Cable Forum - Coronavirus

If depends on the poster. If it's just a random, I would be inclined to agree with you. If it's a reputable journalist - as in this instance - I wouldn't. To me, it's more rhe person than the platform.

But you yourself just acknowledged that the platform’s limited character space causes problems. That being the case, what’s prompting reputable people to keep struggling with it, if it’s inadequate as a means of communicating their expertise?

I contend that with Twatter, even if you’re a reputable journalist, it’s about being seen and esteemed by your peer group rather than the detail of what you want to say. And if the primary purpose of a communication is to be seen and esteemed by the “right” people rather than the serious examination of ideas, then that communication’s seriousness as a means of discussing ideas is still suspect.

In short … I stand by my opinion of Twatter. If something is worth saying on its own merit, rather than as a means of looking good in front of your mates, then say it somewhere else. If you’re a senior staffer at the FT for example, you could try using that platform.

nffc	19-10-2021 12:28

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36097975)

I wonder if this will trigger Plan B?

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-sky...-rise-12431158

Considering the cases are pretty much almost all in secondary school age kids and not yet having a similar impact on hospitals as previously (which seems to be the tipping point) then I'd suggest probably not.

It isn't rising very much and mostly seems to be in the SW where apparently a lot of people had PCRs and then given the incorrect results so these have spread it when they should have been isolating.

Also, take the person into context. David King is a former CSA admittedly, but neither he nor Vallance are medics (unlike Whitty, Harries and the deputy CMOs) in fact I think King is a retired chemistry professor from Oxford. He's also not a SAGE member, he heads up IndySage who are mainly a bunch of lockdown zealots who like to make a lot of noise on twitter.

Sephiroth

19-10-2021 13:15

Re: Coronavirus

I’m sure that what’s happening g is the rod to herd immunity. As long as the booster jabs are given in good time, the high number of positive tests will fizzle out. I did the maths some weeks ago and there’s nothing to challenge that. There is more congregation at universities and schools - so more positive tests. Yet hospitalisation are a fraction of the past peak.

Hugh	19-10-2021 13:38

Re: Coronavirus

4 Attachment(s)

When you posted your calcs on the 28th August, the 7 day COVID death rate was 12 - it’s now 121.

There are now 10 times the number of COVID patients in ICU than there was then.

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...2&d=1634647270

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1634647270

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...4&d=1634647589

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...5&d=1634647589

Sephiroth

19-10-2021 14:22

Re: Coronavirus

In my mind, it's the hospitalisations that is the key number in relation to positive tests.

However, I do recognise that my postulation is based on the axiom that the vaccine is bringing the pandemic under control and that thus convergence must occur.

nffc	19-10-2021 16:10

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36098030)

This would at least appear logical considering the hospitalisation of double-jabbed people is still low and most of the positive tests are in unvaccinated school kids.

At some point it will hit the level where enough people have had it or been vaccinated enough to stop it. Wonder what that's called :p

Sephiroth

19-10-2021 17:12

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by nffc (Post 36098050)

To backup what you've said (and it's called "my post of 28-August"), here's what I said:

Quote:

I did a fag packet calculation. Based on the % of adult population given in the daily stats as at 28-August:

Adult population = 55 million.
78% fully vaccinated = 43 million
88% partly vaccinated = 48 million. I'll take the 45 million mid point of vaccination status.

10 million adults are up for statistical grabs. Let's assume 33,333 new case per day.

Then at that rate it would take 300 days if nobody else was vaccinated for the UK's adults to be loaded with anti-bodies.

The second dose daily rated is c. 128,000 which is closing the gap 4x faster than the infection rate. So, the two rate would converge within 3 months, possibly 2 months.

CONCLUSION: No need for any more lock-downs because the hospitals are running at a fraction of the cases as compared with January.

Anyone disagree?

However, the 2nd dose rate has dropped off so the convergence will take longer.

