Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

Kaz said:
I tend to agree with your implied cynicism regarding politicians vs scientists, however.... if 1 dose of Pfizer-Biontech gives 91% protection, 2 doses of Oxford gives 60% then it's an interesting suggestion.

I'm less keen on the "health passport" idea as that seems like the thin end of particularly unpleasant wedge.
Click to expand...
That may just be reality and he is suggesting we are prepared for it. It seems like a logical step so like it or not it may well be coming.

No harm having some thoughts on all of this. Throw up ideas, see which have merit.
 
Lord Tyrion said:
That may just be reality and he is suggesting we are prepared for it. It seems like a logical step so like it or not it may well be coming.

No harm having some thoughts on all of this. Throw up ideas, see which have merit.
Click to expand...

Agreed but I would prefer ideas thrown up by actual people with the qualifications to do so, all this does is increase speculation by those that see the headlines and like reporters these days, report on rumour and speculation.
 
Old Skier said:
Agreed but I would prefer ideas thrown up by actual people with the qualifications to do so, all this does is increase speculation by those that see the headlines and like reporters these days, report on rumour and speculation.
Click to expand...
There you go (y)
 

Attachments

  • 132480238_10216979658512396_3982657902886474543_ncovid update.jpg
    132480238_10216979658512396_3982657902886474543_ncovid update.jpg
    41 KB · Views: 23
Old Skier said:
Agreed but I would prefer ideas thrown up by actual people with the qualifications to do so, all this does is increase speculation by those that see the headlines and like reporters these days, report on rumour and speculation.
Click to expand...
Is what he is saying unreasonable? I'm not sure it is. I think having been PM for 10 or so years qualifies you to an extent. You certainly know how govts work, think, here and worldwide.

I don't think this is political but if so we will have to stop the chat. Hopefully not though as it is more about ideas than politics.
 
A paper was uploaded a while ago over this and can certainly see the argument about doing it :-

Covid-19: Pfizer vaccine efficacy was 52% after first dose and 95% after second dose, paper shows | The BMJ

Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine | NEJM

You only need to look at the separation on the cases recorded graph after 14 days(figure 3 on the link above), to consider this.

Anyone read how many of the supplies of the vaccine are flowing in and if they will continue, considering a number of countries have passed it now.
 
AmandaJR said:
I agree and can't see what other choice we have. This new varient is spreading like wildfire.
Click to expand...

Sorry -this comment is long

I am intrigued as to exactly how this new variant spreads more easily.
I expected quite a dramatic rise in infections ,anyway, as we progressed into winter; colder temperatures which the virus loves, but most importantly the populace spending a lot more time indoors.
Back when pubs, cafes etc were re-opened, I remember the "one metre" distance which was recommended (or required?). Strangely, to me, that went against the SD 2 metres asked for at the time, but I imagine they knew that patrons wouldn't keep to two metres so......
At that time it was said that , apart from touch, the virus was passed if you caught droplets from people's breath ( for around 15 mins), and the droplets wouldn't get to you if you were more than two metres away.
Then evidence began to be put forward that you could catch it from the "aerosol" effect, breathing in the air expelled from someone else. Much like passive smoking.
This didn't get too much publicity and I suspect not many people were aware or accepted it. To some of us it was a no brainier. Clearly, if you were outdoors,the droplets effect had almost no chance of infecting you. Maybe much the same for the aerosol scenario.
But, indoors, it's a new ball game. SD at two metres and the droplets effect may not be too much of a problem, but the aerosol effect is clearly the virus's best friend., and because the expelled air hangs about without excellent ventilation, most are going to breath in others breath at some time. SD of 2 metres doesn't come into it.

This, to my mind, is what has been driving the increase in the last weeks, but to what extent? Is it just that , accounting for the rapid increase in figures ( which is why Xmas get togethers is going to be costly), or is it the new variant effect as well?

They've identified a new variant, but haven't detailed (widely) how it transmits more rapidly. Is that based on the fact that most new , rapidly rising,cases are of the new variant? What do they say to those who claim the rapid case increase is because of more indoor behaviour, and both original and variant are caught as easily as each other?

Is there data that has been proved showing that the variant passes easier? And how? e.g,
just a whiff of a positive's breath as opposed to longer exposure?. How has this been ascertained?
I'm not doubting that there is some property of the variant that is causing the easier transmission, but we need to know so that we can behave accordingly.
I say this, because for example, on this forum there is the general belief ( true as Ethan has said for the original virus) that playing golf , being outdoors, is safe, because the air disperses the breath very quickly.
But, if the variant requires only a whiff of your playing partner's breath to hit you.
that safe game of golf may change!
Now, I'm not saying that is the case , but we need to know in what way this virus has been found to be more transmissible.
 
Last edited:
Swinglowandslow said:
Sorry -this comment is long

I am intrigued as to exactly how this new variant spreads more easily.
I expected quite a dramatic rise in infections ,anyway, as we progressed into winter; colder temperatures which the virus loves, but most importantly the populace spending a lot more time indoors.
Back when pubs, cafes etc were re-opened, I remember the "one metre" distance which was recommended (or required?). Strangely, to me, that went against the SD 2 metres asked for at the time, but I imagine they knew that patrons wouldn't keep to two metres so......
At that time it was said that , apart from touch, the virus was passed if you caught droplets from people's breath ( for around 15 mins), and the droplets wouldn't get to you if you were more than two metres away.
Then evidence began to be put forward that you could catch it from the "aerosol" effect, breathing in the air expelled from someone else. Much like passive smoking.
This didn't get too much publicity and I suspect not many people were aware or accepted it. To some of us it was a no brainier. Clearly, if you were outdoors,the droplets effect had almost no chance of infecting you. Maybe much the same for the aerosol scenario.
But, indoors, it's a new ball game. SD at two metres and the droplets effect may not be too much of a problem, but the aerosol effect is clearly the virus's best friend., and because the expelled air hangs about with excellent ventilation, most are going to breath in others breath at some time. SD of 2 metres doesn't come into it.

This, to my mind, is what has been driving the increase in the last weeks, but to what extent? Is it just that , accounting for the rapid increase in figures ( which is why Xmas get togethers is going to be costly), or is it the new variant effect as well?

They've identified a new variant, but haven't detailed (widely) how it transmits more rapidly. Is that based on the fact that most new , rapidly rising,cases are of the new variant? What do they say to those who claim the rapid case increase is because of more indoor behaviour, and both original and variant are caught as easily as each other?

Is there data that has been proved showing that the variant passes easier? And how? e.g,
just a whiff of a positive's breath as opposed to longer exposure?. How has this been ascertained?
I'm not doubting that there is some property of the variant that is causing the easier transmission, but we need to know so that we can behave accordingly.
I say this, because for example, on this forum there is the general belief ( true as Ethan has said for the original virus) that playing golf , being outdoors, is safe, because the air disperses the breath very quickly.
But, if the variant requires only a whiff of your playing partner's breath to hit you.
that safe game of golf may change!
Now, I'm not saying that is the case , but we need to know in what way this virus has been found to be more transmissible.
Click to expand...
A virologist was talking about this on Sunday. He was quite relaxed about it incidentally, not running around screaming, hands in the air. He described the new variant as 'more sticky'. I love that phrase. Apparently it grabs onto you, your cells or whatever and is harder to shake off. Whereas a small dose of the original could be knocked off, beaten up by your system, this new one clings on and stays on you, thus increasing its chances of the infection taking hold. How much or little is needed I don't know but presumably it is less.

All normal according to this bloke, a natural evolution of the virus. He wasn't worried so oddly it made me very calm about it. The vaccine is still the answer, it is rolling out. We just have to keep sensible until more of us have been jabbed. Not different to before really.
 
So, my sister in law, the supposedly intelligent, responsible NHS frontline nurse, who was happy to have a house full on Boxing Day, including her parents, who are already spending Christmas Day with two other families, has been on the phone to my wife this morning. “You’re still welcome to come round on Boxing Day, if you want”, she says.

I despair. I genuinely do.
 
Billysboots said:
So, my sister in law, the supposedly intelligent, responsible NHS frontline nurse, who was happy to have a house full on Boxing Day, including her parents, who are already spending Christmas Day with two other families, has been on the phone to my wife this morning. “You’re still welcome to come round on Boxing Day, if you want”, she says.

I despair. I genuinely do.
Click to expand...

Right - I'm not saying that what she's doing is in any way right, or sensible. But,

Maybe, just a little maybe, after the year that she's probably had on the front line of the NHS, a Christmas get together is just about the only thing that she has had to look forward to all year and she just can't let go of the thought?

I'm married to a (semi) front line NHS Nurse and she is really struggling with it now. I'm practically picking her up off the floor most days. She hasn't seen any friends or family in months (and to make it worse, the only person she can talk to is ME!). The one thing that kept her going was the thought of spending a small amount of Christmas with her Family. Now that has been taken away (part Covid and part another reason). If this goes on much longer she's going to become ill in my opinion.
 
