Coronavirus Thread

[CosbehFox]

21 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

How is that proof the vaccination is working? july 2020 saw 1500 deaths which is 48 a day, currently the death rate is rising, so we don't know what it will be at the end of the month, but i bet it won't be much different.

We can't tell unless the govt is willing to let us know if the deaths are occurring to vaccinated or vulnerable persons. The government seem reluctant to let information go when it comes to the status of those hospitalised and sadly passed away. 

[SpacedX]

24 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

 but I think she's talking absolute nonsense and had to remind her we don't live in a totalitarian dictatorship (yet).

??? But...but...this thread told me...

[z-layrex]

I think the best thing about having occupational covid for a second time is the knowledge that my job is secure. Really just grateful for the chance to earn that 1%.

[Guest Bert Fill]

1 hour ago, The People's Hero said:

My daughter has a positive lateral flow test and so we are prepared to do the common sense thing and just all isolate for the 10 days.

 

My question is, is there a requirement, legal or otherwise for us to get a full PCR check done? I'd rather not put everyone through the hassle since the net result is surely the same anyway, ie we isolate?

 

Answers appreciated as my wife thinks we could be fined for not having a PCR check, but I think she's talking absolute nonsense and had to remind her we don't live in a totalitarian dictatorship (yet).

I think you’re wrong about us not living in a totalitarian dictatorship, but right about not having to get a PCR test.

 

*Edited to add that someone who I suspect knows more than I do about this says you should get the PCR.

Edited 15 July 2021 by Bert Fill

[SpacedX]

4 minutes ago, Bert Fill said:

I think you’re wrong about us not living in a totalitarian dictatorship, 

Are you actually being serious? 

[z-layrex]

47 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

My daughter has a positive lateral flow test and so we are prepared to do the common sense thing and just all isolate for the 10 days.

 

My question is, is there a requirement, legal or otherwise for us to get a full PCR check done? I'd rather not put everyone through the hassle since the net result is surely the same anyway, ie we isolate?

 

Answers appreciated as my wife thinks we could be fined for not having a PCR check, but I think she's talking absolute nonsense and had to remind her we don't live in a totalitarian dictatorship (yet).

(positive) lateral flow tests are 99.7% accurate. You are supposed to get the PCR after.

 

https://www.gov.uk/report-covid19-result

[Guest Bert Fill]

14 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Are you actually being serious? 

Er… no.

Although my intent at humour was also intended as a reference to the gradual undermining of democratic safeguards in our political system.

But no, we don’t live in a totalitarian dictatorship. Yet.

[SpacedX]

1 minute ago, Bert Fill said:

Er… no.

Although my intent at humour was also intended as a reference to the gradual undermining of democratic safeguards in our political system.

But no, we don’t live in a totalitarian dictatorship. Yet.

Apologies, so difficult to tell on this thread. 

[Guest Bert Fill]

1 minute ago, Line-X said:

Apologies, so difficult to tell on this thread. 

Ain’t that the truth!

[Dunge]

1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said:

Point 1 - by relying on personal choice/common sense, I think it's perfectly clear that not enough people can be relied upon to act for the common good, so at the very least I'd prefer them to have vaccinated more widely before blurring the lines and prickteasing us all about the relaxing of things - and said prickteasing has been done knowingly, getting hopes and expectations up, so that when the time comes, some have already made their minds up, and the government can blame us for their contradictory, self-serving rubbish.

 

Point 2 - I'm no doctor, but I know plenty that work in the medical profession, and none that I've spoken to know the long term chances of the immune system and its ability to adapt/counter/grow resilient to Covid and its many variants. I find the phrasing of your (well intended, no doubt) question rather sinister - because if we simply rely on the human immune system to overcome the disease (which we don't yet know is actually possible) then it is basically a game of 'let the weak/old/unlucky die, who cares that much? - it's the 'natural' order', which I don't think you are saying or thinking (I do not want to either accuse you or be accused of such) but I think it's what the Old Etonian/Harrovian etc mindset is - let the plebs take the bullets, we'll be 35 miles behind the front line. Oh, and please vote for us, we're not scary lefties.

I suppose my concern, and why I phrased it as starkly as I did, is that I figure there may be an important conversation to be had as a society and a country - maybe even a world - of what exactly we expect as a long-term policy over Coronavirus. As an illustration, we’ve just been through what we call lockdown measures, all to avoid an idea of (pre-vaccine) herd immunity, where the virus would run rampant through society and everyone takes their chances. On the other hand, other than personal vaccinations, nothing has ever been done about flu, which can be deadly to compromised immune systems. And no government has been accused of letting the weak die out deliberately in the process.

 

This says to me that there’s a balance to be struck somewhere, and furthermore that that balance is a choice rather than anything that can be calculated or optimised scientifically. What is a life compared to freedom? Where should the line be drawn? Two different people could give two different answers, and I couldn’t declare either to be wrong. My concern, therefore, is that the usage of the word eugenics rather polarises that whole debate, implying that the mere suggestion of living with Covid in the same way we lived with flu (should that ultimately be possible) is strictly immoral. Hence I figured I’d encourage elaboration on the matter.

