CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 10)
Discussion
johnboy1975 said:
Boris has just said "people can from today meet outside 1 on 1 for the first time in months"
PHbulls
t detector fact check says:
Completely false. You have been able to do that throughout. The change is now you can take a hot drink with you, and sit down. Legally (let that sink in)
So, deliberate misinformation? Hard to believe he's not aware of this
Oooh I was wondering what the fuss was all about as that was the case all along with regard to meeting people outside - so now you can have a coffee and it becomes a 2 person picnic rather than a exercise, incredible PH
t detectorCompletely false. You have been able to do that throughout. The change is now you can take a hot drink with you, and sit down. Legally (let that sink in)
So, deliberate misinformation? Hard to believe he's not aware of this
Edited by johnboy1975 on Monday 8th March 16:15
isaldiri said:
R Mutt said:
Have I got a tin foil hat on or does
A) the current narrative dictate that the vaccine confers a greater degree of immunity than immunity acquired post infection (this is completely separate from the risks OF infection) and
B) the science not support this suggestion?
Strawman some may say but no one I speak to seems to accept my stance that I do not require the vaccine right now having recovered from a mild case of COVID 2 months ago. I takes quite a bit of evidence on antibodies (present 11 months after infection in the case of 1 friend) to have anyone reluctantly accept my position.
This seems ironically like misinformation from the government and/ or media on their part.
I think it depends. Antibody titers do look to be very high in vaccine response, mostly higher than say mild/asymptomatic covid infection for example. A) the current narrative dictate that the vaccine confers a greater degree of immunity than immunity acquired post infection (this is completely separate from the risks OF infection) and
B) the science not support this suggestion?
Strawman some may say but no one I speak to seems to accept my stance that I do not require the vaccine right now having recovered from a mild case of COVID 2 months ago. I takes quite a bit of evidence on antibodies (present 11 months after infection in the case of 1 friend) to have anyone reluctantly accept my position.
This seems ironically like misinformation from the government and/ or media on their part.
However vaccine immunity is very much spike protein focused so far while infection immunity is supposed to be much more broad based (whatever that means in egghead terms). I've assumed that means infection recovery is more likely to give a higher level of protection against a bigger mutation (if/when that occurs) even if it's possibly less effective against the original virus (or close copy) and probably longer lasting overall protection.....
That of course then gets picked up and people start to justify it with bulls
t reasons as to why only vaccines give proper immunity, then other people wonder what's going on because that's all obviously nonsense, so why are they lying to us, when in fact it's just keeping everything simple so nobody has to think.
CrutyRammers said:
In fairness to the government, I think the stance is "everyone should have the vaccine regardless of whether they've had covid", because there are so many people who are convinced they've had it with no proof. Given no way of proving it, it's better overall to have a blanket rule.
That of course then gets picked up and people start to justify it with bullst reasons as to why only vaccines give proper immunity, then other people wonder what's going on because that's all obviously nonsense, so why are they lying to us, when in fact it's just keeping everything simple so nobody has to think.
I suppose the way around that is to exempt people who had previously tested positive (PCR) from one dose. That frees up more capacity for others and it's a cutoff with clear proof so you end up wasting less doses unnecessarily even if there will obviously have been far more people that were infected than tested positive.That of course then gets picked up and people start to justify it with bulls
t reasons as to why only vaccines give proper immunity, then other people wonder what's going on because that's all obviously nonsense, so why are they lying to us, when in fact it's just keeping everything simple so nobody has to think.CAH706 said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Maybe storing some up to drop in when the numbers get really low
The Nhs England says 90 tested positive and 13 no positive test but civid recorded on death cert. so 103 in total although only up to 4pm on 6 April.
On 6 March GOvt site said 135 England.
So which figure do we go on? Who knows as I can’t tie up any of the numbers
vonuber said:
The change in behaviour and outlook of our 6 year old after just one day back in school is remarkable.
Yup my 4 year old came pretty much bouncing through the door of my office (ok - spare bedroom haha) this afternoon with excitement at seeing his friends again. It's nice to see albeit he shouldn't have been missing however many weeks of school it was (11 was it?).Todays numbers:
1. Despite huge increases in testing cases continue to fall. Still following a predictable decline and halving every 18 days:
2. The majority of tests are now consistently LFD and the number of cases seems largely irrelevant to testing volumes:
3. Key metrics are all falling. Cases per 100k tests and admissions also halving every 18 days, but the decline in deaths seems more linear:
4. Overlaying the three metrics shows that deaths are declining faster than the other measures.
I suspect that hospital admissions are now determined by general prevalence and I am cautiously hopeful that the decline in deaths is a vaccine effect.
