Coronavirus (OLD)

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I read it in the Daily Telegraph, but as it's behind a paywall, I did a quick Google and found this. You could have done it yourself, jfman.

https://www.accuweather.com/en/healt...-months/679415

Doesn't read like meaningful scientific research to me, Old Boy.

but emphasized that his remarks were made in “a personal capacity” and meant to remain “private.”

Even he won't stand by his statement in public.

Also published on February 11th. The northern hemisphere is getting warmer and coronavirus is getting deadlier when adjusted for the significant steps by Governments to stop the spread.

a severe case of the common cold

Well that needs no response.

If your going to quote something then do it properly.

Compared to SARS and MERS, we are talking about a coronavirus that has a mortality rate of eight to 10 times less deadly to SARS to MERS," Nicholls said. "So, a correct comparison is not SARS or MERS but a severe cold. Basically, this is a severe form of the cold.

[jfman]

I was quoting the paragraph above in the article, but thanks for pointing out that he actually said it. I'm unconvinced, and as I pointed out above so evidently is he to the extent he was unwilling to publicly stand behind his findings in February.

[jfman]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...rim-virus-data

Scientists warning that the lockdown isn't effective enough at this stage to release it and that the necessary "test track track isolate" of cases following lockdown wouldn't be possible.

Before anyone accuses me of being political with this I could not agree less with the leader of the Labour Party who wants the Government to publish an exit strategy.

The public at large aren't clever enough to cope with the intricacies such a plan, nor our media competent enough to report it responsibly, and as such targets that were never intended would be manufactured out of nowhere and the Government expected to abide by them in the absence of any evidence at all.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I quite understand the medical advice on social distancing, Den!

I'm not questioning the sense of social distancing, I am simply stating the obvious - that it is not a practical proposition when everyone is back at work. The number of people crowded together on public transport will undo any good of social distancing at the workplace.

That's quite apart from those working in close proximity to their customers such as dentists, hairdressers, etc.

I don't think the new normal will necessarily be the same when there is a return to work. Certainly, I wouldn't rule out everyone wearing face masks and PPE being used by hairdressers, perhaps all 100% appointment. In restaurants and pubs/bars I would expect to see fewer tables to facilitate social distancing. Queuing at the bar may end in favour of table service aided by apps. I think there would be very strict limits on numbers allowed in.

[Sephiroth]

... and will the businesses be able to afford to operate in this constrained mode?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

... and will the businesses be able to afford to operate in this constrained mode?

Agreed. Some smaller venues just wouldn't be viable unless they could charge a lot more or were subsidised. At best, they would be mothballed until a vaccination was invented. At worst, they would never re-open.

[1andrew1]

Three things I don't get about the current situation:
1) Why can passengers still travel to the UK without being quarantined, tested or subject to heat checks?
2) Why elderly people are alloted early slots in supermarkets alongside health workers - surely this is putting a vulnerable group in proximity to those who stand a higher-than-average chance of being carriers? (Or is it that the supermarkets will be very quiet then so there won't be much proximity?)
3) Who the cabinet minister is that got away with adding off-licences to the list of essential businesses? (Not objecting to the categorisation. )

[Ken W]

I find that going to my local Sainsburys in the elderly allotted times it is busier than going in the normal tiles

[Taf]

From what I was taught in school, viruses tend to die out only if they dead-end either by killing their host or enter a host with the antibodies to destroy it.

This is why they evolve in most cases to be non-lethal to their hosts, and to resist antibodies against a previous form.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Ken W

I find that going to my local Sainsburys in the elderly allotted times it is busier than going in the normal tiles

I avoid that Sainsbury's for the very reason, Ken.

Admittedly Waitrose is more expensive, but we vary between Wokingham & Twyford according to time of day. I appreciate, however, that Sainsbury Winnersh is a reasonably short walk for you.

The corner shop in Sherwood Road is very well stocked, btw.


---------- Post added at 12:31 ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 ----------

Originally Posted by Taf

From what I was taught in school, viruses tend to die out only if they dead-end either by killing their host or enter a host with the antibodies to destroy it.

This is why they evolve in most cases to be non-lethal to their hosts, and to resist antibodies against a previous form.

Design (God) or what? It woukld be perverse if it's the god that some worship.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Doesn't read like meaningful scientific research to me, Old Boy.



Even he won't stand by his statement in public.

Also published on February 11th. The northern hemisphere is getting warmer and coronavirus is getting deadlier when adjusted for the significant steps by Governments to stop the spread.



Well that needs no response.

It is typical of you to ask for a source and then debunk it when it is provided on the basis of the news provider or something trivial that you can eke out an argument with. The man is an expert on coronaviruses, having studied this for many years - you know, like you are an expert on economics.