[HighPeakFox]

3 minutes ago, Dunge said:

I suppose my concern, and why I phrased it as starkly as I did, is that I figure there may be an important conversation to be had as a society and a country - maybe even a world - of what exactly we expect as a long-term policy over Coronavirus. As an illustration, we’ve just been through what we call lockdown measures, all to avoid an idea of (pre-vaccine) herd immunity, where the virus would run rampant through society and everyone takes their chances. On the other hand, other than personal vaccinations, nothing has ever been done about flu, which can be deadly to compromised immune systems. And no government has been accused of letting the weak die out deliberately in the process.

 

This says to me that there’s a balance to be struck somewhere, and furthermore that that balance is a choice rather than anything that can be calculated or optimised scientifically. What is a life compared to freedom? Where should the line be drawn? Two different people could give two different answers, and I couldn’t declare either to be wrong. My concern, therefore, is that the usage of the word eugenics rather polarises that whole debate, implying that the mere suggestion of living with Covid in the same way we lived with flu (should that ultimately be possible) is strictly immoral. Hence I figured I’d encourage elaboration on the matter.

Well put and totally understood.

[Dahnsouff]

4 hours ago, z-layrex said:

Why do you have such a problem with me wearing a mask to protect you and others around you? I've been walking around unknowingly positive for at least a couple days, the fact I always wear a mask on the train and in shops might have stopped me giving it to someone else?

Because he feels his personal liberty is above the needs of wider society I would guess. If it is not, then I apologise, but a little more clarity as to his concerns would help.

[FoxesDeb]

2 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Because he feels his personal liberty is above the needs of wider society I would guess. If it is not, then I apologise, but a little more clarity as to his concerns would help.

I think you're correct, but I also don't think we're going to get said clarity unfortunately. 

[HighPeakFox]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, those that are hell-bent on finding fault and accusing the rest of us of being sheep will, in any context, shout loudest and refuse to listen most.

[st albans fox]

4 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Going back to my point about testing - it's less about not admitting there's an increasing rate of cases but rationalising the situation. 

 

We were not testing people free of symptoms last year - therefore we might be a lot lower in the curve/peak than we actually know if comparing to last year.

 

If the actual rates of cases last year are anywhere near this year, it kind of takes the edge off the transmission of variants improving and puts the current situation more favourable. 

 

We have never got to grips really with how many people have had COVID without symptoms. We can't judge the level of testing. 

 

As ever the hospitalisation rate is key now - that's shown a slow down on growth rate but it's still growing. 

which is why you should use the weekly ONS data which is not skewed by testing only those with symptoms 
 

3 hours ago, The People's Hero said:

My daughter has a positive lateral flow test and so we are prepared to do the common sense thing and just all isolate for the 10 days.

 

My question is, is there a requirement, legal or otherwise for us to get a full PCR check done? I'd rather not put everyone through the hassle since the net result is surely the same anyway, ie we isolate?

 

Answers appreciated as my wife thinks we could be fined for not having a PCR check, but I think she's talking absolute nonsense and had to remind her we don't live in a totalitarian dictatorship (yet).

If you’re all happy to isolate for 10 days then you don’t need to do anything. Otherwise, your daughter should get a pcr test ASAP to confirm the LFT and assuming that’s positive, test and trace should spring into action and you will be contacted as a ‘close contact’.  There is no requirement whatsoever to get a pcr to confirm the  lft? Legally, you only have to isolate if test and trace tell you to. Although if you have a positive lft and just ignore that then I suspect you could end up in some trouble if you then went and infected anyone vulnerable. 
 

anyone thinking of getting a pcr to confirm if an infected close contact has passed the infection onto them should, wait a couple of days before testing as it’s generally a few days before you would become infectious after contracting the virus. 

[StanSP]

On 14/07/2021 at 14:36, Father Ted said:

You really do stink this group out Mr Doom and Gloom. If you wish to wear a mask, you go ahead, but expect to be berated by people like me who aren’t mentally inept at deciding how to live our lives with freedom. Sad.

eh? why would you 'berate' people who choose to wear something that might help prevent passing the virus on?

[Legend_in_blue]

Eye watering figures right there.

 

Worth it?

 

 

[enmac]

5 hours ago, The People's Hero said:

My daughter has a positive lateral flow test and so we are prepared to do the common sense thing and just all isolate for the 10 days.

 

My question is, is there a requirement, legal or otherwise for us to get a full PCR check done? I'd rather not put everyone through the hassle since the net result is surely the same anyway, ie we isolate?

 

Answers appreciated as my wife thinks we could be fined for not having a PCR check, but I think she's talking absolute nonsense and had to remind her we don't live in a totalitarian dictatorship (yet).

Incredibly confusing isn't it? There's what's legal and then there's what's guidance? Daniel Barnett, barrister, I'm sure has said something about this. Sorry, but I can't remember what he's said. He's on LBC at 9 pm, Saturdays. Give him a call. 

