CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 11)
Discussion
grumbledoak said:
turbobloke said:
gizlaroc said:
Plus we have the issue that if these vaccines don't make you immune, they just reduce the effects of the virus on you, you also have the issue that the virus is allowed to run wild, mutate and could become far more dangerous than it is now. A virus will always try and find a host, at the moment it is doing a rather good with those at the end of their life, but if we pump the planet with a vaccine that reduces symptoms but doesn't kill it off, what we are actually doing is allowing the virus to spread and mutate.
A situation still better than no vaccinations or fewer vaccinations, as some individuals will in fact be prevented from catching it, others less seriously, and mutations are supported by more cases and cases with more severe viral infections.Marek's disease in chickens shows what leaky vaccines can do
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article...
I said that covid vaccination supports fewer infections and less serious infections, and that mutations are helped by more infections and more serious infections.
The more infections there are, the more the virus reproduces, with random mutations increasing with the number of reproductions and therefore the number of infections.
Seriously ill patients treated with experimental therapies such as convalescent plasma donated by recovered patients can endure lengthy illnesses / slow recoveries, during which the virus has more opportunities to replicate, increasing the odds for mutations.
Tedros of WHO said:
The more we allow it to spread the more opportunity it has to change.
Analysis of recent data from three trials found that the first AZ vaccination reduces transmission of the virus by 67%. In addition. An earlier trial clinical involving the UK, Brazil and South Africa showed that AZ vaccination significantly reduced severe cases.Taken together and in summary, this shows that what I said is correct from what's known and published at present.
turbobloke said:
gizlaroc said:
Plus we have the issue that if these vaccines don't make you immune, they just reduce the effects of the virus on you, you also have the issue that the virus is allowed to run wild, mutate and could become far more dangerous than it is now. A virus will always try and find a host, at the moment it is doing a rather good with those at the end of their life, but if we pump the planet with a vaccine that reduces symptoms but doesn't kill it off, what we are actually doing is allowing the virus to spread and mutate.
A situation still better than no vaccinations or fewer vaccinations, as some individuals will in fact be prevented from catching it, others less seriously, and mutations are supported by more cases and cases with more severe viral infections.We have seen it with bird flu and swine flu before.
The virus mutates and goes from being dangerous to a few too dangerous to every one. We could suddenly see 75% of the planet wiped out.
Maybe that is what is needed? Maybe that is what they have realised we need to save the planet, this would be a great way to do it and simply blame it on Covid.
A recent study by John Ioannidis @Stanford adjusts the infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID19 from 0.23% (previous estimate) to 0.15%. It is now almost identical to the IFR of the flu.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
TheJimi said:
RemarkLima said:
HardtopManual said:
Harry H said:
Would explain a lot but the trouble is too many people world wide would have to be in the know to keep it a secret for any length of time.
Plenty of precedent for that though. Bletchley Park. Anything that gets revealed under the 20 year rule. Other countries have similar.So, I think it's entirely possible to have a massive conspiracy - otherwise, we'd not need to have the word conspiracy in our lexicon.
If this is one of those, only history will tell (maybe) - but I think it's more about a serious gravy train going on with the testing, the PPR supplies, the infinite spend on vaccines. Cash is a seriously large motivator
Instant comms is just a way to add more noise to any potential signal.
See any discussion about COVID
gizlaroc said:
turbobloke said:
gizlaroc said:
Plus we have the issue that if these vaccines don't make you immune, they just reduce the effects of the virus on you, you also have the issue that the virus is allowed to run wild, mutate and could become far more dangerous than it is now. A virus will always try and find a host, at the moment it is doing a rather good with those at the end of their life, but if we pump the planet with a vaccine that reduces symptoms but doesn't kill it off, what we are actually doing is allowing the virus to spread and mutate.
A situation still better than no vaccinations or fewer vaccinations, as some individuals will in fact be prevented from catching it, others less seriously, and mutations are supported by more cases and cases with more severe viral infections.We have seen it with bird flu and swine flu before.