Old Skier said:
Does Mr Blair know better than the Scientists and are we all going to roll up our sleeves https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55410349
Click to expand...

The scientists are not determining the policy, the politicians and their appointed officials are, with some scientific advice or cover.

Blair makes a lot of sense, in that one dose of vaccine confers more than half the effect, and it is likely that those who get Covid despite the vacc will have a milder course, so that helps reduce the pressure on the NHS. Therefore giving double the number one dose gets considerably faster population coverage, and that in turn protects the remainder faster.

The health passport will become necessary because airlines and foreign immigration officials will require it.
 
bluewolf said:
Right - I'm not saying that what she's doing is in any way right, or sensible. But,

Maybe, just a little maybe, after the year that she's probably had on the front line of the NHS, a Christmas get together is just about the only thing that she has had to look forward to all year and she just can't let go of the thought?

I'm married to a (semi) front line NHS Nurse and she is really struggling with it now. I'm practically picking her up off the floor most days. She hasn't seen any friends or family in months (and to make it worse, the only person she can talk to is ME!). The one thing that kept her going was the thought of spending a small amount of Christmas with her Family. Now that has been taken away (part Covid and part another reason). If this goes on much longer she's going to become ill in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I absolutely understand what you’re saying, and sympathise with your wife’s situation, but with my sister in law it’s very different.

I don’t know whether she’s thick skinned, naive, laid back or just plain stupid but she genuinely carries on as though this virus won’t impact on anyone she knows. In her mind, it only happens to others.

In the autumn she invited 20+ people round for her birthday, only to cancel when we all said no. Her daughter’s boyfriend is a regular visitor, staying overnight frequently, despite the restrictions locally. The Boxing Day plans were an absolute joke, given what her parents are planning on Xmas Day, and now this invitation. She either doesn’t get it, or chooses not to see it. Doubly surprising given my mother in law also spent her entire working life in the NHS.

The problem is all this causes arguments in our house, because my wife was initially happy with the original Boxing Day plans, and couldn’t understand why I, with my COPD, was less than impressed.
 
bluewolf said:
Right - I'm not saying that what she's doing is in any way right, or sensible. But,

Maybe, just a little maybe, after the year that she's probably had on the front line of the NHS, a Christmas get together is just about the only thing that she has had to look forward to all year and she just can't let go of the thought?

I'm married to a (semi) front line NHS Nurse and she is really struggling with it now. I'm practically picking her up off the floor most days. She hasn't seen any friends or family in months (and to make it worse, the only person she can talk to is ME!). The one thing that kept her going was the thought of spending a small amount of Christmas with her Family. Now that has been taken away (part Covid and part another reason). If this goes on much longer she's going to become ill in my opinion.
Click to expand...
That’s a really tough choice being decided by lots of frontline staff.
I do feel for her and them .
My son is in this dilemma.
It’s not easy .
 
Swinglowandslow said:
Sorry -this comment is long

I am intrigued as to exactly how this new variant spreads more easily.
I expected quite a dramatic rise in infections ,anyway, as we progressed into winter; colder temperatures which the virus loves, but most importantly the populace spending a lot more time indoors.
Back when pubs, cafes etc were re-opened, I remember the "one metre" distance which was recommended (or required?). Strangely, to me, that went against the SD 2 metres asked for at the time, but I imagine they knew that patrons wouldn't keep to two metres so......
At that time it was said that , apart from touch, the virus was passed if you caught droplets from people's breath ( for around 15 mins), and the droplets wouldn't get to you if you were more than two metres away.
Then evidence began to be put forward that you could catch it from the "aerosol" effect, breathing in the air expelled from someone else. Much like passive smoking.
This didn't get too much publicity and I suspect not many people were aware or accepted it. To some of us it was a no brainier. Clearly, if you were outdoors,the droplets effect had almost no chance of infecting you. Maybe much the same for the aerosol scenario.
But, indoors, it's a new ball game. SD at two metres and the droplets effect may not be too much of a problem, but the aerosol effect is clearly the virus's best friend., and because the expelled air hangs about with excellent ventilation, most are going to breath in others breath at some time. SD of 2 metres doesn't come into it.

This, to my mind, is what has been driving the increase in the last weeks, but to what extent? Is it just that , accounting for the rapid increase in figures ( which is why Xmas get togethers is going to be costly), or is it the new variant effect as well?

