The big Coronavirus thread
Comments
-
You need to watch some of the youtube documentaries about Theranos before investing.shirley_basso said:I am working with a few companies who are making the desktop machines which can do exactly as you say. Expensive-ish to buy but then you need to buy the consumables.
That said, someone else I am speaking to has allegedly made a chemical which can amplify without thermal cycling which could potentially be a game changer.0 -
this goes in a test tube that is posted off to a laboratoryTheBigBean said:
My dad did a couple of the ONS ones. They are just instant ones that tell you the result. They aren't very reliable though for an individual. Maybe you are being offered something else.surrey_commuter said:
I got a lot of texts/emails after the positive PCR one of which asked if I would take part in an anti-gen survey.TheBigBean said:
How did you do that?surrey_commuter said:Has anybody else volunteered for an antibody test?
if so do they tell you the result?
Am intrigued to know if they will let me know my individual result0 -
I think it's just a scam to get your dna on a database.0
-
totes obvs but was still hoping they would share the resultJezyboy said:I think it's just a scam to get your dna on a database.
0 -
-
What do you think midwives are doing when they take a newborn away?Pross said:
Or worse still, to check it against a sample that is already on the database!Jezyboy said:I think it's just a scam to get your dna on a database.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
-
That's just for sh!ts and giggles though. 😉surrey_commuter said:The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
"The findings re-emphasise the importance of short-range Covid transmission, with physical distancing and mask-wearing likely to be the most effective means of preventing infection. Ventilation, though still worthwhile, is likely to have a lesser impact."TheBigBean said:
I know someone who won't be pleased.1 -
Also humidity is important, it seems. So:
"Hands. Face. Space. Air Conditioning."0 -
i assumed he would be apoplectic with rage by the following paragraph which suggests there has been focus on ventilation.First.Aspect said:
"The findings re-emphasise the importance of short-range Covid transmission, with physical distancing and mask-wearing likely to be the most effective means of preventing infection. Ventilation, though still worthwhile, is likely to have a lesser impact."TheBigBean said:
I know someone who won't be pleased.“People have been focused on poorly ventilated spaces and thinking about airborne transmission over metres or across a room. I’m not saying that doesn’t happen, but I think still, the greatest risk of exposure is when you’re close to someone,”0 -
TheBigBean said:
i assumed he would be apoplectic with rage by the following paragraph which suggests there has been focus on ventilation.First.Aspect said:
"The findings re-emphasise the importance of short-range Covid transmission, with physical distancing and mask-wearing likely to be the most effective means of preventing infection. Ventilation, though still worthwhile, is likely to have a lesser impact."TheBigBean said:
I know someone who won't be pleased.“People have been focused on poorly ventilated spaces and thinking about airborne transmission over metres or across a room. I’m not saying that doesn’t happen, but I think still, the greatest risk of exposure is when you’re close to someone,”
Well, I suspect it won't just be me raising an eyebrow at those findings... there might be rather more eminent scientists than someone with a B at O-level questioning that.0 -
It isn't peer reviewed. Nor intuitive, necessarily. But interesting. Partucularly the humidity dependence part.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
i assumed he would be apoplectic with rage by the following paragraph which suggests there has been focus on ventilation.First.Aspect said:
"The findings re-emphasise the importance of short-range Covid transmission, with physical distancing and mask-wearing likely to be the most effective means of preventing infection. Ventilation, though still worthwhile, is likely to have a lesser impact."TheBigBean said:
I know someone who won't be pleased.“People have been focused on poorly ventilated spaces and thinking about airborne transmission over metres or across a room. I’m not saying that doesn’t happen, but I think still, the greatest risk of exposure is when you’re close to someone,”
Well, I suspect it won't just be me raising an eyebrow at those findings... there might be rather more eminent scientists than someone with a B at O-level questioning that.
Given the nature of the work - it isn't day critical information for public health decisions - it does bother me that yet another academic has published something before it's been published properly.
If he forgot to divide by 10 somewhere and actually it should be 9% and not 90%, who will rember anything other than the original article?0 -
First.Aspect said:
It isn't peer reviewed. Nor intuitive, necessarily. But interesting. Partucularly the humidity dependence part.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
i assumed he would be apoplectic with rage by the following paragraph which suggests there has been focus on ventilation.First.Aspect said:
"The findings re-emphasise the importance of short-range Covid transmission, with physical distancing and mask-wearing likely to be the most effective means of preventing infection. Ventilation, though still worthwhile, is likely to have a lesser impact."TheBigBean said:
I know someone who won't be pleased.“People have been focused on poorly ventilated spaces and thinking about airborne transmission over metres or across a room. I’m not saying that doesn’t happen, but I think still, the greatest risk of exposure is when you’re close to someone,”
Well, I suspect it won't just be me raising an eyebrow at those findings... there might be rather more eminent scientists than someone with a B at O-level questioning that.
Given the nature of the work - it isn't day critical information for public health decisions - it does bother me that yet another academic has published something before it's been published properly.
If he forgot to divide by 10 somewhere and actually it should be 9% and not 90%, who will rember anything other than the original article?
I'd read in a few other places about humidity being important.
I've not read this paper, but seeing the headline strikes me that it's an attention grabber. The science has been trending towards the importance of ventilation for quite a while, so I'd be surprised if that trend, with the wealth of real-world data (such as studies of airflows in Japanese restaurants where there were outbreaks) was entirely wrong.0 -
If ventilation isn't that important does it also mean that being outside isn't much better than being inside?0
-
I'd understood it as being that the ventilation of a room doesn't make enough of a difference to outweigh being on the other side of it in the first place.Pross said:If ventilation isn't that important does it also mean that being outside isn't much better than being inside?
0 -
The findings of this study - to me as a virology and epidemiology layman - fly in the face of what we're told about how contagious the virus is.
We hear stories "there was a New Years Eve party and everyone there ended up testing positive..."
For me that always meant "person A was positive, didn't know and turned up. Breathed out into person B's front room all night, and persons B thru Z all caught it from person A".
Whereas now I'm seeing a scenario where "person A was positive, didn't know and turned up. Spoke closely with every single person there, and persons B thru Z all caught it from person A".
Very happy to be told I'm misunderstanding completely, I am after all a simple Civil Engineer.Ben
Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/0 -
While UK has another fall in cases reported today (121k), France is still on the up... 350k. Starting to feel a bit safer to say that a corner has been turned...0
-
Has absolutely everyone in France gone skiing at the same time or something, because that's an insane number.briantrumpet said:While UK has another fall in cases reported today (121k), France is still on the up... 350k. Starting to feel a bit safer to say that a corner has been turned...
0 -
Is it really inconsistent with what you've been told? We breathe out, what 20 times each minute? So if you are in a crowded room with 5 people around you that's lot of exhaled aerosols built up over 5 minutes, no?Ben6899 said:The findings of this study - to me as a virology and epidemiology layman - fly in the face of what we're told about how contagious the virus is.
We hear stories "there was a New Years Eve party and everyone there ended up testing positive..."
For me that always meant "person A was positive, didn't know and turned up. Breathed out into person B's front room all night, and persons B thru Z all caught it from person A".
Whereas now I'm seeing a scenario where "person A was positive, didn't know and turned up. Spoke closely with every single person there, and persons B thru Z all caught it from person A".
Very happy to be told I'm misunderstanding completely, I am after all a simple Civil Engineer.0 -
New slogan I saw earlier...
Hands.
Face.
Drinks at my place.
================
2020 Voodoo Marasa
2017 Cube Attain GTC Pro Disc 2016
2016 Voodoo Wazoo2 -
First.Aspect said:
Has absolutely everyone in France gone skiing at the same time or something, because that's an insane number.briantrumpet said:While UK has another fall in cases reported today (121k), France is still on the up... 350k. Starting to feel a bit safer to say that a corner has been turned...