The virus mutates and goes from being dangerous to a few too dangerous to every one. We could suddenly see 75% of the planet wiped out.
"situations where we have a pandemic...we have seen it with bird flu...." there have been human infections of H5N1, H5N6, H7N9, H9N2 and more recently H5N8 but I forget when we had a bird flu pandemic, when was it? I may have missed it in all the excitement. It's been described as an emerging pandemic threat iirc.
So that's a "no" to your no, but lovin' your baseless byperbole with 75% of the planet suddenly wiped out.
isaldiri said:
.
Johnboy - if I might say you're missing the point worrying about a 2 year reinfection cycle. There is quite a lot of evidence to suggest subsequent reinfection of sars-cov2 will not manifest itself anything like the severity of the initial exposure. Effectively after a round or 2 of infection/vaccination for most, especially the at risk group sars-cov2 simply becomes hcov5 that we get every now and then which mostly is a bit irksome but not severely debilitating unless already very ill/vulnerable.
Yeah, fair points. Its definitely a problem for the ultra low covid brigade though, and by extension for me, who wants my (old) normal life back before 2025Johnboy - if I might say you're missing the point worrying about a 2 year reinfection cycle. There is quite a lot of evidence to suggest subsequent reinfection of sars-cov2 will not manifest itself anything like the severity of the initial exposure. Effectively after a round or 2 of infection/vaccination for most, especially the at risk group sars-cov2 simply becomes hcov5 that we get every now and then which mostly is a bit irksome but not severely debilitating unless already very ill/vulnerable.
isaldiri said:
The Pfizer and some other data suggests that twinfan's experience of knowing a few cases of reinfection isn't a surprise. There likely is a few months of sterilising immunity post infection/vaccination but after that you might very well get reinfected. It shouldn't be that big a deal at that point. Especially as some of the US studies suggest t cells and low levels of neutralising antibodies are likely are able to provide sufficient protection from severe disease.
Wouldn't we be seeing more reinfections if that were the case? Appreciate its probably gone up (considerably) since last November, but there were a few dozen cases documented worldwide at that point. (I think?) Certainly limitations in first wave testing will have played a part in that (ie it becomes anecdotal rather than documented), but even so....Edited by isaldiri on Tuesday 6th April 17:14
turbobloke said:
Tedros of WHO said:
The more we allow it to spread the more opportunity it has to change.
Analysis of recent data from three trials found that the first AZ vaccination reduces transmission of the virus by 67%. In addition. An earlier trial clinical involving the UK, Brazil and South Africa showed that AZ vaccination significantly reduced severe cases.Taken together and in summary, this shows that what I said is correct from what's known and published at present.
Vaccinating people with a jab that doesn't give immunity just reduces the symptoms is exactly the same. We're not stopping it from spreading, we are just hiding the spread.
Avian flu is a good example, for years we used non steralising vaccines, it stopped the many birds who could have died from dieing, so we carried on using them for years. However, all the time we used them the flu mutated, it got more and more dangerous and spread far more easily and quickly. So we have gone from a flu that used to kill a few birds to one that will wipe out the entire flock. Now, any trace of avian flu and we kill them all to stop any risk of it spreading to another flock.
We really should learn our lessons from our past, yet we never do.
Edited by gizlaroc on Tuesday 6th April 18:05
steveT350C said:
A recent study by John Ioannidis @Stanford adjusts the infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID19 from 0.23% (previous estimate) to 0.15%.
It is now almost identical to the IFR of the flu.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
More details in Twitter thread here.... https://twitter.com/abirballan/status/137943627820...It is now almost identical to the IFR of the flu.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
steveT350C said:
A recent study by John Ioannidis @Stanford adjusts the infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID19 from 0.23% (previous estimate) to 0.15%. It is now almost identical to the IFR of the flu.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
Won't the counter be that the transmissibility of Covid is X times more than Influenzas?https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
CoolC said:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/...
Texas Governor Greg Abbott has passed an executive order banning Joe Biden's proposed "vaccine passports."