They've identified a new variant, but haven't detailed (widely) how it transmits more rapidly. Is that based on the fact that most new , rapidly rising,cases are of the new variant? What do they say to those who claim the rapid case increase is because of more indoor behaviour, and both original and variant are caught as easily as each other?

Is there data that has been proved showing that the variant passes easier? And how? e.g,
just a whiff of a positive's breath as opposed to longer exposure?. How has this been ascertained?
I'm not doubting that there is some property of the variant that is causing the easier transmission, but we need to know so that we can behave accordingly.
I say this, because for example, on this forum there is the general belief ( true as Ethan has said for the original virus) that playing golf , being outdoors, is safe, because the air disperses the breath very quickly.
But, if the variant requires only a whiff of your playing partner's breath to hit you.
that safe game of golf may change!
Now, I'm not saying that is the case , but we need to know in what way this virus has been found to be more transmissible.
Click to expand...
I was asking the question on how it is more transferable a few days ago. I'm finding it difficult to understand, the news articles are suggesting it may be up to 70% more transferable but not how that's possible.

I can understand that once injested it may have a higher possibility of creating infection from a smaller viral load, if this is indeed the case.
We previously saw large infection rates in the North of England where southern areas were much lower, this was more to do with social mixing than new strains of the virus.
 
Billysboots said:
So, my sister in law, the supposedly intelligent, responsible NHS frontline nurse, who was happy to have a house full on Boxing Day, including her parents, who are already spending Christmas Day with two other families, has been on the phone to my wife this morning. “You’re still welcome to come round on Boxing Day, if you want”, she says.

I despair. I genuinely do.
Click to expand...

One of my best mate's sister works as a nurse in a hospital in South Wales, basically in one of the worst hit areas of the UK for the virus. She has spent most of this year sticking posts on FB about everyone needing to pull together and more recently, we can miss this Christmas so we can have another in the future. That is her public persona. Behind the scenes she has been planning a Christmas with herself, husband and their 2 kids plus parents and then my mate inc. his wife and their child. When Boris announced Tier 4, which he was in, he made the decision that they'd be having Christmas alone and his sister has got extremely annoyed about it. She wanted a family Christmas despite the new guidance/laws. You do have to wonder with some people, especially with those who you would expect to be more sensible.
 
For the first time ever 2 weeks ago I had my house broken in to. Nothing stolen but it left me with a broken door and an excess insurance bill of £145.
And I'm still finding fragments of glass.
Must be something to do with the virus as other properties nearby also suffered. Crime stats might prove the link.
 
SocketRocket said:
I was asking the question on how it is more transferable a few days ago. I'm finding it difficult to understand, the news articles are suggesting it may be up to 70% more transferable but not how that's possible.

I can understand that once injested it may have a higher possibility of creating infection from a smaller viral load, if this is indeed the case.
We previously saw large infection rates in the North of England where southern areas were much lower, this was more to do with social mixing than new strains of the virus.
Click to expand...

I think the greater transmissibility is partly due to the viral load and partly because the new variant has a great affinity (i.e. binds more readily) with the ACE2 receptor which is the main route of entry into the body.
 
Just me and the "missus" in the house for Xmas, all plans cancelled, not that we had really made any other than mum-in-law visiting. She didn't want to travel so cancelled before Drakeford/Boris intervened.

My mum is back in Barnet Hospital, needed an operation, we are not allowed to see her. She is refusing to talk to us on her mobile as she thinks were have left her in there without visiting. A right blooming mess.

Golf courses in Wales still closed, weather is bloody awful. Forget all the noise, we are only being asked to restrict contact with folk outside our households...that is annoying, but less annoying that being in hospital on a ventilator.

Quite frankly Xmas can do one! Engage log burner and watch the Telly!! Call me when the sun comes out and golf reopens!
 
Lord Tyrion said:
That may just be reality and he is suggesting we are prepared for it. It seems like a logical step so like it or not it may well be coming.

No harm having some thoughts on all of this. Throw up ideas, see which have merit.
Click to expand...

I can see how that will play out.

Old people with a health passport, doing as they please.

Young people who are little to no risk of dying, having to wait for months till their turn. Why would any young people bother to obey after over a year of it?
 
No chicken at our large Sainsburys yesterday... got a couple of British poussin.. Trucker circus at the dock.. all seems like a full dress rehearsal for a no-deal. if we can get thru this, we can get thru everything..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top