virus propagates - and in Covid that can happen in a vaccinated (to a lesser degree) as well as an unvaccinated host. However, as we're seeing (perhaps) with Omicron, such mutations are, as well as a threat, our best ticket out of this mess.

 

I can certainly understand the frustration - this virus has turned the lives of practically everyone on here and out there upside down - some more than others. Such disruption leads people to be afraid and often anger and confrontation result, which is not really what we need when the virus itself is enemy enough. Additionally, I'm sure there are people looking to make a buck from all this but they are rather misguided if they think that buck is going to protect them totally from the virus and what it can do.

 

I guess the only thing I can say is to hold on - better days are coming, Omicron (as per above) is a probable sign of that. Human strength lies, as it has always done, in its unity, when needed (last part italicised for emphasis).

 

6 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

 

@Line-Xhas been absent  for a while - hope all is ok there as he had covid issues across his family.  He may have read more up to date studies on it. I suspect that the fact vaccines are in the vast majority of people leading to weaker and shorter experiences likely means that less of that ‘copying’ is gong on.  Less copying = less opportunity to mutate.

 

there was debate on whether a vaccine that pretty much eliminated covid would force the virus to mutate to evade efficacy. The fact that the virus seems quite capable of existing alongside the vaccines would surely deal with that question. 

Good responses, thanks.

[Zear0]

4 minutes ago, shade said:

 

Good responses, thanks.

Credit for reading them and engaging too, there's not been enough of that here.  I don't agree with some of your points, but feel a need to credit actually having a discussion.  There are pages and pages of people posting stuff which is robustly rebutted and then the posters ghosting the response.  The world of "alternative facts" I guess.

[leicsmac]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/31/im-a-uk-covid-scientist-heres-a-sample-of-the-abuse-in-my-inbox

 

"You scaremongering ignorant ****ing cvnt, you and your retarded team made predictions that could have ****ed this country for billions of pounds, ****ed Christmas for a second time and cost thousands thier [sic] jobs only to have your most pessimistic ballshit [sic] now found to be just that. How fvcks like you can sleep at night is beyond me and I hope you are ****ing held to account for what you have done and could have done if there weren’t some people in the government with a brain.”

 

Charming.

 

I do wish people would separate the people working on the science from those deciding policy that may or may not be based upon it. Is that asking too much?