Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

Slime said:
I thought shopping for purely non-essential items was heavily frowned upon, or did I get that wrong?
Click to expand...

They may have been essential given time of year. I went shopping today for goose fat, chestnuts and cloves. Hardly essential however it was what I had left on my list that I hadn’t managed so far. On that note if anyone can send me a small envelope of cloves it’d be appreciated.
 
Slime said:
I thought shopping for purely non-essential items was heavily frowned upon, or did I get that wrong?
Click to expand...

And herein lies the problem. Is an avocado essential? Probably not for me or you but for some hipster that wants it mashed on toast then it might be.

And that's before you get me started on the Waitrose "Essential" range of products.

Essential double cream.

Essential aubergines.

Essential gooseberry fool.

Essential Parmigiano Reggiano <---- because Tarquin absolutely won't eat his pasta bolognaise without grated parmesan.

Essential carbonated natural mineral water <--- how the **** is bottled water essential. It comes out of the ****ing tap. Yes it might not be carbonated or natural mineral water but it's good enough to drink and survive.
 
You might not want to read this but to-date, the people I have spoken to are going to ignore all advice and do what they were going to do anyway, and that was before the latest load of tosh. Why was social distancing and face masks not enforced at the train station in London? They have cause the latest panic yet no one bothers to enforce restrictions on them then we let them roam the country spreading the virus everywhere.
 
Crazyface said:
You might not want to read this but to-date, the people I have spoken to are going to ignore all advice and do what they were going to do anyway, and that was before the latest load of tosh. Why was social distancing and face masks not enforced at the train station in London? They have cause the latest panic yet no one bothers to enforce restrictions on them then we let them roam the country spreading the virus everywhere.
Click to expand...

Surely those actions won't show up in the figures for a week/10 days/14 days. Loads of 2nd home owners from London heading up to Norfolk and Suffolk for the Xmas period but they don't account for the increase in cases we've been seeing in these areas for the last couple of weeks.
 
As per PJ87, "essential" has nothing much to do with things - at least from the shopper's point of view. If the business is permitted to be open, its perfectly fine to shop there - regardless of whether you or I think the item eventually bought is "essential" .
 
ColchesterFC said:
Surely those actions won't show up in the figures for a week/10 days/14 days. Loads of 2nd home owners from London heading up to Norfolk and Suffolk for the Xmas period but they don't account for the increase in cases we've been seeing in these areas for the last couple of weeks.
Click to expand...
Funny how people can interpret things differently. One view might be that the mass departure was Londoners decamping to 2nd homes for Christmas. Another view might be that it was non-Londoners escaping to their families back home for Christmas? Who knows what was the right interpretation?
 
backwoodsman said:
Funny how people can interpret things differently. One view might be that the mass departure was Londoners decamping to 2nd homes for Christmas. Another view might be that it was non-Londoners escaping to their families back home for Christmas? Who knows what was the right interpretation?
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting that most of those pictured at the stations were escaping London to head to their 2nd homes in rural England, just that some of them might have been. The majority of those that can afford to have a 2nd home in Norfolk or Suffolk would have been loading up their Range Rovers and driving up the A12 or M11/A11 to get there. The fact remains that 100's/1000's of people have seen that London was about to be placed into Tier 4 and have selfishly decided that they are going to leave for what was at that time a lower tier area. They have decided that they are willing to take the risk of spreading the virus to outlying areas.
 
The packed trains were ordinary Joe's going home.
The 2nd home owners wouldn't be with the masses on the trains :-)

Highpothetically, if I've been in my house here and not mixed, getting in my car and going to sit in my holiday home, and not mixing isnt going to spread any germs!

Falls foul of the unnecessary travel though ?
 
bobmac said:
39,237 new cases yesterday.
Click to expand...

What I really don’t understand Bob is we now have cases that have surpassed anything during the first lockdown ( yes we are testing) we also have deaths that are as bad as the first lockdown. We now have new Covid strains that are now worse than the original. And there’s no lockdown.
 
Tashyboy said:
What I really don’t understand Bob is we now have cases that have surpassed anything during the first lockdown ( yes we are testing) we also have deaths that are as bad as the first lockdown. We now have new Covid strains that are now worse than the original. And there’s no lockdown.
Click to expand...

Almost seems like wearing masks, social distancing, washing your hands to they are raw 10 times a day, slathering your hands with sanitizer, circuit breaks, more tiers than a wedding cake and various other lockdowns has absolutely no effect in the spread at all?
And whilst we flush our economy down the toilet it’s street parties in Wuhan and the Chinese economy is booming! ?
 
Tashyboy said:
What I really don’t understand Bob is we now have cases that have surpassed anything during the first lockdown ( yes we are testing) we also have deaths that are as bad as the first lockdown. We now have new Covid strains that are now worse than the original. And there’s no lockdown.
Click to expand...

What I don't understand is why they are delaying the go ahead of the Oxford vaccine until next week. :(
 
SocketRocket said:
I suggested it would be a no brainer if a single dose gave 90% protection. I didn't suggest it did but read an article in the BBC News saying this:

His proposal was backed up by Professor David Salisbury, the man in charge of immunisation at the Department of Health until 2013.

He told Today the numbers were "straightforward".

"You give one dose you get 91% [protection] you give two doses and you get 95% - you are only gaining 4% for giving the second dose," he said.

"With current circumstances, I would strongly urge you to use as many first doses as you possibly can for risk groups and only after you have done all of that come back with second doses."
Click to expand...

He is right. Most of the benefit comes from the first one. The incremental benefit of the second is small. In all likelihood, the first one also modulates the severity of any Covid that breaks through. Better to give a large quantum of benefit to someone else, and then once the country is done, look at a booster for everyone on a more relaxed basis.
 
Ethan said:
I think they are still sorting out this low dose-high dose vs high dose-high dose question.
Click to expand...

Is it that way round? If it were high dose-high dose, or high dose-low dose, they could give the high dose( as in your previous post ) and sort out whether to follow later with high or low?

Or is that too simple?
 
Swinglowandslow said:
Is it that way round? If it were high dose-high dose, or high dose-low dose, they could give the high dose( as in your previous post ) and sort out whether to follow later with high or low?

Or is that too simple?
Click to expand...

The interim data showed that the low dose-high dose combination was more effective. The vaccine is constructed from the genetic sequence/blueprint for the Covid spike protein inserted into a harmless adenovirus, and some have theorised that when given in low dose it stimulates a lower immune response to the adenovirus, so the patient is able to response better to the subsequent booster. However, the data set for this combo was not huge, as it was a side question (with some serendipitous additional patents) to the main high dose-high dose question. So the MHRA is really mainly reviewing the high dose-high dose version, despite the fact that many now think the low-high combo would be preferable. It would make the scarce resource go a bit further, for a start.

Interestingly, the Russian vaccine makers also identified the same problem that Oxford may have partly intentionally, partly serendipitously also identified, and they approach the immunogenicity of the adenovirus by using different strains for the primary and the booster, thus swerving any immune response triggered by the primary.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top