1. Despite huge increases in testing cases continue to fall. Still following a predictable decline and halving every 18 days:
2. The majority of tests are now consistently LFD and the number of cases seems largely irrelevant to testing volumes:
3. Key metrics are all falling. Cases per 100k tests and admissions also halving every 18 days, but the decline in deaths seems more linear:
4. Overlaying the three metrics shows that deaths are declining faster than the other measures.
I suspect that hospital admissions are now determined by general prevalence and I am cautiously hopeful that the decline in deaths is a vaccine effect.
CrutyRammers said:
isaldiri said:
R Mutt said:
Have I got a tin foil hat on or does
A) the current narrative dictate that the vaccine confers a greater degree of immunity than immunity acquired post infection (this is completely separate from the risks OF infection) and
B) the science not support this suggestion?
Strawman some may say but no one I speak to seems to accept my stance that I do not require the vaccine right now having recovered from a mild case of COVID 2 months ago. I takes quite a bit of evidence on antibodies (present 11 months after infection in the case of 1 friend) to have anyone reluctantly accept my position.
This seems ironically like misinformation from the government and/ or media on their part.
I think it depends. Antibody titers do look to be very high in vaccine response, mostly higher than say mild/asymptomatic covid infection for example. A) the current narrative dictate that the vaccine confers a greater degree of immunity than immunity acquired post infection (this is completely separate from the risks OF infection) and
B) the science not support this suggestion?
Strawman some may say but no one I speak to seems to accept my stance that I do not require the vaccine right now having recovered from a mild case of COVID 2 months ago. I takes quite a bit of evidence on antibodies (present 11 months after infection in the case of 1 friend) to have anyone reluctantly accept my position.
This seems ironically like misinformation from the government and/ or media on their part.
However vaccine immunity is very much spike protein focused so far while infection immunity is supposed to be much more broad based (whatever that means in egghead terms). I've assumed that means infection recovery is more likely to give a higher level of protection against a bigger mutation (if/when that occurs) even if it's possibly less effective against the original virus (or close copy) and probably longer lasting overall protection.....
That of course then gets picked up and people start to justify it with bulls
t reasons as to why only vaccines give proper immunity, then other people wonder what's going on because that's all obviously nonsense, so why are they lying to us, when in fact it's just keeping everything simple so nobody has to think.CDC have posted their: Interim Public Health Recommendations for Fully Vaccinated People
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines...
Fully vaccinated people can:
Visit with other fully vaccinated people indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing
Visit with unvaccinated people from a single household who are at low risk for severe COVID-19 disease indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing
Refrain from quarantine and testing following a known exposure if asymptomatic
For now, fully vaccinated people should continue to:
Take precautions in public like wearing a well-fitted mask and physical distancing
Wear masks, practice physical distancing, and adhere to other prevention measures when visiting with unvaccinated people who are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease or who have an unvaccinated household member who is at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease
Wear masks, maintain physical distance, and practice other prevention measures when visiting with unvaccinated people from multiple households
Avoid medium- and large-sized in-person gatherings
Get tested if experiencing COVID-19 symptoms
Follow guidance issued by individual employers
Follow CDC and health department travel requirements and recommendations
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines...
Fully vaccinated people can:
Visit with other fully vaccinated people indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing
Visit with unvaccinated people from a single household who are at low risk for severe COVID-19 disease indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing
Refrain from quarantine and testing following a known exposure if asymptomatic
For now, fully vaccinated people should continue to:
Take precautions in public like wearing a well-fitted mask and physical distancing
Wear masks, practice physical distancing, and adhere to other prevention measures when visiting with unvaccinated people who are at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease or who have an unvaccinated household member who is at increased risk for severe COVID-19 disease
Wear masks, maintain physical distance, and practice other prevention measures when visiting with unvaccinated people from multiple households
Avoid medium- and large-sized in-person gatherings
Get tested if experiencing COVID-19 symptoms
Follow guidance issued by individual employers
Follow CDC and health department travel requirements and recommendations
Am I missing something here
“ Harries said although there was a steep decline in cases and deaths, infections were still causing a “substantial strain on the NHS”.”
When numbers in hospital are down from a peak of just over 39,000 to now at just over 10,000. Those poor people on ventilators are down from 4000 to 1542
Admissions are down from 4000 a day to 688.
Words and figures differ I would say
“ Harries said although there was a steep decline in cases and deaths, infections were still causing a “substantial strain on the NHS”.”
When numbers in hospital are down from a peak of just over 39,000 to now at just over 10,000. Those poor people on ventilators are down from 4000 to 1542
Admissions are down from 4000 a day to 688.
Words and figures differ I would say
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff