| Get ready for an October national lockdown 11:47 - Sep 7 with 5716 views | homer_123 |
The Gov have stated there are no plans for a lockdown in October.
* - I think we are all astutely aware that this was going to be extremely likely....but hey |  |
| |  |
| Get ready for an October national lockdown on 18:23 - Sep 7 with 988 views | factual_blue |
I'm all for things that keeps dreadful people, and in particular their repulsive, entitled children off the streets and out of my way. |  |
| |
| On the second point..... on 18:32 - Sep 7 with 965 views | WD19 |
| On the second point..... on 17:31 - Sep 7 by DinDjarin |
If the majority of deaths were not vaccinated I am sure they would be reporting that all over the place. |
I can assure you that unvaccinated people make up a massively disproportionate number of the deaths if that helps (?) |  | | |
| On the second point..... on 18:51 - Sep 7 with 946 views | Ryorry |
| On the second point..... on 13:00 - Sep 7 by Guthrum |
But a key thing here is patience.
Have we learnt nothing from 1914 and "it'll all be over by Christmas"? This virus has only existed since late November 2019, as a global crisis, it's been less than 18 months. I know everybody would like to get back to their old lives ASAP, but that is not necessarily sensible.
If the world can get this under control in two, three, four years, we'd have done very well. Bubonic plague kept returning as a major issue for about five centuries after it first arrived in Europe. Already we've had problems caused by premature reopenings, initiatives and "Freedom Days".
There are signs that we are winning the battle, but it's by no means over yet. Relaxing vigience and suppression measures risks allowing another explosion - which stands a chance of being nastier than what we have at the moment. |
|  |
| |
| On the second point..... on 19:06 - Sep 7 with 940 views | Guthrum |
| On the second point..... on 15:34 - Sep 7 by Lightworker |
Well that rather depends on the amplification cycles that are adopted at the time of testing.
The inventor of the PCR test is on record as saying that if you apply the cycles at a high enough level you will find almost anything that you are looking for.
It is possible that you could still be infectious, but it is also possible that you are not. It is possible the test is picking up dead viral fragment and that you are not infectious at all. There is medical literature which demonstrates this.
This is the point I am making, that we should really be distinguishing between those genuine infectious cases with symptoms and those that are not, but we don't do this, they all get lumped together and therefore the figures can never be truly meaningful, or fully trusted.
In the history of infectious disease I don't believe we have ever previously considered people that have zero symptoms of disease to be infectious to others......the only exception to this I can think of is HIV/AIDS. |
Also depends upon the mechanism by which the virus spreads. If droplet-based, then symptoms (i.e. coughing) will greatly increase infectiousness. But I understand that most researchers now believe it to be straightforward airborne, not needing the carrying agency of the drops. |  |
| |
| On the second point..... on 21:01 - Sep 7 with 899 views | Ryorry |
| On the second point..... on 19:06 - Sep 7 by Guthrum |
Also depends upon the mechanism by which the virus spreads. If droplet-based, then symptoms (i.e. coughing) will greatly increase infectiousness. But I understand that most researchers now believe it to be straightforward airborne, not needing the carrying agency of the drops. |
Does that mean that surfaces - gates, door handles, wrapped foodstuffs etc have now been more or less completely ruled out of spreading infection? And that they're more or less certain it's spread by aerosol effect only - ie coughing, sneezing, talking etc? | |
| |
| On the second point..... on 11:38 - Sep 8 with 793 views | DebsyAngel |
| On the second point..... on 21:01 - Sep 7 by Ryorry |
Does that mean that surfaces - gates, door handles, wrapped foodstuffs etc have now been more or less completely ruled out of spreading infection? And that they're more or less certain it's spread by aerosol effect only - ie coughing, sneezing, talking etc? |
I wondered this too - never hear any up to date information on this.
We have stopped cleaning so much now, just stuff that we feel needs it. Still worries me though. |  | | |
| On the second point..... on 12:19 - Sep 8 with 772 views | Pinewoodblue |
| On the second point..... on 12:10 - Sep 7 by Bloots |
....the problem is that there is zero context to the reporting, or at least in the way that the media report it.
It's too black and white.
If they are going to report the number of infections, then they need to report it in much more depth, which they can't be bothered to.
They don't report the positivity rate, they don't report the ages, they don't report if they are vaccinated, they barely report the number of tests, they don't say if they are LFT or PCR, etc, etc.
Hospitalisations is more relevant, ITU occupancy even more so.
Essentially they need to report three things:
Percentage of beds occupied by covid patients and percentage unoccupied
Percentage of ITU beds occupied by covid patients and percentage unoccupied.
Deaths due to covid within any timescale.
All of the above by nation and region. |
If you know where to look I’m sure most of that in-depth of analysis can be found. You could, for example roughly work out the positivity rate as you know numbers of tests and number of positive tests, even if they are for different dates.
The figure I would like to see is number of positive tests showing no symptoms. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Get ready for an October national lockdown on 19:59 - Sep 9 with 662 views | BlueBadger |
| Get ready for an October national lockdown on 11:56 - Sep 7 by Steve_M |
I did see a suggestion that there has been some contingency planning which is a quite surprising degree of forethought from this government.
re: reporting. I think case numbers are still important because a large surge does provide early warning of an increase in hospitalisations and deaths. A small percentage of a rapidly growing number will still be a larger number of serious cases. |
The plan is probably 'do what the experts suggest, only six weeks later'. |  |
| |
| Get ready for an October national lockdown on 21:14 - Sep 9 with 596 views | Ryorry |
| Get ready for an October national lockdown on 19:59 - Sep 9 by BlueBadger |
The plan is probably 'do what the experts suggest, only six weeks later'. |
| |
| |
| On the second point..... on 22:23 - Sep 9 with 567 views | Freddies_Ears |
| On the second point..... on 21:01 - Sep 7 by Ryorry |
Does that mean that surfaces - gates, door handles, wrapped foodstuffs etc have now been more or less completely ruled out of spreading infection? And that they're more or less certain it's spread by aerosol effect only - ie coughing, sneezing, talking etc? |
It always ever was an aerosol spread risk, but UK govt were panicking early on, as they didn't want Joe Public snapping up available masks that then would not be available for the NHS. So, they set out a message that surface spread was the thing, and handwashing with lots of soap would help to protect you. |  | | |
| On the second point..... on 22:34 - Sep 9 with 552 views | BlueBadger |
| On the second point..... on 22:23 - Sep 9 by Freddies_Ears |
It always ever was an aerosol spread risk, but UK govt were panicking early on, as they didn't want Joe Public snapping up available masks that then would not be available for the NHS. So, they set out a message that surface spread was the thing, and handwashing with lots of soap would help to protect you. |
In all fairness, 'please wash your hands more' is good infection control practice in general. I don't have numbers ro hand, but I can't honestly remember having many, if any, C-diff/Norovirus type nasties to deal with over the last 18 months. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