If the guy is asking for his views to be kept private, I would venture to suggest that he does not want to tread on anyone elses toes here, or maybe he still has research to do.

Nevertheless, the man is kosher and he has a theory. I never claimed that it was fact. Even the government's advisors point out that nothing is certain because not enough is known about this new virus to compare what has happened before.

As for the seasonal issue, it is not as straight forward as you would like to have us believe. It is still early in the season but as more people get out and about and warmth and humidity increase, the likelihood appears to be that it could either retreat or die off altogether. It is known that the virus does not do well in warmer, humid temperatures, so we shall see.

It will be interesting to see whether the virus returns in winter, something that is perhaps more likely if there has been inadequate penetration of the virus amongst the population. This possibility can be minimised by opening the schools sooner rather than later, and allowing shops to re-open. As many people as possible should be allowed back to work also. This may lead to a rise in cases, but this time it should be more manageable. As I have said many times, we will end up with the vast majority of the population being infected in any case, but most will not even know they've had it.

The people we should be trying to protect are the vulnerable, including people in care homes, but it does seem pretty hopeless based on how many have fallen ill to date, despite visitors being kept away.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It is typical of you to ask for a source and then debunk it when it is provided on the basis of the news provider or something trivial that you can eke out an argument with. The man is an expert on coronaviruses, having studied this for many years - you know, like you are an expert on economics.

If the guy is asking for his views to be kept private, I would venture to suggest that he does not want to tread on anyone elses toes here, or maybe he still has research to do.

Nevertheless, the man is kosher and he has a theory. I never claimed that it was fact. Even the government's advisors point out that nothing is certain because not enough is known about this new virus to compare what has happened before.

As for the seasonal issue, it is not as straight forward as you would like to have us believe. It is still early in the season but as more people get out and about and warmth and humidity increase, the likelihood appears to be that it could either retreat or die off altogether. It is known that the virus does not do well in warmer, humid temperatures, so we shall see.

It will be interesting to see whether the virus returns in winter, something that is perhaps more likely if there has been inadequate penetration of the virus amongst the population. This possibility can be minimised by opening the schools sooner rather than later, and allowing shops to re-open. As many people as possible should be allowed back to work also. This may lead to a rise in cases, but this time it should be more manageable. As I have said many times, we will end up with the vast majority of the population being infected in any case, but most will not even know they've had it.

The people we should be trying to protect are the vulnerable, including people in care homes, but it does seem pretty hopeless based on how many have fallen ill to date, despite visitors being kept away.

We get that you didn't want a lockdown Old Boy but opening up the schools and shops simply means that millions are put at risk, we cripple the NHS and tens of thousands more die, rendering the work done to date pointless.

Coronavirus is spreading in the southern hemisphere where lockdowns are weak or absent, and in countries where the weather temperature is currently comparable or in excess of a summer in the UK.

Have you got a source for the bit in bold - testing for antibodies in the population done to date hasn't indicated that there's a large number of asymptomatic people and there are question marks over their reliability in any case.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020...-be-unreliable

Even further - there is a bigger question mark over whether any immunity exists at all for those who have had the virus.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by jfman

We get that you didn't want a lockdown Old Boy but opening up the schools and shops simply means that millions are put at risk, we cripple the NHS and tens of thousands more die, rendering the work done to date pointless.

Absolutely. I can't stand this lockdown. This is the longest I've not been to the gym in 4 years. I can't see my children or my elderly mother.

But the world doesn't revolve around what Russ wants.

My OH suffers with significant asthma, if she caught the Rona then...it doesn't bear thinking about. There are people out there at even more risk than she is.

The NHS is already over-stretched. The economy is not far off being absolutely shot to brown-stuff.

Like it or not we have to look at the greater good, something that a generation of self-titled "why should I?" types (not aiming that at anyone here) are incapable of understanding.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

<SNIP>

As for the seasonal issue, it is not as straight forward as you would like to have us believe. It is still early in the season but as more people get out and about and warmth and humidity increase, the likelihood appears to be that it could either retreat or die off altogether. It is known that the virus does not do well in warmer, humid temperatures, so we shall see.
<SNIP>

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-warm-weather-will-not-slow-covid-19-transmission

The link is to a scientific journal rather than the daily press.

The first two paragraphs state:

The arrival of spring in the Northern Hemisphere has raised hopes that warmer and wetter weather might slow or even stop the COVID-19 pandemic, at least until fall. But don’t plan on that happening, U.S. health experts say.

“One should not assume that we are going to be rescued by a change in the weather. You must assume that the virus will continue to do its thing,” Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in Bethesda, Md., and a member of the White House coronavirus task force, said during an interview April 9 on ABC’s Good Morning America.

Later in the article, a study said it required 30 minutes at 56C to render the pathogen non-infectious. Singapore is around 32C and the pathogen is definitely "doing its thing" there.