Coronavirus Thread

[kyleolly]

Isolation and covid passes to be scrapped 🥳

[kenny]

2 hours ago, Sly said:

You’d like to think most employers will have realised this. 
 

However unfortunately many will still adopt the slave / master approach and require people to still be in an office, as they don’t trust people.

 

You’ll always get the few that spoil it for the many, however the world has changed and I could see people leaving roles, if people were required to work from an office. Like you mention, the cost to drive, park, eat and most importantly be productive due to less travelling can’t go unnoticed.

We are noticing the opposite. I'm employing people because we are in the office and they aren't being forced to work from home as they are at their current businesses.

[Raj]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60050996

 

 

 

Idiot.

I mean how sad, sorry for the loss.

 

[Manini]

2 hours ago, Sly said:

could see people leaving roles, if people were required to work from an office.

Already started. Companies in London offering fully remote roles to people in the north of England on near enough London money anyway, with no or minimal required travel. 

[Corky]

Face masks should remain mandatory on public transport. They help stem the spread of not just Covid but other illnesses like colds.

[dsr-burnley]

8 minutes ago, Corky said:

Face masks should remain mandatory on public transport. They help stem the spread of not just Covid but other illnesses like colds.

Have there been any useful studies about whether restricting the spread of colds is a good thing?  Anecdotally, they say that children are more likely to be ill now because they haven't been exposed to germs for a while.  Anecdotally also, they say that exposure to colds may have helped people avoid or suffer fewer ill effects from covid.  Remember that indigenous islanders in the Americas and the Pacific were decimated or wiped out by relatively mild diseases from European settlers, simply because they had no immunity to them.  

[leicsmac]

8 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

Have there been any useful studies about whether restricting the spread of colds is a good thing?  Anecdotally, they say that children are more likely to be ill now because they haven't been exposed to germs for a while.  Anecdotally also, they say that exposure to colds may have helped people avoid or suffer fewer ill effects from covid.  Remember that indigenous islanders in the Americas and the Pacific were decimated or wiped out by relatively mild diseases from European settlers, simply because they had no immunity to them.  

There's something in this, as the historical records clearly show. Though rather obviously you have to balance this with the severity of the disease being exposed to, as well.

 

(And I think "settlers" is a rather tame term for what the Europeans got up to when they arrived in the Americas.)

[RowlattsFox]

So my PCR came back positive, as did my wife's. However she is continuously getting negative LFTs  could it be she had the infection first, so therefore stil showing on a PCR but no longer on LFTs? 

 

All a bit of a ballache, for essentially a cold as that is all I have, i know it's not always like that. 

 

5 year old is expected to be in school, unless he has symptoms, yet we are both self isolating so can't take him. Great. 

[KrefelderFox666]

2 hours ago, RowlattsFox said:

So my PCR came back positive, as did my wife's. However she is continuously getting negative LFTs  could it be she had the infection first, so therefore stil showing on a PCR but no longer on LFTs? 

 

All a bit of a ballache, for essentially a cold as that is all I have, i know it's not always like that. 

 

5 year old is expected to be in school, unless he has symptoms, yet we are both self isolating so can't take him. Great. 

It's all a bit confusing. Your situation is very similar to ours.

 

I am now positive after 6 consecutive days of testing negative even though symptoms started on Saturday (runny nose, sniffles and had a day or two sore eyes). My wife tested negative yesterday (after testing positive Friday) so we were hoping today she would test negative again and be "free". No, she tested positive again today, really? She had a PCR on the weekend and confirmed positive, I don't think I am going to bother because it should inevitably be positive (and they say no PCR is needed if LFT is positive - would prevent any further unecessary contacts).

 

Our son has been shipped off to school by a grandparent as neither of us can leave the house. We tested him this morning to be sure and he was negative, so was our youngest (who is stuck in the house with us).

 

On a positive, it means I am unable to go to the Brighton game and don't have to suffer further!!!

[RowlattsFox]

26 minutes ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

It's all a bit confusing. Your situation is very similar to ours.

 

I am now positive after 6 consecutive days of testing negative even though symptoms started on Saturday (runny nose, sniffles and had a day or two sore eyes). My wife tested negative yesterday (after testing positive Friday) so we were hoping today she would test negative again and be "free". No, she tested positive again today, really? She had a PCR on the weekend and confirmed positive, I don't think I am going to bother because it should inevitably be positive (and they say no PCR is needed if LFT is positive - would prevent any further unecessary contacts).

 

Our son has been shipped off to school by a grandparent as neither of us can leave the house. We tested him this morning to be sure and he was negative, so was our youngest (who is stuck in the house with us).

 

On a positive, it means I am unable to go to the Brighton game and don't have to suffer further!!!

Unfortunately we have no family nearby so have no choice but to leave him off school today and tomorrow. Fingers crossed I have negative LFT on Saturday and Sunday so he can go back on Monday. Bit shit that there is a red mark against his attendance record when we have no choice. 

I'm supposed to do daily testing on him but to be honest, its not worth the daily battle  Unless he starts having symptoms

 

 

[KrefelderFox666]

17 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

Unfortunately we have no family nearby so have no choice but to leave him off school today and tomorrow. Fingers crossed I have negative LFT on Saturday and Sunday so he can go back on Monday. Bit shit that there is a red mark against his attendance record when we have no choice. 

I'm supposed to do daily testing on him but to be honest, its not worth the daily battle  Unless he starts having symptoms

 

 

Yes we are very lucky in that respect. And it seems ridiculous that in Covid times attendance records are of any value. And completely agree re testing, although our son is actually not too bad with the LFT's, he's nearly 5. Our 2 year old daughter on the other hand, it's torture so we try to avoid at all costs.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

FOI request doing the rounds that states that the total number of deaths where Covid was the only contributing factor on the death certificate, was just over 6000 between the start of Feb 2020 and the end of Dec 2021. 

 

I know it's horribly out of context but it is interesting.

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

FOI request doing the rounds that states that the total number of deaths where Covid was the only contributing factor on the death certificate, was just over 6000 between the start of Feb 2020 and the end of Dec 2021. 

 

I know it's horribly out of context but it is interesting.

I guess that depends on the legitimacy of the source.

 

And additional other factors, such as whether or not such excess deaths seemingly caused by comorbidities rather than "just" Covid are somehow less important. 

Edited 20 January 2022 by leicsmac

[KrefelderFox666]

12 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

FOI request doing the rounds that states that the total number of deaths where Covid was the only contributing factor on the death certificate, was just over 6000 between the start of Feb 2020 and the end of Dec 2021. 

 

I know it's horribly out of context but it is interesting.

As above would be interesting to see more data and stats on that. I could say that not a single person has died from the vaccine shot (as it is only potential side effects that cause mortality) when we all know it can contribute in extreme cases.

 

I almost find that stat slightly concerning. It basically says 6,000 people have died purely because of the virus, they were otherwise fit and healthy and would have likely lived for many years to come. I still think that of the other 145,000 odd deaths, Covid played a huge role in shortening their lives.

 

Just for comparison (using latest figures), road traffic fatalities stand at about 1,500 per year, so Covid (purely Covid deaths without contributing factors according to the stat you provided) has double the amount of deaths on a per year basis.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

21 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I guess that depends on the legitimacy of the source.

 

And additional other factors, such as whether or not such excess deaths seemingly caused by comorbidities rather than "just" Covid are somehow less important. 

This was the source:

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/covid19deathsandautopsiesfeb2020todec2021

[dsr-burnley]

13 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I guess that depends on the legitimacy of the source.

 

And additional other factors, such as whether or not such excess deaths seemingly caused by comorbidities rather than "just" Covid are somehow less important. 

It's not a matter of "importance".  But I think we would mostly agree that what is the appropriate and proportional reaction to some deaths is not appropriate and proportional to others.  It doesn't mean the dying old man's death is less important than the healthy child's, but it does mean that the effort and expense of trying to prevent the death will not be the same. 

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

This was the source:

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/covid19deathsandautopsiesfeb2020todec2021

Much obliged, no issue with the legitimacy of the source then. So it's the second part of the argument that is now pertinent.

 

10 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

It's not a matter of "importance".  But I think we would mostly agree that what is the appropriate and proportional reaction to some deaths is not appropriate and proportional to others.  It doesn't mean the dying old man's death is less important than the healthy child's, but it does mean that the effort and expense of trying to prevent the death will not be the same. 

Au contraire, to those who would be circulating that 6,000 figure online at this very moment and using it as a flag to rally around regarding Covid being "not that bad" (and you can bet your bottom dollar exactly that is happening), rather than the nuanced approach being talked about on this thread, it is very much a matter of "importance".

 

Why else would they isolate and use those 6,000 only? To imply the message that Covid doesn't kill many "healthy" people, just the "weak".

[dsr-burnley]

4 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Much obliged, no issue with the legitimacy of the source then. So it's the second part of the argument that is now pertinent.

 

Au contraire, to those who would be circulating that 6,000 figure online at this very moment and using it as a flag to rally around regarding Covid being "not that bad" (and you can bet your bottom dollar exactly that is happening), rather than the nuanced approach being talked about on this thread, it is very much a matter of "importance".

 

Why else would they isolate and use those 6,000 only? To imply the message that Covid doesn't kill many "healthy" people, just the "weak".

We already know that covid doesn't kill many healthy people.  It doesn't need implying, it can be stated flat out. The average age of death = 83 is not because covid kills a random sample from all age groups, it's because it primarily kills the weak.  I'm not drawing conclusions, just stating a fact.

[Lionator]

50 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

FOI request doing the rounds that states that the total number of deaths where Covid was the only contributing factor on the death certificate, was just over 6000 between the start of Feb 2020 and the end of Dec 2021. 

 

I know it's horribly out of context but it is interesting.

I know several healthy people in their 50’s die of covid, who had no underlying health issues. I am skeptical of your above quote. 
 

of course it’s clear that factors like obesity, heart disease etc are big contributing factors to deaths in covid but they’re so prevalent in the population that there will be few who died solely of covid. Those 6,000 people may be completely healthy and a disease which kills that many healthy people in an 18 month period is an issue. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

11 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I know several healthy people in their 50’s die of covid, who had no underlying health issues. I am skeptical of your above quote. 
 

of course it’s clear that factors like obesity, heart disease etc are big contributing factors to deaths in covid but they’re so prevalent in the population that there will be few who died solely of covid. Those 6,000 people may be completely healthy and a disease which kills that many healthy people in an 18 month period is an issue. 

Well it's from the ONS, I'm not going to sing their praises but it's hardly a YouTube conspiracy theory is it.

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

We already know that covid doesn't kill many healthy people.  It doesn't need implying, it can be stated flat out. The average age of death = 83 is not because covid kills a random sample from all age groups, it's because it primarily kills the weak.  I'm not drawing conclusions, just stating a fact.

Absolutely.

 

The problem arises when you get people expressing the equation "Covid kills the weak"  + "it doesn't kill many healthy people + (implied) "its not really a big problem".

 

... because that = (implied) "they don't matter and they deserved to suffer and die".

 

Thankfully, no one on here (I don't think) is drawing that particular incredibly eugenicist and unethical conclusion, but let's not pretend it isn't happening out in the world, sometimes from people with a lot of power and influence.

[fox_favourite]

So day 3 after testing positive on a lateral flow and I still feel fine. Just feels like a very Slight blockage in my nose, but not stopping me from breathing normally and my voice breaks up a bit from time to time.

 

I fully aware, so far I’ve got off lightly and very lucky, but with people with experience - when did it get worse?

 

im so glad that I do lateral flows regularly that it got picked up. 

Edited 21 January 2022 by fox_favourite

[danny.]

17 hours ago, Lionator said:

I know several healthy people in their 50’s die of covid, who had no underlying health issues. I am skeptical of your above quote. 
 

of course it’s clear that factors like obesity, heart disease etc are big contributing factors to deaths in covid but they’re so prevalent in the population that there will be few who died solely of covid. Those 6,000 people may be completely healthy and a disease which kills that many healthy people in an 18 month period is an issue. 

Were they fit and of a healthy weight? Just asking as I’ve read several articles abour people who are “fit and healthy with no underlying conditions” suffering badly from Covid, or dying - and then the article shows a picture of them, and it turns out they are morbidly obese. 

[KrefelderFox666]

So after my first positive test yesterday (and having it confirmed with a PCR), I have tested negative today...

 

Either LFT's are completely useless, or I am just showing up weird results. Symptoms (as minor as they are) started 6 days ago but it took 5 days to show up on an LFT. Will do another tomorrow to see if today was an anomaly but I am struggling to make sense of how it all works.

[kyleolly]

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/covid-vaccine-mandate-nhs-staff-paused-government-workers-sacked-1416578