Coronavirus

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Damien

It is bloody annoying that the virus seems to mutate so quickly and previous infections seem to matter for little. Hopefully, this peaks and we see more evidence that each 'wave' is smaller than the last.

It may be no worse than the flu but we already have the flu so to have two respiratory illnesses for the NHS to handle each year is a bit crap.

What little validity the flu comparison has it's at an individual level, not based on the majority of the population catching it, potentially multiple times a year.

Originally Posted by Damien

It is bloody annoying that the virus seems to mutate so quickly and previous infections seem to matter for little. Hopefully, this peaks and we see more evidence that each 'wave' is smaller than the last.

It may be no worse than the flu but we already have the flu so to have two respiratory illnesses for the NHS to handle each year is a bit crap.

On the contrary, previous infections (and vaccination) are the reason why covid is now causing far less serious illness. Memory T cells are among the things that persist in the body and are triggered by reinfection. There’s sufficient lag that this response doesn’t prevent infection becoming established but it is effective at eliminating it thereafter.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth

71 last Monday where my wife works which was almost double the week before. I think, at the moment, it's the increasing levels of staff of ill with it that should be worrying us.

Yes, and as they are in contact (and testing) with people who have the virus that is potentially going to go up, even if they wear masks.


I appreciate training to be a nurse or a doctor takes several years, and that importing them isn't really the answer either, but surely the NHS has had years to plan for a solution to their recruitment issues, and that for whatever reason the NHS not adequately being able to crisis manage or plan contingency for staff shortages etc (which are likely, though I'm sure you have better inside info than I do, to be the main reasons something like this puts the NHS under "pressure" aside from the obvious one) isn't really a valid reason to put the general population under restrictions. It's like saying let's close everything in a town because the school is closed as all the teachers and some of the kids have norovirus.


The other thing which concerns me is how the virus can spread in hospitals. Yes, I know it's contagious and I know people can have it before they get ill or test positive, but what precautions are they taking to isolate those with covid so they don't spread it? Are patients with covid being kept apart from those who don't? Are the staff changing PPE enough?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

What little validity the flu comparison has it's at an individual level, not based on the majority of the population catching it, potentially multiple times a year.

I think Damien was referring to the potency of the illness now rather than the rate of transmission.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I think Damien was referring to the potency of the illness now rather than the rate of transmission.

Yes, OB and I think you'll find that exactly the point I addressed in my post. Such analysis is at an individual level, not a population one.

---------- Post added at 13:21 ---------- Previous post was at 13:17 ----------

Originally Posted by nffc

Yes, and as they are in contact (and testing) with people who have the virus that is potentially going to go up, even if they wear masks.

I appreciate training to be a nurse or a doctor takes several years, and that importing them isn't really the answer either, but surely the NHS has had years to plan for a solution to their recruitment issues, and that for whatever reason the NHS not adequately being able to crisis manage or plan contingency for staff shortages etc (which are likely, though I'm sure you have better inside info than I do, to be the main reasons something like this puts the NHS under "pressure" aside from the obvious one) isn't really a valid reason to put the general population under restrictions. It's like saying let's close everything in a town because the school is closed as all the teachers and some of the kids have norovirus.

The other thing which concerns me is how the virus can spread in hospitals. Yes, I know it's contagious and I know people can have it before they get ill or test positive, but what precautions are they taking to isolate those with covid so they don't spread it? Are patients with covid being kept apart from those who don't? Are the staff changing PPE enough?

The Secretary of State for Health has been clear about there being no need for extra mitigations in hospitals. To fingerpoint at staff is absolutely laughable.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...g-covid-rules/

Indeed the Department for Health and Social Care is now threatening people off with Covid with disciplinary action under pre-Covid rules.

https://inews.co.uk/news/health/paid...s-soar-1719806

It doesn't sound very "learning to live with the virus" to not adapt HR policies to account for a virus that individuals will statistically catch two or three times a year. There's no evidence of learning at all.

[Pierre]

I continue to be unconcerned.

Originally Posted by Chris

On the contrary, previous infections (and vaccination) are the reason why covid is now causing far less serious illness. Memory T cells are among the things that persist in the body and are triggered by reinfection. There’s sufficient lag that this response doesn’t prevent infection becoming established but it is effective at eliminating it thereafter.

