OneGuyFromBarlick

Big Kev wrote: ↑23 Apr 2020, 10:29 Hayfever symptoms are producing some funny looks from people. Just because I'm sneezing doesn't mean I have the plague

To paraphase the old adage 'When Big Kev sneezes everybody does a runner.

Usually quote as 'when America sneezes...... ' I was surprised to find it originated in Napoleonic France.
Sneeze

plaques wrote: ↑24 Apr 2020, 08:45 To paraphase the old adage 'When Big Kev sneezes everybody does a runner.

True story

I commented on injecting disinfectant elsewhere. Trump should perhaps try the theory out on himself?
I've completely given up on the 3 podium news slot, perhaps that is what the government wants, to bore us all into a state of apathy.

This is a bit of hearsay at the moment basically true but the details need qualifying. Pendle Community Hospital, Leeds Rd, Nelson. has turned over a number of beds to treat coronavirus patients, The hospital is basically a recovery unit with a total of 72 bed split into three wards with 24 beds per ward. From what I have seen each ward is then built up of a number of four beds per room. The number of beds given over coronovirus patients is not clear.

Have you seen the proposals for getting crumblies out of hospital and back in care homes? Not clear whether they will be properly tested for the virus. It looks very close to chucking them into the care homes to die.

As the lockdown eases there is a proposal to allow a bubble of very close friends come together to reduce the stress of isolation. That leaves me talking to myself for another month or more.

Every time I hear about the symptoms it frightens me....
Laura is filling in time as she waits to go up to the Pilbara by working for BHP testing Aborigine workers who seem to be more prone to contracting the virus.

Stanley wrote: ↑22 Apr 2020, 02:35 Kev, that article about testing centres talks well but doesn't detail any real moves to make it easier for carers to get tested. (Or anyone else).

The military are rolling out mobile testing centres for 'hard to reach' areas from tomorrow.

BBC report here

Lets remember the sole purpose of journalists is to scare us to death. There is nothing happening in the UK that is not happening elsewhere. The main difference is elsewhere we are told how many have recovered but no one has any idea in the UK. Numbers are meaningless unless they are at least percentages. Also you cannot compare a densely populated country with a sparsely populated one, or one with a high number of elderly overall one with one that hasn’t, or one in its winter /spring with one in summer/ autumn or one with a large number of people with underlying issues by virtue of their environment with one with a relatively small number of vulnerable people. How many in the UK eg know the number in France who have died in care homes or industrial areas.

Epidemiology is complex. Don’t get obsessed with your own data. I would still rather be in the UK than France or the States when it comes to care.

You're quite right Sue and I keep telling myself that but when you see your kids struck down and on the brink of being taken into ICU the news and the stats fade into insignificance. They are both recovering well now and taking longer walks up steeper hills each day so there is hope for them yet!
The BBC and the government's 3 podium news management have killed any desire I had for 'news'. I take more notice of Private Eye these days and this week's has some hairy stories but I shan't retail them, get a copy for yourself or have a look online. MD is brilliant on the virus....

Of course they do , thats a gut response but the intelligent man in there can and will see beyond that. We would all react in the same way, but I am in a novel position of seeing news first hand from another country and thus cannot help make comparisons, and to be honest I could be in the same country. The worst statistics I have seen is Belgium

Its the journalists with their stupid questions that have no answers ( and they know it) that makes it such a farce. Same questions each day , same answers. The sole point of the question is to make everyone seem incompetent. It really wouldn’t matter which party was in charge the object is the same, belittle and blame. I sit there and shout at the journalists and say for goodness sake they told you that yesterday. The profession needs an overhaul!
They ask a question and distort the answer to create their own shocking headlines that will anger and confuse the general public. I have no time for such garbage. It is immoral and irresponsible.

I shall stick to my own research, scientific reports articles by sound journalists and experts qualified in the field they are writing in. We are lucky to have a world renowned epidemiologist involved. His answers are always well thought out, logical, precise and stick to the point. Not emotionalist propaganda.