[leicsmac]

5 hours ago, Dunge said:

I suppose my concern, and why I phrased it as starkly as I did, is that I figure there may be an important conversation to be had as a society and a country - maybe even a world - of what exactly we expect as a long-term policy over Coronavirus. As an illustration, we’ve just been through what we call lockdown measures, all to avoid an idea of (pre-vaccine) herd immunity, where the virus would run rampant through society and everyone takes their chances. On the other hand, other than personal vaccinations, nothing has ever been done about flu, which can be deadly to compromised immune systems. And no government has been accused of letting the weak die out deliberately in the process.

 

This says to me that there’s a balance to be struck somewhere, and furthermore that that balance is a choice rather than anything that can be calculated or optimised scientifically. What is a life compared to freedom? Where should the line be drawn? Two different people could give two different answers, and I couldn’t declare either to be wrong. My concern, therefore, is that the usage of the word eugenics rather polarises that whole debate, implying that the mere suggestion of living with Covid in the same way we lived with flu (should that ultimately be possible) is strictly immoral. Hence I figured I’d encourage elaboration on the matter.

For the time being, certainly.

 

Perhaps one day that will be easier to quantify, though a part of the discussion itself is that the very notion of doing so might be unethical in someones opinion.

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

So we could be locked down again 'within weeks'? Can just see it now 200k cases a day 500 deaths and skyrocketing and Boris heading up a press conference for one last push spending the autumn locked in our houses only being allowed out to exercise. Will there be an end to this? 

[leicsmac]

Getting my first jab today. Case numbers have been higher than ever over here recently so happy to get it.

[WigstonWanderer]

6 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Getting my first jab today. Case numbers have been higher than ever over here recently so happy to get it.

Australia is also having another wave. Nothing like what the UK has suffered of course, but threatens to unleash Covid on a largely unvaccinated population. All entirely due to the arrogance, complacency and narcissism of the NSW state government. They’ve spent the whole of the last year lecturing all the other states about a “proportional response”, how their contact tracing is the “gold standard” and better than anyone else, and how they have managed to avoid large scale lockdowns.

 

The reality is that their current predicament was entirely predictable. The template for dealing with outbreaks in Australia was forged by trial and error when Victoria was plunged into a 4 month lockdown last year due to delaying doing so for too long. Lessons were learned and since then all other states except NSW have adopted a policy of what to many people seems like a disproportionately heavy response, clamping down hard almost immediately at the start of an outbreak for a relatively short time in order to snuff out the virus before it gets a chance to take hold and spread. This has been hugely successful and has protected both health and livelihoods, with most people suffering only a few days in lockdown, with very light restrictions at other times.

 

Unfortunately now, NSW might be condemned to weeks or even months of lockdown. Of course, the longer the lockdown the more fatigue sets in, compliance diminishes, and the whole strategy is put at risk. The alternative (opening up) would mean UK levels of infection, and massive economic damage, ultimately spreading to the rest of Australia. By current world standards this would be paradise lost. Hopefully they’ll toughen up and take the hard decisions required to get back on top of it, with us eventually being bailed out by the vaccine.

 

 

 

 

Edited 16 July 2021 by WigstonWanderer

[st albans fox]

5 hours ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

So we could be locked down again 'within weeks'? Can just see it now 200k cases a day 500 deaths and skyrocketing and Boris heading up a press conference for one last push spending the autumn locked in our houses only being allowed out to exercise. Will there be an end to this? 

It’s a huge gamble that they’re taking and whilst they argue that economically and for mental health reasons they need to do it, it could straight backfire on them big time. Once people realise that they can catch it whilst double vaccinated and that 10% of the double vaccinated are likely to end up in potentially as bad a place as they would have without a vaccine, they could vote with their feet and generally stay home too much for the economy to recover. The expected number of daily deaths is likely to be 100+ in august - the media will grab all the bad stories that they can. Assume it’s just a case of needing to do this at some point and now is better than October.   It’s a hell of an experiment and if long covid does persist for years then they may find themselves with a problem come the next election over it. 

[Babylon]

30 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

It’s a huge gamble that they’re taking and whilst they argue that economically and for mental health reasons they need to do it, it could straight backfire on them big time. Once people realise that they can catch it whilst double vaccinated and that 10% of the double vaccinated are likely to end up in potentially as bad a place as they would have without a vaccine, they could vote with their feet and generally stay home too much for the economy to recover. The expected number of daily deaths is likely to be 100+ in august - the media will grab all the bad stories that they can. Assume it’s just a case of needing to do this at some point and now is better than October.   It’s a hell of an experiment and if long covid does persist for years then they may find themselves with a problem come the next election over it. 

The Dutch and Israel already winding back on their opening up admitting it was a mistake. Going to be an interesting couple of months... 

[st albans fox]

5 minutes ago, Babylon said:

The Dutch and Israel already winding back on their opening up admitting it was a mistake. Going to be an interesting couple of months... 

Quite different scenarios though ……Israel way more vaccinated. I think they’ve only had to re introduced masks in indoor public settings. The Dutch problem seems to be purely down to re opening night life without any restrictions which has allowed the virus to run freely through the under 30’s.  that’s us now 

 

my teenage daughter has several friends suffering a flu like version of covid despite being single vaxed.  Last year that age group tended to be very much asymptomatic.