True although I was hoping for more immunity from infection entirely.

[Sephiroth]

I don't see how anyone can ever be immune from infection, in this case Covid. If a virus gets into your nose and throat, you're infected.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Damien

True although I was hoping for more immunity from infection entirely.

Indeed, it was literally the basis for emergency use authorisation for all of the vaccines.

---------- Post added at 23:04 ---------- Previous post was at 23:03 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

I continue to be unconcerned.

I'd expect nothing less.

---------- Post added at 23:07 ---------- Previous post was at 23:04 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I don't see how anyone can ever be immune from infection, in this case Covid. If a virus gets into your nose and throat, you're infected.

Well the theory is antibodies prevent the infection spreading. However with 99% of the population having antibodies from vaccines or previous infection it's fair to say it isn't working as the proponents of herd immunity previously planned.

[Sephiroth]

Lockdown, etc, prevents the infection from spreading.

Vaccines reduce the gravity of infection. On reflection, the term "herd immunity" was insufficiently defined and has thus been hacked to pieces to suit the interpretation of individuals.

[jfman]

Herd immunity wasn't insufficiently defined. It's proponents had a very clear definition, Seph. They were simply wrong.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Herd immunity wasn't insufficiently defined. It's proponents had a very clear definition, Seph. They were simply wrong.

"Immunity" from what? Infection or serious illness? It wasn't sufficiently defined, John.

It can't be immunity from infection. "Herd immunity" can only mean that a critical mass of population has the right antibodies to attack and kill the viral infection.

In the Covid case, the medical boffins decided that, because of the deadliness of the Alpha strain, it would be a vaccine that would provide the so-called herd immunity.

All the above said, there'll be some boffin on this forum that can put me right. I'm sure you can't normally "get" measles twice but I'm pretty sure that one can become infected (it's obvious really) but the antibodies kill it off before it gets hold. Doesn't that mean that you can be infected with Covid, be asymptomatic (but would test positive), never know you'd got it and then it's gone (like measles).

Right?

Originally Posted by Pierre

I continue to be unconcerned.

However,” replied the universe,
“The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation.”

- Stephen Crane

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

"Immunity" from what? Infection or serious illness? It wasn't sufficiently defined, John.

It can't be immunity from infection. "Herd immunity" can only mean that a critical mass of population has the right antibodies to attack and kill the viral infection.

In the Covid case, the medical boffins decided that, because of the deadliness of the Alpha strain, it would be a vaccine that would provide the so-called herd immunity.

All the above said, there'll be some boffin on this forum that can put me right. I'm sure you can't normally "get" measles twice but I'm pretty sure that one can become infected (it's obvious really) but the antibodies kill it off before it gets hold. Doesn't that mean that you can be infected with Covid, be asymptomatic (but would test positive), never know you'd got it and then it's gone (like measles).

Right?

At the point originally coined - and throughout it’s continued use - it was indeed that sufficient immunity existed within the population that the vast, vast majority of people would be immune from infection at a later point therefore the population as a whole is protected by a collective immunity that prevented significant outbreaks.

The existing immunity meant that small outbreaks would happen, however would fizzle out, because they’d hit the “wall of immunity” in the population at large.

A bit like monkeypox pre-2022.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Indeed, it was literally the basis for emergency use authorisation for all of the vaccines.

---------- Post added at 23:04 ---------- Previous post was at 23:03 ----------



I'd expect nothing less.

---------- Post added at 23:07 ---------- Previous post was at 23:04 ----------



Well the theory is antibodies prevent the infection spreading. However with 99% of the population having antibodies from vaccines or previous infection it's fair to say it isn't working as the proponents of herd immunity previously planned.

No, that's not fair. The vaccination programme has significantly reduced pressure on the NHS. Which, of course, was the purpose of the lockdowns.

Herd immunity works, just not as perfectly as you would like.

---------- Post added at 00:48 ---------- Previous post was at 00:45 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Lockdown, etc, prevents the infection from spreading.

Vaccines reduce the gravity of infection. On reflection, the term "herd immunity" was insufficiently defined and has thus been hacked to pieces to suit the interpretation of individuals.

Lockdown only delays - it does not spread.

As China is discovering, at great embarassment.