CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 15)

[PurplePangolin]

sunnygym said:

Why has one side got masks on and the other not….

Because they are all tts especially labour - spineless morons

[Oakey]

They're the opposition?

[PurplePangolin]

Oakey said:

They're the opposition?

Allegedly

[Scolmore]

Believe that's the SNP. Clearly trying to show that they believe Scottish laws apply everywhere...

[grumbledoak]

sunnygym said:

Why has one side got masks on and the other not….

Because they are a sign of political allegiance.

[Brave Fart]

Boringvolvodriver said:

You do surely have to wonder why they have carried on in this manner when it should be obvious that some of the measures do not make sense in a health context if a virus that has such a low fatality rate.

The fact that it is happening in many countries is a coincidence?

I am losing what little faith I had in our MPs and the rest of the population.

My bold, and I have to agree - our politicians have been a motley bunch, with no ability to make the government answerable for their incompetence.
And that's just in England, those in Scotland and Wales have been even worse, IMHO.

Meanwhile the public have, in my opinion, allowed their fear to overrule any semblance of rational thought. I've certainly had to revise my opinion of one or two people that I don't know as well as I thought I did. All very disappointing.

[2gins]

Brave Fart said:

My bold, and I have to agree - our politicians have been a motley bunch, with no ability to make the government answerable for their incompetence.
And that's just in England, those in Scotland and Wales have been even worse, IMHO.

Meanwhile the public have, in my opinion, allowed their fear to overrule any semblance of rational thought. I've certainly had to revise my opinion of one or two people that I don't know as well as I thought I did. All very disappointing.

I had observed Labour's complete lack of critique of lockdown (etc) and thought along the lines surely they can't be that stupid, weak and completely and utterly ineffective? There must be something else going on, some plan or cohesive direction. Then I observed Starmer's pandering to the Rayner thing and refusal to take a stand on that and other issues, and then I realised that sadly, yes, they really are mainly as thick as mince and completely unfit for office.

[g4ry13]

I see BBC reporting that 68% of premier league players now double vaccinated. 81% have received a single jab.

That's quite an uptake since a few months ago. Either the players suddenly changed their mind / club pressured them into it / players lied about having it or the story is being creative with the truth.

Link

[EddieSteadyGo]

isaldiri said:

If it didn't fall quickly at 60% why would it do so suddenly at 70%?

My whole point above was that 5% of all of that age population infected means 12+% of those who would be susceptible if ~60% were previously infected. And that is also a rate that has doubled if not trebled in the last 6 weeks. It should not have been the case at 50+% prior infection levels.

I'm not following your logic - the number of infections in children has been growing since the start of the September term when all of the children were brought back together, and all the restrictions which slowed infection rate (like bubbles) were removed. So just because the number of infections has increased following this change in policy (and resulting behavior change) doesn't mean we can't have reached a high proportion already infected.

And the reason it would drop quickly after maybe 70% is just due to a lack of susceptible hosts to maintain that infection rate.

But in terms of what this all means, I think we will see infection rates in the 10-14 age group drop very quickly before mid November.

[Hoink]

g4ry13 said:

I see BBC reporting that 68% of premier league players now double vaccinated. 81% have received a single jab.

That's quite an uptake since a few months ago. Either the players suddenly changed their mind / club pressured them into it / players lied about having it or the story is being creative with the truth.

Link

They were still reporting low numbers two weeks ago. That's a lot of people changing their mind in a very short period of time.

[Andy888]

Oh, here we go.

"Ministers must urgently implement sweeping “plan B” winter measures or derail efforts to tackle the backlog of 5 million patients, the head of the NHS Confederation warned as the UK recorded its highest daily Covid death toll since March."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/19/impl...

[CarCrazyDad]

Andy888 said:

Oh, here we go.

"Ministers must urgently implement sweeping “plan B” winter measures or derail efforts to tackle the backlog of 5 million patients, the head of the NHS Confederation warned as the UK recorded its highest daily Covid death toll since March."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/19/impl...

We knew it was coming.

The NHS will never clear its backlog.

Oh well. Life as we know it is over and it isn't coming back.

[LeighW]

Brave Fart said:

My bold, and I have to agree - our politicians have been a motley bunch, with no ability to make the government answerable for their incompetence.
And that's just in England, those in Scotland and Wales have been even worse, IMHO.

Meanwhile the public have, in my opinion, allowed their fear to overrule any semblance of rational thought. I've certainly had to revise my opinion of one or two people that I don't know as well as I thought I did. All very disappointing.

Entirely agree. Some of my mates have surprised me, they think it's all fine, they've had both jabs, no way will any more restrictions be imposed etc. They're in for a surprise. One of them I expected it from, he posts his life on FB, including regular dinner pics, but some others that are quite intelligent and successful seem utterly oblivious.

[johnboy1975]

As discussed with Eddie earlier, how many of the cases are old cases from the 43k false negatives 'scandal ' (I say scandal, it barely raised a murmur, even on here). That's 8.5k a day over 5 days, unless they drop them in all at once? I guess if a batch is retested it means maybe the results would be over 2 or 3 days rather than 5, so 14k a day??

And if 43k people can live their lives normally, nay even with an increased sense of confidence from a "gold standard" negative test result, and not infect the whole bloody country, have we maybe been overdoing the isolation thing, just a little bit?