1andrew1

19-10-2021 17:50

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36098030)

Do the rising numbers of infections, deaths and hospitilisations in the UK suggest vaccines on their own are insufficient to bring the pandemic under control and we need to consider measures like a return to mandatory mask-wearing, like those countries which are not experiencing the same uptick as us? Or is it a temporary increase that will be resolved once more people have the boosters?

papa smurf

19-10-2021 17:58

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36098062)

Seems to me people are still wearing masks, cleaning everything in sight, etc.

nffc	19-10-2021 18:52

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36098066)

Seems to me people are still wearing masks, cleaning everything in sight, etc.

Tbh I've only worn one a handful of times since they lifted the legal requirement.

They just don't seem to be effective enough to work, and they do only work to begin with if you have covid, and if you have covid symptoms you should be at home.

The fact we have no masks and in Scotland / Wales they're more restrictive yet still seeing similar relative numbers (plus they have vaxpasses) implies they aren't making a great deal of difference there.

The more important measures are
- Not going out and getting a test if you have symptoms of the virus
- If you're in close contact i.e. live with someone who has had it or been close to a positive test, test yourself if you're going anywhere
- Avoiding doing things which are unnecessary and working from home if you can
- Keeping social visits and house party type things to minimum

None of that needs face nappies or lockdowns to do, just using your common sense.

Hugh	19-10-2021 19:13

Re: Coronavirus

"Face nappies"?

<snigger>

OLD BOY

19-10-2021 19:36

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36098062)

Why are you so obsessed with government control, Andrew? Stop pulling your hair out about the number of infections. The higher it rises, the more immunity in the country will be strengthened.

The PM has already said that the criteria for measures being reintroduced is whether the NHS can cope, and at present it is, because the vaccines are working.

Mask wearing is not effective. The masks we buy in the shops are not surgical masks, people don’t wear them correctly and those that do can be seen with the masks gapping when they should completely seal the face.

The concentration should be on stepping up on the vaccinations and monitoring hospital admissions and lengths of stay.

Hugh	19-10-2021 19:50

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36098081)

Why are you so obsessed with government control, Andrew? Stop pulling your hair out about the number of infections. The higher it rises, the more immunity in the country will be strengthened.

The PM has already said that the criteria for measures being reintroduced is whether the NHS can cope, and at present it is, because the vaccines are working.

Mask wearing is not effective. The masks we buy in the shops are not surgical masks, people don’t wear them correctly and those that do can be seen with the masks gapping when they should completely seal the face.

The concentration should be on stepping up on the vaccinations and monitoring hospital admissions and lengths of stay.

As was previously posted just over a fortnight ago when you posted the same misinformation…

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36095711)

You are putting your own interpretation onto the findings - nothing in that research stated that masks were ineffective, largely or otherwise; it states they could be "less effective" if not fitted properly.

Two different things.

The study showed that surgical & fabric masks kept between 65-80% of particles outside the mask - that is not "largely ineffective".

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...3&d=1633289074

Anyway, instead of a study that involved 7 people, how about one that involved 350,000 people?

Quote:

Styczynski and her colleagues recently performed a study across 600 villages in Bangladesh where they provided surgical masks to some of the villages and cloth masks to others.

”When considering both types of masks together, we found a significant reduction in Covid-19. When we looked at each of the mask types separately, we found that surgical masks were especially effective in reducing Covid-19, though there was more uncertainty for cloth masks,” she says. “It may be that we didn't see an effect of cloth masks on Covid-19 because fewer people were given cloths masks. However, both cloth and surgical masks significantly reduced Covid-like symptoms, suggesting that cloth masks offer some protection.”

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-ne...-covid-19.html

1andrew1

19-10-2021 20:03

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36098081)

I said "infections, deaths and hospitilisations". It suits no one to discard the rise in the latter two.

I also said "measures like a return to mask-wearing" as an example of some of the measures we previously had. I didn't intend to trigger the mask-wearing debate again - plenty of independent studies answer this question better than me or you ever can.

I'm sure hospitlisations and their duration are monitored and obviously the booster vaccinations need to be rolled out as quickly as possible. The question is: Will we need to do more so that we don't top the wrong charts in Europe?

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:12.

Page 511 of 569

511

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page