I used to teach contentious issues and was proud of and indeed praised for my methods. I use to split the class into groups and get them to research opposing sides of an issue, then we would have a formal debate. I made the students find all the evidence they could for their allocated side of the argument. Only accurate , backed up facts were allowed in classroom discussion , no emotive arguments were accepted. I taught that you have a right to your own opinion if it could be backed up with facts, and you had no right to belittle someone. Persuade with facts not emontional blackmail.

I remember one such debate about the need for a reservoir on a farmers land. On the day the three sides came armed with all the facts I could have hoped for, environmentalists, bureaucrats , and farmers, all dressed up for a perfect role play. The leader of the ‘farmers ‘ was in her wellies and overalls. The best lesson I ever did. The outcome perfect, open mindedness, factual research and an understanding that people only present the facts that are relevant to themselves often omitting crucial evidence to suit their cause ,don’t always believe what you read with out checking yourself, plus a great insight into other peoples problems and there is more than one way to look at an issue.

That's it, its not like me to be outspoken .

Just had to log on to applaud everything Sue has just said.

Excellent posts Sue, I think most of us on OG have given up on the tabloid newspapers some years ago. One of the main problems of course is that journalists miss quote politicians who in turn are selective in the information they hand out often in such a garbled manner and with added words that give the meaning 'more flexibility' A good example is the 'tens of thousands' on immigration. = one hundred thousand in reality.

Back to facts and figures. We hear that the object in the coronavirus debate is to get the transmission (R) rate down to below one. This sounds plausible if those previous infected have developed an immunity. But the WHO have said that a permanent immunity after catching it is very unlikely. This one factor blows the 'R' theory out of the water. Diminishing waves of infection become unlikely if the total population available to catch always remains at 56 million. This leaves us with the stark fact that until a vaccine is available then some form of population movement control is essential. Unfortunately anything other than a full lockdown will increase the rate of transmission. Something that we may have to live or die with.

Very well said Sue.

The WHO I think are covering their backs. There has been talk of an immunity passport, if the WHO. Gives the go ahead they will be heavily criticised if it turns out to be impossible . It is too soon to say if immunity is long standing. There was a scientific article a couple of weeks back to this effect. It said ot could be weeks, months, a year, two years or even longer but the normal response is 1-2 years. Passports last longer than that.

As a biologist I cannot see why there would not be some immunity that survives. If there is none please explain why they are using plasma from recovered patients as treatment . The normal situation would be a response on first exposure then the production of memory white cells, on second exposure these can leap into action and stimulate antibody production in large quantities and give immunity or at least help to stop as severe an attack. With each exposure the immunity level builds up as the number of memory cells i crease. The memory cells only survive in small numbers and need frequent exposure to keep building the level up. Some pathogens for what ever reason trigger a long standing response others do not eg tetanus. The reason for timing between vaccinations is to allow sufficient memory cells to be stimulated to create a long standing response on subsequent vaccine doses or boosters.

Of course it is more complex than this with all sorts of different white cells involved in the action but this is the principle. The white cells are basically primed during development and respond to surface antigens that tge body may be exposed to. The problem here is that tge proteins and genetic material are new to humans and the chances of their being a white cell appropriate is reduced. BUT as antibodies have been produced and found in recovering patients there must have been an immune response.

Of course I may be wrong here, my knowledge is old and it is 15-20 years since I taught it, and I may be a little in accurate on what I have said but the principle of primary and secondary response on exposure is the same

There is also ongoing research to determine whether the severity of the disease is linked to our genes. This could account for the differences of severity in ethnic populations.

Wonderful posts Sue and an excellent point on the plasma testing that's happening. The instigators must think there is a chance of such an effect.

Phew complex or what !

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _Responses

Genetic links
https://www.wsj.com/articles/hunt-is-on ... 1586259827

Sue, thanks for the above posts and I agree with your comments about the news media people who are giving priority to their scare ratings over the provision of objective and accurate reporting. There's far too much negativity about and inappropriate criticism: it reminds me of someone who said `Don't shout at the pilot when he's struggling to prevent the aeroplane crashing'.

Your last link to the WSJ only allows me to view the first paragraph and the rest is behind a pay wall so I'll offer this version from the AAAS:
`How sick will the coronavirus make you? The answer may be in your genes' AAAS

Thanks Tiz , its all a very complex issue. The science behind it is so important