Texas Governor Greg Abbott has passed an executive order banning Joe Biden's proposed "vaccine passports."
Ntv said:
Vaccine passports!
Er
“Wow”
“More Bacofoil needed”
“Tin hattery!!!”
Everyone here thinks it’s all Bill Gates’ scheme’!!!!
Er ... what else ... 5G?
Nut jobs!!
Restrictions should be removed once the vulnerable are vaccinated... oh shyte... er ok, once the Government says they should be removed (though I reserve the right to fastidiously align my view with HMG’s, such is the value of my critical thinking!)
Wonder what Nickgnome, Gadgetmac and whoever Sambucket posts as nowadays think to recent events.Er
“Wow”
“More Bacofoil needed”
“Tin hattery!!!”
Everyone here thinks it’s all Bill Gates’ scheme’!!!!
Er ... what else ... 5G?
Nut jobs!!
Restrictions should be removed once the vulnerable are vaccinated... oh shyte... er ok, once the Government says they should be removed (though I reserve the right to fastidiously align my view with HMG’s, such is the value of my critical thinking!)
Of couuuuuurse we will be going back to normal when the vulnerable are vaccinated you crazy tin foil hatters.
When do we see Grant Schapps manning the barricades?
A Winner Is You said:
Will it be enough..?amgmcqueen said:
A Winner Is You said:
Will it be enough..?amgmcqueen said:
A Winner Is You said:
Will it be enough..?" Alas, regrettably the organisation of the vaccine certificate will take too long to help in this outbreak...... Remember, however, that frequent, daily testing will set you free."
HardtopManual said:
"Long Covid" is a hypochondriac's wet dream. I'm amazed it's as low as 35% - I'm sure I read one study where 80% of self diagnosed "long Covid".sufferers had never even had Covid.
It seems to be confined to government employees who receive indefinite full sick pay, then get pensioned of as if they had worked to retirement age.steveT350C said:
A recent study by John Ioannidis @Stanford adjusts the infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID19 from 0.23% (previous estimate) to 0.15%. It is now almost identical to the IFR of the flu.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
If you look at page 9/18 of the Imperial Paper yesterday, their main scenario suggests:-https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
Deaths: 15,700
Incidence: 5,642,800
That implies an IFR of 0.27% I think. However, it does take into account the effect of many people being vaccinated and thus immune. On page 5/15 they describe it in these terms "78.6% population eligible for vaccination x average 93.5% uptake amongst those eligible x 83.6% (“central”) efficacy against severe disease with 2 doses = 61%". The spread is limited to another 5m or so people leaving a chunk of other people to die no doubt in the years ahead.
My sense is that the population wide, unvaccinated IFR is higher than 0.23%. However, as with any average figure it is potentially highly misleading.
Edited by ant1973 on Tuesday 6th April 18:58
johnboy1975 said:
Wouldn't we be seeing more reinfections if that were the case? Appreciate its probably gone up (considerably) since last November, but there were a few dozen cases documented worldwide at that point. (I think?) Certainly limitations in first wave testing will have played a part in that (ie it becomes anecdotal rather than documented), but even so....
There probably are far more reinfections just that quite possibly people have looked quite as hard anymore as last year people were trying quite hard to show infected/recovered people weren't immune.... The US marine preprint study last year showed a much higher rate of reinfection than most people (certainly me anyway) had expected at 30-40% iirc within around 6-8 months. Asymptomatic rate went to 80% i think though of those reinfected so at least that was not out of expectation ie much milder reinfection.
steveT350C said:
A recent study by John Ioannidis @Stanford adjusts the infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID19 from 0.23% (previous estimate) to 0.15%. It is now almost identical to the IFR of the flu.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
Well to be fair, it is also makes quite clear from the study that IFR is very dependent on population demographic. For most western countries with large elderly populations there is no way ifr across the population is anything like that figure.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/e...
Edited by isaldiri on Tuesday 6th April 19:02
king traitor johnson a wobble i hope it’s true. amgmcqueen said:
A Winner Is You said:
Will it be enough..?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff