The big Coronavirus thread
Comments
-
Calm down, just pointing out that what he was asking for had already been provided.coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.
0 -
Stop being stupid. Stop it. It's infuriating. You literally don't understand what words mean.coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.1 -
To be fair to the newspapers. There is only one news story on atm and they have a whole paper to fill!
The whole right wing deliberately contrarian opinion article is pretty standard fare and pretty tedious. Expecting them to do a fair cost benefit analysis (I.e one that includes the cost of preventable deaths as a cost of opening up our economy again) is simply expecting too much within a short article.
I do think that there could be more emphasis on just how bad letting covid run riot would be from an economic pov (as well as a human pov) though.
0 -
Also, the civility police won't like that name calling.coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.0 -
You are having a mental breakdown. Step back from your computer to save yourself and let the adults deal with this.rick_chasey said:
Stop being stupid. Stop it. It's infuriating. You literally don't understand what words mean.coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.0 -
How about I teach you how to spell the plural of policy? Did they not cover that over in Vladivostok?coopster_the_1st said:
You are having a mental breakdown. Step back from your computer to save yourself and let the adults deal with this.rick_chasey said:
Stop being stupid. Stop it. It's infuriating. You literally don't understand what words mean.coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.0 -
😂😂😂coopster_the_1st said:
You are having a mental breakdown. Step back from your computer to save yourself and let the adults deal with this.rick_chasey said:
Stop being stupid. Stop it. It's infuriating. You literally don't understand what words mean.coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.0 -
You favour letting 250,000 die to own the libs?coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
If Toby young is your barometer of what is definitely wrong, here he is. One right take at the end though.
0 -
The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) put an upper band of £30,000 on the cost of adding one quality-adjusted life year (Qaly).Jeremy.89 said:To be fair to the newspapers. There is only one news story on atm and they have a whole paper to fill!
The whole right wing deliberately contrarian opinion article is pretty standard fare and pretty tedious. Expecting them to do a fair cost benefit analysis (I.e one that includes the cost of preventable deaths as a cost of opening up our economy again) is simply expecting too much within a short article.
I do think that there could be more emphasis on just how bad letting covid run riot would be from an economic pov (as well as a human pov) though.
Even Diane Abbott and her maths can see we blown this figure away.
And this does not take account of the life years list of the 99.5% who have to pick up the pieces0 -
How many times....? LOTS OF DEATHS WILL BE BAD FOR THE ECONOMY.0
-
There are 65,750,000 others and their future lives to consider as welltailwindhome said:
You favour letting 250,000 die to own the libs?coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.0 -
As well?coopster_the_1st said:
There are 65,750,000 others and their future lives to consider as welltailwindhome said:
You favour letting 250,000 die to own the libs?coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.
It's mostly owning the libs though isn't it?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Do you really still think this is about buying a few octogenarians a couple of extra years?coopster_the_1st said:
The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) put an upper band of £30,000 on the cost of adding one quality-adjusted life year (Qaly).Jeremy.89 said:To be fair to the newspapers. There is only one news story on atm and they have a whole paper to fill!
The whole right wing deliberately contrarian opinion article is pretty standard fare and pretty tedious. Expecting them to do a fair cost benefit analysis (I.e one that includes the cost of preventable deaths as a cost of opening up our economy again) is simply expecting too much within a short article.
I do think that there could be more emphasis on just how bad letting covid run riot would be from an economic pov (as well as a human pov) though.
Even Diane Abbott and her maths can see we blown this figure away.
And this does not take account of the life years list of the 99.5% who have to pick up the pieces1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
We won the war, we can survive any disruption from a no deal brexit.
Also: if we stay inside for 3 months to help protect people, the country will never recover from it.2 -
I've owned the libs for the last 3.5 yearstailwindhome said:
As well?coopster_the_1st said:
There are 65,750,000 others and their future lives to consider as welltailwindhome said:
You favour letting 250,000 die to own the libs?coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.
It's mostly owning the libs though isn't it?
We always use to abide by the 'women and children' first philosophy. ie The young before the old. This is surely a very liberal policy.
We'd all agree that right now you would spend your medical resources on saving a doctor against an 80 year man. We would do it for the greater good as the recovered doctor would then contribute to saving many more lives.0 -
Apart from stopping the NHS from collapsing, look at ages of those dying so to answer your question Yes there is too much focus on that.rjsterry said:
Do you really still think this is about buying a few octogenarians a couple of extra years?coopster_the_1st said:
The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) put an upper band of £30,000 on the cost of adding one quality-adjusted life year (Qaly).Jeremy.89 said:To be fair to the newspapers. There is only one news story on atm and they have a whole paper to fill!
The whole right wing deliberately contrarian opinion article is pretty standard fare and pretty tedious. Expecting them to do a fair cost benefit analysis (I.e one that includes the cost of preventable deaths as a cost of opening up our economy again) is simply expecting too much within a short article.
I do think that there could be more emphasis on just how bad letting covid run riot would be from an economic pov (as well as a human pov) though.
Even Diane Abbott and her maths can see we blown this figure away.
And this does not take account of the life years list of the 99.5% who have to pick up the pieces
0 -
If they do develop an effective vaccine for COVID-19, then it may simply get incorporated into the annual flu jab, which typically has at least 2 of the 'Type A' (i.e. nasty) flu viruses such as swine flu.coopster_the_1st said:
This is a laymans view from what I have read/heard.Stevo_666 said:I was hoping that they would have checked this point first - assumption being the mother of all **** ups etc.
Covid-19 is in the same group of viruses as the common cold. So once you have had C19 your body has the mechanism to produce the anti-bodies to stop you getting the virus again. However your body over time (1-2 years) forgets how to produce these anti-bodies unless it is stimulated to do so again (ie has to fight the virus).
It seems like the scientists believe they can produce a vaccine, however I'm guessing that it will have to be administered every year.
However I don't know if herd immunity will cause C19 to die out. Logic says over a number of years it will do as to stay alive it needs to find hosts that are not immune to it.
https://nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/how-flu-vaccine-works/"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'm a big fan of Jenny Harries the medical expert. Incredible speaker, confident and clearly knows exactly what she's talking about.1
-
Stopping the NHS from collapse is kinda important, and key to ensuring the virus is as safe as possible for the young people you are now so keen to look after.coopster_the_1st said:
Apart from stopping the NHS from collapsing, look at ages of those dying so to answer your question Yes there is too much focus on that.rjsterry said:
Do you really still think this is about buying a few octogenarians a couple of extra years?coopster_the_1st said:
The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) put an upper band of £30,000 on the cost of adding one quality-adjusted life year (Qaly).Jeremy.89 said:To be fair to the newspapers. There is only one news story on atm and they have a whole paper to fill!
The whole right wing deliberately contrarian opinion article is pretty standard fare and pretty tedious. Expecting them to do a fair cost benefit analysis (I.e one that includes the cost of preventable deaths as a cost of opening up our economy again) is simply expecting too much within a short article.
I do think that there could be more emphasis on just how bad letting covid run riot would be from an economic pov (as well as a human pov) though.
Even Diane Abbott and her maths can see we blown this figure away.
And this does not take account of the life years list of the 99.5% who have to pick up the pieces
0 -
Your plan is to help doctors by sending hundreds of thousands virus infected patients their way.coopster_the_1st said:
I've owned the libs for the last 3.5 yearstailwindhome said:
As well?coopster_the_1st said:
There are 65,750,000 others and their future lives to consider as welltailwindhome said:
You favour letting 250,000 die to own the libs?coopster_the_1st said:I am enjoying that people are waking up and finally questioning if we are looking way to short term with our actions to the current crisis.
That this discussion angers the woke and SJW's shows that it is likely the current policys are the wrong ones.
It's mostly owning the libs though isn't it?
We always use to abide by the 'women and children' first philosophy. ie The young before the old. This is surely a very liberal policy.
We'd all agree that right now you would spend your medical resources on saving a doctor against an 80 year man. We would do it for the greater good as the recovered doctor would then contribute to saving many more lives.
Just to own the libs
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!1 -
I have and there are more than a few of working age needing ICU treatment or dying. Not that over 70s aren't able to contribute economically either.coopster_the_1st said:
Apart from stopping the NHS from collapsing, look at ages of those dying so to answer your question Yes there is too much focus on that.rjsterry said:
Do you really still think this is about buying a few octogenarians a couple of extra years?coopster_the_1st said:
The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) put an upper band of £30,000 on the cost of adding one quality-adjusted life year (Qaly).Jeremy.89 said:To be fair to the newspapers. There is only one news story on atm and they have a whole paper to fill!
The whole right wing deliberately contrarian opinion article is pretty standard fare and pretty tedious. Expecting them to do a fair cost benefit analysis (I.e one that includes the cost of preventable deaths as a cost of opening up our economy again) is simply expecting too much within a short article.
I do think that there could be more emphasis on just how bad letting covid run riot would be from an economic pov (as well as a human pov) though.
Even Diane Abbott and her maths can see we blown this figure away.
And this does not take account of the life years list of the 99.5% who have to pick up the pieces
Stopping the NHS collapsing is pretty much the entire focus of the lockdown. A quarter of the workforce is off sick or isolating and two senior medics have died already.
More generally businesses aren't able to function with that level of absence due to sickness even if they all just had two weeks off and then came back. As someone actually running a business, having everyone healthy and continuing to work from home is better than losing at least half a man-year to sick leave.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
A quick Google revealed that the BCG seems to have some magic properties. I know nothing more.rjsterry said:
BCG is a vaccine for TB: a bacterial infection. How would it be effective against a virus?TheBigBean said:
Which bit? BCG? Or the bit where it is brought into the country from abroad and occasionally affects a local?rjsterry said:
That sounds like complete cobblers. TB is a bacterial infection, not viral.TheBigBean said:
People will want to know if they have had it, but I suspect the vast majority of people don't actually need to know. If the herd immunity threshold was reached then it would effectively have died in the UK, so the main risks would be people bringing it in from abroad, and then it would die again after affecting only a few people. I think there are other diseases comparable to this such as TB.rick_chasey said:
Mmm I don't think the gaps and the casualties from those would be tolerated... People will want to know if *they* have had it or not. If it's as easily transmitted. You think people would tolerate the 'accidental' infections?TheBigBean said:
You may only need to test those at high risk and sample the rest of the population to see if herd immunity has been reached.rick_chasey said:Eventually they will need to test everyone and keep testing everyone, so you will need around a billion just for Europe, assuming each person will on average need three tests.
The challenge isn't really developing a test - it is developing a test you can make 100s of millions of in fairly short notice.
In the meantime, constant testing of everyone can more easily help get things back to normal.
What is it they do in the SARS affected places? Take your temperature whenever you go on a bus, enter a bank or an office, supermarket etc - if you have a temperature they send you to a warehouse without passing go until you are assessed. If you have it they stick you in a bed and tell you to not leave for 14 days. The rest go back.
Something like that makes sense if you want to return to normality sooner.
That reminds me. I am very much liking the story that a BCG provides good protection against the virus although I have no idea if that is true.
They are both transmitted in similar ways but that's it.
0 -
Shame they stopped giving it to teenagers as a matter of course in 2005, something I only discovered a few days ago when my daughter had to complete a list of vaccines she's had for a job application.TheBigBean said:
A quick Google revealed that the BCG seems to have some magic properties. I know nothing more.rjsterry said:
BCG is a vaccine for TB: a bacterial infection. How would it be effective against a virus?TheBigBean said:
Which bit? BCG? Or the bit where it is brought into the country from abroad and occasionally affects a local?rjsterry said:
That sounds like complete cobblers. TB is a bacterial infection, not viral.TheBigBean said:
People will want to know if they have had it, but I suspect the vast majority of people don't actually need to know. If the herd immunity threshold was reached then it would effectively have died in the UK, so the main risks would be people bringing it in from abroad, and then it would die again after affecting only a few people. I think there are other diseases comparable to this such as TB.rick_chasey said:
Mmm I don't think the gaps and the casualties from those would be tolerated... People will want to know if *they* have had it or not. If it's as easily transmitted. You think people would tolerate the 'accidental' infections?TheBigBean said:
You may only need to test those at high risk and sample the rest of the population to see if herd immunity has been reached.rick_chasey said:Eventually they will need to test everyone and keep testing everyone, so you will need around a billion just for Europe, assuming each person will on average need three tests.
The challenge isn't really developing a test - it is developing a test you can make 100s of millions of in fairly short notice.
In the meantime, constant testing of everyone can more easily help get things back to normal.
What is it they do in the SARS affected places? Take your temperature whenever you go on a bus, enter a bank or an office, supermarket etc - if you have a temperature they send you to a warehouse without passing go until you are assessed. If you have it they stick you in a bed and tell you to not leave for 14 days. The rest go back.
Something like that makes sense if you want to return to normality sooner.
That reminds me. I am very much liking the story that a BCG provides good protection against the virus although I have no idea if that is true.
They are both transmitted in similar ways but that's it.0 -
Coop go'n click (and retweet)rick_chasey said:I think we can all see that. But what is going on in the minds of the publishers? in this instance, the editors.
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
I disagree it looked terrible at the time. To misquote TBB if only they knew more than him they would have done so much better and all he had was a small box that allowed him to see two weeks into the future.rick_chasey said:In hindsight, how on earth was the gov't going to do 'herd immunity' without any testing?
The response until about March 15th in hindsight looks absolutely terrible.0 -
To add to the point above, malaria is a parasite, but some anti-malarial drugs seem to be effective against this virus.0
-
The BCG thing is about it increasing the innate immune response which is also a theory as to why children are much less affected by coronavirus. The evidence is debatable but it's not daft.0
-
I don't think the straight up herd immunity policy really stands up to any scrutiny. However, I think the timings of our lockdown have worked reasonably, although we'll have to wait for a while to really know one way or the other.surrey_commuter said:
I disagree it looked terrible at the time. To misquote TBB if only they knew more than him they would have done so much better and all he had was a small box that allowed him to see two weeks into the future.rick_chasey said:In hindsight, how on earth was the gov't going to do 'herd immunity' without any testing?
The response until about March 15th in hindsight looks absolutely terrible.
I would set September up as a month to work towards for lots of things, school university grad schemes and sport.
That doesn't mean I don't think things should go on in the meantime, finishing off the Premier league behind closed doors would seem sensible, so long as the lockdown is giving results, and so long as there are plenty of anti body tests flying about.
Having said all that, I'm not keen when politicians/Toby Youngs talk about setting precise dates on these things.0