Hmm, odd figures going on... only 82k reported yesterday, so might be lumpy data, though the 7-day average is 270k0 -
First.Aspect said:
Is it really inconsistent with what you've been told? We breathe out, what 20 times each minute? So if you are in a crowded room with 5 people around you that's lot of exhaled aerosols built up over 5 minutes, no?Ben6899 said:The findings of this study - to me as a virology and epidemiology layman - fly in the face of what we're told about how contagious the virus is.
We hear stories "there was a New Years Eve party and everyone there ended up testing positive..."
For me that always meant "person A was positive, didn't know and turned up. Breathed out into person B's front room all night, and persons B thru Z all caught it from person A".
Whereas now I'm seeing a scenario where "person A was positive, didn't know and turned up. Spoke closely with every single person there, and persons B thru Z all caught it from person A".
Very happy to be told I'm misunderstanding completely, I am after all a simple Civil Engineer.
Agreed. But on one hand we're being told that one person can infect a whole room, even if they remain several metres away from certain people for the whole time.
This study - as I understand (see my disclaimers!) - is telling us that, if you're several metres from the person in the room then the chance of you becoming infected via their aerosols reduces to ~10%. That's a heck of a risk reduction and changes the picture entirely, as far as I can understand.
I have to say, I'm very keen to not come across as a denier in this. I'm quite the opposite.Ben
Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/0 -
That's what I understood too, but surely has to apply to a set of conditions that aren't reported in the article.Ben6899 said:First.Aspect said:
Is it really inconsistent with what you've been told? We breathe out, what 20 times each minute? So if you are in a crowded room with 5 people around you that's lot of exhaled aerosols built up over 5 minutes, no?Ben6899 said:The findings of this study - to me as a virology and epidemiology layman - fly in the face of what we're told about how contagious the virus is.
We hear stories "there was a New Years Eve party and everyone there ended up testing positive..."
For me that always meant "person A was positive, didn't know and turned up. Breathed out into person B's front room all night, and persons B thru Z all caught it from person A".
Whereas now I'm seeing a scenario where "person A was positive, didn't know and turned up. Spoke closely with every single person there, and persons B thru Z all caught it from person A".
Very happy to be told I'm misunderstanding completely, I am after all a simple Civil Engineer.
Agreed. But on one hand we're being told that one person can infect a whole room, even if they remain several metres away from certain people for the whole time.
This study - as I understand (see my disclaimers!) - is telling us that, if you're several metres from the person in the room then the chance of you becoming infected via their aerosols reduces to ~10%. That's a heck of a risk reduction and changes the picture entirely, as far as I can understand.
I have to say, I'm very keen to not come across as a denier in this. I'm quite the opposite.
I don't know enough about droplet diffusion rates in air to be able to judge one way or the other.
A gas would certainly diffuse more quickly, but a droplet? No idea.0 -
briantrumpet said:First.Aspect said:
Has absolutely everyone in France gone skiing at the same time or something, because that's an insane number.briantrumpet said:While UK has another fall in cases reported today (121k), France is still on the up... 350k. Starting to feel a bit safer to say that a corner has been turned...
Hmm, odd figures going on... only 82k reported yesterday, so might be lumpy data, though the 7-day average is 270k
Yeah, 368k today, so 450k for two days, so looks about right.0 -
Was this lawbreaking OK because 'everyone else was doing it'?
0 -
In usual circumstances there’s a clear process to follow - any bidding process involving the public sector is laborious but it is what it is. I don’t believe this should have been completely ripped up to instead allow a free-for-all, but in the face of a public health emergency there was a need for a middle ground approach.0
-
Has anyone read Viral: The Search for the Origin of COVID-19 by Alina Chan and Matt Ridley?
A very interesting read, highly recommended.0 -
No. Did they start writing it with an open mind, by any chance?0
