Coronavirus

Originally Posted by nffc

Delta does seem to be very good at seeking out unvaccinated and people who haven't had the virus.

Isnt that pretty much how any virus works, and survives ?

---------- Post added at 15:20 ---------- Previous post was at 15:19 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

I fully expect you to continue to defend the indefensible, so I’m content to leave it there.

LOL, Classic JFM.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by Paul

Isnt that pretty much how any virus works, and survives ?

Yes, but I meant more so than other viruses which aren't as transmissible, and even more so with other variants of covid which are in the same category.


I read before that people who are infected with Delta seem to replicate so much virus early on that the immune system can't get a response quickly enough (though it does eventually which is why you usually get the initial replication and some symptoms but not more in vaccinated people) and that they shed so much virus it infects others more. Given that they don't think it takes much to infect someone then they will be able to spread that more easily to others and of course people who have no immunity will get ill easier.


Probably a reason why it's spreading through kids more than usual and they're actually getting ill, if they have more virus in them at the time, then there will be more for the immune system to respond to.


I suppose win for a virus is one which spreads easily between hosts whilst not killing them or debilitating them to the extent they stop what they're doing.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by nffc

Yes, but I meant more so than other viruses which aren't as transmissible, and even more so with other variants of covid which are in the same category.


I read before that people who are infected with Delta seem to replicate so much virus early on that the immune system can't get a response quickly enough (though it does eventually which is why you usually get the initial replication and some symptoms but not more in vaccinated people) and that they shed so much virus it infects others more. Given that they don't think it takes much to infect someone then they will be able to spread that more easily to others and of course people who have no immunity will get ill easier.

Viral load, doesn't seem unreasonable to assume anything that cuts the load down, like a mask is probably a good thing!

I suppose win for a virus is one which spreads easily between hosts whilst not killing them or debilitating them to the extent they stop what they're doing.

Only problem with that is for this virus to mutate into that it actually has to evolve into an entirely new virus, which it may well do incidentally but I wouldn't bank on it

[nffc]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Viral load, doesn't seem unreasonable to assume anything that cuts the load down, like a mask is probably a good thing!



Only problem with that is for this virus to mutate into that it actually has to evolve into an entirely new virus, which it may well do incidentally but I wouldn't bank on it

The better thing would not be to rely on whatever protection (which is nowhere near watertight) a mask offers.


Distancing - which means fewer people would get near whatever viral load someone is shedding - is effective.


As is testing and isolating if you have symptoms, and if you're in an environment where there's risk, doing lateral flow tests if you don't.


Much better people who have covid stay at home rather than relying on a mask to protect others. Unless it's a N85 or similar which actually do work, most people don't use them properly anyway, which makes them worse.


I'm still waiting for the person to explain the protection offered by someone walking into a pub, putting a mask on as they come off the street, walking to a table and sitting down with everyone else as it's table service, then taking the mask off, sitting in the pub chatting/watching the football/singing along to the music for a couple of hours whilst enjoying a few drinks and possibly some food, is actually a thing which works. Because to me it looks like the activities which are likely to generate aerosol are the seated ones cheering or singing or at the very least talking where the 30 seconds walking to your table is unlikely to infect anyone more.


Of course, if we all stayed at home all day every day and never went shopping, to work, or to anything else, it'd stop the viral load totally, but that's not workable.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s surely also a question of medical ethics to knowingly and wilfully expose the young to a disease for the purpose of boosting population level immunity?

It’s right there in the minutes that they’ve suppressed for months - removing the right of parents to make informed decisions before the schools returned and exposure was most likely to happen as mitigations and contact tracing were removed in schools.

It’s also surely a question of medical ethics why the CMOs all - almost immediately - overruled the JCVI non-decision they took months to make despite the MHRA approving the vaccines as safe and effective?

It is also a significant question of scientific ethics for a pseudo-regulator to make decisions and not publish their evidence base and rationale for peer review until after hundreds of thousands of infections have occurred off the back of it. -

---------- Post added at 14:47 ---------- Previous post was at 14:45 ----------



The evidence from around the world shows no such thing at all. However, evidence of the health implications of Covid-19 are always going to be dismissed by someone like yourself who has refused to acknowledge the health impacts since the very start.

What evidence? Our scientists disagree with you.

---------- Post added at 19:11 ---------- Previous post was at 19:09 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s in there in the minutes whether you consider it reasonable or otherwise. The basic principles of managing a pandemic - testing, contract tracing and isolating were removed from teenagers in this country (for the purpose of boosting population level immunity) at the exact same time vaccinations were rolling out to protect teenagers in others.

I fully expect you to continue to defend the indefensible, so I’m content to leave it there.

Surely, because teenagers were rarely ill with it, and so there was no point. As I said earlier, it’s a balance of benefits isn’t it? Vaccinations also cause harm.

[1andrew1]

MPs told to mask up in Parliament.

MPs and peers have been told to wear face masks in Parliament following a rise in Covid cases in the building.

Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle urged MPs to follow the Parliamentary authorities' guidance, saying they should "pull together" to stop the spread of infections.

He added that the measures would be reviewed in two weeks' time.

Most opposition MPs have opted to wear a mask, but many Conservatives have not.

Last week, face coverings became mandatory for staff employed by the House of Commons, unless they have a legitimate exemption - but it was left up to individual MPs to decide whether to cover their faces or not.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59132968

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

MPs told to mask up in Parliament.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59132968

More pointless panic. As a human race, we are all becoming like ducklings, following faithfully the mother of every panic fad that emerges.

How utterly depressing this is. When will people get back to thinking for themselves?

If they were really serious about preventing infection in the House of Commons, they’d take the roof off.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

If they were really serious about preventing infection in the House of Commons, they’d take the roof off.

Or work from home, as many office staff now do.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

More pointless panic. As a human race, we are all becoming like ducklings, following faithfully the mother of every panic fad that emerges.

How utterly depressing this is. When will people get back to thinking for themselves?

If they were really serious about preventing infection in the House of Commons, they’d take the roof off.

It's not all or nothing - it's about graduated responses.

As has been proven, wearing a mask, as well as other options, reduces the chance of infecting others - why wouldn't people want to reduce the chance of infecting others?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

It's not all or nothing - it's about graduated responses.

As has been proven, wearing a mask, as well as other options, reduces the chance of infecting others - why wouldn't people want to reduce the chance of infecting others?

Yeah, yeah! Vaccinations….

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yeah, yeah! Vaccinations….

No HazMat suits for life, it's the only way.

[nffc]

Another massive fall, under 30k positive tests recorded in England today. Schools will be back now though.

[Mad Max]

Got my booster and flu jab last night, so far no ill effects.

[heero_yuy]

Just got a text reminder to book a flu jab at the local surgery.

Originally Posted by Hugh

As has been proven, wearing a mask, as well as other options, reduces the chance of infecting others - why wouldn't people want to reduce the chance of infecting others?

Because its just pointless ?
Its a waste of time trying to avoid the inevitable.
Covid is not going to suddenly vanish, just like other common viruses, you're going to get it eventually.

Did they wear masks before Mar 2020, just in case they passed on the Flu, or Measles, or anything else at all ?

Its just turned into mindless paranoia now.
If they are fully vaccinated (as MPs should be) then they have no need to worry about getting infected.