Coronavirus Thread

[shade]

94% of covid deaths had an average of 4 comorbidities? wild.

[WigstonWanderer]

9 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

The problem is this isn’t like a ‘normal virus’

Omicron spreads like wildfire. God knows what’s happening with Covid 19 but the speed of mutation IS NOT like anything seen before 

Or, as far as my limited knowledge dictates anyway.

Literally, it is spreading so amazingly quickly

You would not believe the amount of work that is going on in the NHS every time we have an infected member of staff or patient. The IPC rules are vast (quite rightly), the documentation is immense and staff are burning out with it. And this is over and above ‘the day job’

I say again, IF this is some type of germ warfare, gotten out of some lab somewhere and designed to wreck economies….. it’s worked 

 

Can’t vouch for the source, but according to this article Omicron is the second most infectious virus after measles. Fortunately measles has a really effective vaccine, which protects for life I believe.

 

https://www.news10.com/news/omicron-is-the-second-most-contagious-virus-in-the-world/

[st albans fox]

7 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Can’t vouch for the source, but according to this article Omicron is the second most infectious virus after measles. Fortunately measles has a really effective vaccine, which protects for life I believe.

 

https://www.news10.com/news/omicron-is-the-second-most-contagious-virus-in-the-world/

We can’t look at your website cos we’re in the eu ???.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

14 minutes ago, shade said:

94% of covid deaths had an average of 4 comorbidities? wild.

We're a grossly unhealthy country. And it will never be tackled as that would rely on people accepting that their health is largely their own responsibility.

[st albans fox]

18 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

The problem is this isn’t like a ‘normal virus’

Omicron spreads like wildfire. God knows what’s happening with Covid 19 but the speed of mutation IS NOT like anything seen before 

Or, as far as my limited knowledge dictates anyway.

Literally, it is spreading so amazingly quickly

You would not believe the amount of work that is going on in the NHS every time we have an infected member of staff or patient. The IPC rules are vast (quite rightly), the documentation is immense and staff are burning out with it. And this is over and above ‘the day job’

I say again, IF this is some type of germ warfare, gotten out of some lab somewhere and designed to wreck economies….. it’s worked 

 

It’s not mutating quickly col, it’s spreading quickly 

 

if it’s mutating quickly then we could be in bigger trouble than we can imagine! (Unless it’s mutating to something even less dangerous than omicron) 

[Babylon]

21 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Malone making a tool of himself on Rogan, things to you love to see.

 

”Mandates are illegal” No they aren’t.

”Against the Nuremberg code” No it’s not.

 

Rolling out every anti vax knobhead trope there is.

Oh and he is vaccinated with MRNA... absolutely mugging people off. 

[WigstonWanderer]

13 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

We can’t look at your website cos we’re in the eu ???.

Oh sorry. I got nothing then 

 

It just says it’s the second most infectious virus after measles 

 

Edit: I think this is the source of the article

 

 

Edited 2 January 2022 by WigstonWanderer

[shade]

39 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Malone making a tool of himself on Rogan, things to you love to see.

 

”Mandates are illegal” No they aren’t.

”Against the Nuremberg code” No it’s not.

 

Rolling out every anti vax knobhead trope there is.

If you've listened to all of it and have taken nothing from it but that (assuming you ahvent just picked the quotes from a debunk site), then this conversation is sadly pointless.

Edited 2 January 2022 by shade

[Guest Col city fan]

18 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

It’s not mutating quickly col, it’s spreading quickly 

 

if it’s mutating quickly then we could be in bigger trouble than we can imagine! (Unless it’s mutating to something even less dangerous than omicron) 

No it’s mutating quickly too mate. How many different ‘variants’ have we had already? 
But as you say, Omicron appears less deadly (for some) but far more contagious than the preceding ones. What we have to hope for I guess it’s that it’s kinda ‘mutating itself out’ and will be less potent at each change

I hope!! 😳 

Edited 2 January 2022 by Col city fan

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, shade said:

If you've listened to all of it and have taken nothing from it but that (assuming you ahvent just picked the quotes from a debunk site), then this conversation is sadly pointless.

And if you are still listening to him after more and more lies, yeah the conversation is pointless. 

[filbertway]

8 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

No it’s mutating quickly too mate. How many different ‘variants’ have we had already? 

Interesting, what's the normal amount you'd expect in your average virus compared to what it is with this virus?

[Guest Col city fan]

6 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Interesting, what's the normal amount you'd expect in your average virus compared to what it is with this virus?

A good example is the flu

For years I’ve given flu jabs and each year the composition of the vaccine changes very slightly to take account of any mutations to the flu virus there might have been over the past 6/7 months. Generally (I’ve been told) the flu virus undergoes slight mutations and the composition of the vaccine is generally considered (annually) in about June/July time (in preparation for the vaccines being given in autumn)

Covid seems very different. It seems to be constantly mutating such that vaccine development is having to be rapid and ongoing. This calendar year, we’ve already had three vaccines (for those who are doubly vaccinated plus the booster)

Covid doesn’t seem ‘natural’ in this way. It’s ever changing and science is having to work dramatically to keep up with it

[VLC86]

1 minute ago, Col city fan said:

A good example is the flu

For years I’ve given flu jabs and each year the composition of the vaccine changes very slightly to take account of any mutations to the flu virus there might have been over the past 6/7 months. Generally (I’ve been told) the flu virus undergoes slight mutations and the composition of the vaccine is generally considered (annually) in about June/July time (in preparation for the vaccines being given in autumn)

Covid seems very different. It seems to be constantly mutating such that vaccine development is having to be rapid and ongoing. This calendar year, we’ve already had three vaccines (for those who are doubly vaccinated plus the booster)

Covid doesn’t seem ‘natural’ in this way. It’s ever changing and science is having to work dramatically to keep up with it

I’d imagine it’s probably because it’s a new virus. Flu will have been around for a long time and has probably mutated so much that it now can only change a certain amount.

[st albans fox]

8 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

A good example is the flu

For years I’ve given flu jabs and each year the composition of the vaccine changes very slightly to take account of any mutations to the flu virus there might have been over the past 6/7 months. Generally (I’ve been told) the flu virus undergoes slight mutations and the composition of the vaccine is generally considered (annually) in about June/July time (in preparation for the vaccines being given in autumn)

Covid seems very different. It seems to be constantly mutating such that vaccine development is having to be rapid and ongoing. This calendar year, we’ve already had three vaccines (for those who are doubly vaccinated plus the booster)

Covid doesn’t seem ‘natural’ in this way. It’s ever changing and science is having to work dramatically to keep up with it

The vaccines are all the same 

they still have efficacy against the new mutations. - less with each though 

 
we will probably have new vaccines for autumn which are based on omicron - whatever mutation there is from omicron will be closer to it than to the original single spike protein 

[reynard]

4 hours ago, shade said:

I mentioned further back in the thread, the chance of me ending up in hospital, let alone ICU was miniscule, that's not bravado, it's just fact. The fundamental problem as I see it is we have a population of people who are guzzling sugar and who's bodies are suffering chronic inflammation, obesity is rife and the chickens are coming home to roost.

 

I don't think I've had to take any medicines that I can remember apart form antibiotics for bacterial tonsillitis (ironically my body doesn't like penicillin, cefalexin or doxycycline), but yes, I would definitely study a drug before taking it, wouldn't you?

 

I shouldn't admit this because I know how it sounds in a thread like this, but this pandemic has made me sceptical about big pharma, the more I've read about them and their past misdemeanors.

I agree with a lot of what you say. I'm the same with penicillin. Yes I do ask but I bet a huge  percentage of people don't. Being sceptical about organisations is someway a healthy thing to be. There's nothing wrong with asking questions.

[leicsmac]

38 minutes ago, reynard said:

I agree with a lot of what you say. I'm the same with penicillin. Yes I do ask but I bet a huge  percentage of people don't. Being sceptical about organisations is someway a healthy thing to be. There's nothing wrong with asking questions.

Scepticism regarding organisations that might use scientific knowledge for their own ends (like, yes, pharma companies) is fair.

 

Extending that scepticism to the scientific method itself as a means of understanding the world is not.

 

The problem is too many people conflating the two.

[Ric Flair]

3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

We must be getting close to the point in the Usk where you just stay home if you aren’t well enough to go to work, and otherwise just get on with it?

Wasn't the plan pre Omicron that from March, as long as you had your booster if tested positive for covid you no longer had to isolate, or have I made that up? I remember being surprised at the bold move.

[reynard]

13 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Scepticism regarding organisations that might use scientific knowledge for their own ends (like, yes, pharma companies) is fair.

 

Extending that scepticism to the scientific method itself as a means of understanding the world is not.

 

The problem is too many people conflating the two.

Indeed

[The Horse's Mouth]

3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

We must be getting close to the point in the Usk where you just stay home if you aren’t well enough to go to work, and otherwise just get on with it?

Yeah I don't see why this hasn't become the plan, Omicron is super spreadable anyway you add restrictions the cases will continue to rise. Hospitalisations are considerably lower, so it's having more of a burden on public services than the national health now.

[shade]

Jim Smith, who sits on Pfizer’s board, is also the chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation - The company that fact checks vaccine information on Twitter. Is this a conflict of interest?

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, shade said:

Jim Smith, who sits on Pfizer’s board, is also the chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation - The company that fact checks vaccine information on Twitter. Is this a conflict of interest?

...unless this person somehow has control over the peer review process by which such facts arise to be checked, is it really relevant other than with respect to a rather narrow scope?

 

I keep hearing the banging of this drum on this thread and I am compelled to say, in one form or another, yet again:

 

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Scepticism regarding organisations that might use scientific knowledge for their own ends (like, yes, pharma companies) is fair.

 

Extending that scepticism to the scientific method itself as a means of understanding the world is not.

 

The problem is too many people conflating the two.

Please - I beg of you, qualify your remarks.

[dsr-burnley]

7 minutes ago, shade said:

Jim Smith, who sits on Pfizer’s board, is also the chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation - The company that fact checks vaccine information on Twitter. Is this a conflict of interest?

Possibly in the sense that being chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation is going to be a conflict of interest for anyone who has any connection at all with something discussed on Twitter.  Which I suspect is everyone!

[shade]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

...unless this person somehow has control over the peer review process by which such facts arise to be checked, is it really relevant other than with respect to a rather narrow scope?

 

I keep hearing the banging of this drum on this thread and I am compelled to say, in one form or another, yet again:

 

Please - I beg of you, qualify your remarks.

You truly believe a chairman has no sway over the organisation's culture or purpose? You don't believe the owners or editors of newspapers direct their agenda?

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, shade said:

You truly believe a chairman has no sway over the organisation's culture or purpose? You don't believe the owners or editors of newspapers direct their agenda?

I don't believe the first and do believe the second, so agree with you.

 

I also believe that people - and in this case I must include yourself - need to work harder on separating critique of them and critique of the scientific method that produces the facts they then do whatever they like with.

 

Please.

[shade]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I don't believe the first and do believe the second, so agree with you.

 

I also believe that people - and in this case I must include yourself - need to work harder on separating critique of them and critique of the scientific method that produces the facts they then do whatever they like with.

 

Please.

I'll try but I don't fully understand what you mean, you're saying you shouldn't question the integrity of people doing the science?

 

Is this valid critique, people doing the Pfizer trials falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2635