Its slightly too tinfoil to suggest they deliberately mistested 43k people in order to add them in at an opportunistic moment......but I wouldn't put it past them

Edited by johnboy1975 on Tuesday 19th October 21:03

[Boringvolvodriver]

The first few para says it all with regard to the Opposition

https://labourlist.org/2021/10/labour-approves-cor...

A shadow health Secretary saying that “he may be naive” but doesn’t vote against the nodding through of the act, it would appear just on the basis of sick pay being available after day 1 not day 4.

[johnboy1975]

Boringvolvodriver said:

The first few para says it all with regard to the Opposition

https://labourlist.org/2021/10/labour-approves-cor...

A shadow health Secretary saying that “he may be naive” but doesn’t vote against the nodding through of the act, it would appear just on the basis of sick pay being available after day 1 not day 4.

said:

Labour’s Dawn Butler, David Davis on the Tory benches and Liberal Democrat Munira Wilson this afternoon highlighted that all 295 cases brought by the police under the Coronavirus Act were found to be incorrectly charged

I'd love to see a detailed summary....Woman walking her dog with a coffee chased by a drone until she begs for mercy, or bloke out 5 minutes after the 10pm curfew and many other similar stories, no doubt.

(Is this old news? I remember similar, but not sure we've had 295/295 headlining the MSM TV output and/or Fleet Street's (as was) finest?)

[isaldiri]

EddieSteadyGo said:

I'm not following your logic - the number of infections in children has been growing since the start of the September term when all of the children were brought back together, and all the restrictions which slowed infection rate (like bubbles) were removed. So just because the number of infections has increased following this change in policy (and resulting behavior change) doesn't mean we can't have reached a high proportion already infected.

And the reason it would drop quickly after maybe 70% is just due to a lack of susceptible hosts to maintain that infection rate.

But in terms of what this all means, I think we will see infection rates in the 10-14 age group drop very quickly before mid November.

my logic is that at 60% or 70%, it's a sufficient level of prior infection such that it would or should (greatly) reduce the number of susceptible hosts. If at 60% infection levels could reach over 1/8 of all susceptible 10-14 year olds, it's improbable that at 70% it would start to drop off as suddenly as you are suggesting as 10% less susceptible isn't going to change all that much if 5% of the entire group is currently infected in the each week over the past 2 weeks at ~60% infection levels.

P.S and definte 'drop very quickly. The supposed 70% infection level of the older group of 20-25 or whatever it was has still resulted in substantial rates of (constant) infection since August/September....Infection rates levelling off isn't necessarily due to X% of infection levels being reached I'd suggest....

Edited by isaldiri on Tuesday 19th October 21:20

[johnboy1975]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Well, they've been eligible since July at the latest, so it certainly isn't nonsensical to suggest that a 1/3 of them getting double jabbed in a month means that either:

JvT had a word on zoom, and now they are massively pro vax (aka They've changed their minds)

Or

The stats were wrong, and are now correct

Or

The stats were right, and are now wrong

Edit:

The English League a few weeks ago had a higher (70%) fully vaccinated rate, which could be explained by the players being less likely to know Christian Ericsson

Edited by johnboy1975 on Wednesday 20th October 05:00

[EddieSteadyGo]

isaldiri said:

my logic is that at 60% or 70%, it's a sufficient level of prior infection such that it would or should (greatly) reduce the number of susceptible hosts. If at 60% infection levels could reach over 1/8 of all susceptible 10-14 year olds, it's improbable that at 70% it would start to drop off as suddenly as you are suggesting as 10% less susceptible isn't going to change all that much if 5% of the entire group is currently infected in the each week over the past 2 weeks at ~60% infection levels.

P.S and definte 'drop very quickly. The supposed 70% infection level of the older group of 20-25 or whatever it was has still resulted in substantial rates of (constant) infection since August/September....Infection rates levelling off isn't necessarily due to X% of infection levels being reached I'd suggest....

I'd define 'dropping quickly' as an R rate of ~0.8 which would half the number of cases in that age group every ~15 days. Which is what I think will be happening in the 10-14 age group before mid Nov.

[johnboy1975]

EddieSteadyGo said:

isaldiri said:

my logic is that at 60% or 70%, it's a sufficient level of prior infection such that it would or should (greatly) reduce the number of susceptible hosts. If at 60% infection levels could reach over 1/8 of all susceptible 10-14 year olds, it's improbable that at 70% it would start to drop off as suddenly as you are suggesting as 10% less susceptible isn't going to change all that much if 5% of the entire group is currently infected in the each week over the past 2 weeks at ~60% infection levels.

P.S and definte 'drop very quickly. The supposed 70% infection level of the older group of 20-25 or whatever it was has still resulted in substantial rates of (constant) infection since August/September....Infection rates levelling off isn't necessarily due to X% of infection levels being reached I'd suggest....

I'd define 'dropping quickly' as an R rate of ~0.8 which would half the number of cases in that age group every ~15 days. Which is what I think will be happening in the 10-14 age group before mid Nov.

Surely it would slow all the way, not speed up, then drop off? I think that's Isaldiri's point, and I agree.

I'm sure there's a positive spin that could be put on the robustness of a prior infection, but I've been brainwashed to believe that you are only truly safe with 2 doses plus a booster......