Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

[redsturgeon]

You appear to be in agreement given you wouldn't expect to see much of it yet.

I don't think we are in agreement.

I have the view that there is evidence for a long lasting immune response between Coronaviruses. Furthermore if there was not some form of lasting immunity we would have masses of reinfection going on.

Hence on a balance of probabilities I take the view that it is reasonable to assume that immunity lasts where people have a strong immune system.

John disagrees. (I think).

I am agnostic. I did not challenge the other view because it looked like it was posed as a question. I genuinely think that we will have a much better idea in six months time and would not be surprised either way. I think it is likely that some immunity will survive in a percentage of people but others will be susceptible to recurrence, much the same as other coronaviruses.

John

[johnhemming]

I think it is likely that some immunity will survive in a percentage of people but others will be susceptible to recurrence, much the same as other coronaviruses.

I have not seen any research papers which say that other coronaviruses have a material amount of reinfection. If you could give me a link to that I would be grateful.

[redsturgeon]

I think it is likely that some immunity will survive in a percentage of people but others will be susceptible to recurrence, much the same as other coronaviruses.

I have not seen any research papers which say that other coronaviruses have a material amount of reinfection. If you could give me a link to that I would be grateful.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opin ... nity-67832

John

[XFool]

We have "experts", we should listen to them, rather than listening to self proclaimed "experts" claiming they know more than the experts do (or worse, that nobody knows "anything"). Which is precisely what I am not doing.

You are picking Experts that you wish to agree with. We have universities that provide qualifications for expertise, but you are not concerning yourself with that, but instead whether an expert is on a particular committee or not.

Exactly, XFool has decided which experts he prefers and then seeks to promote them over other experts whose views he likes less.

In other words he doesn't advocate that we listen to experts but rather that we should believe the experts he prefers. In other words he seeks to present himself as the expert on experts. But on what basis?

Thank you Lootman, for simplistically (mis)representing what I think. How ever would people know what I think without you telling them? Indeed, how would even I know what I think without you telling me?

Fortunately, we can always rely on you to supply this useful service.

[johnhemming]

I think it is likely that some immunity will survive in a percentage of people but others will be susceptible to recurrence, much the same as other coronaviruses.

I have not seen any research papers which say that other coronaviruses have a material amount of reinfection. If you could give me a link to that I would be grateful.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opin ... nity-67832

John

Thanks

A year later, 14 of the same volunteers came back for another round. Of the nine people who’d become infected with the first exposure, six became infected again, but none developed colds. Moreover, they only shed virus from their noses for a couple of days, compared with an average of five and a half days the first time around. As for the five people who’d resisted infection the first time around, all became infected this time, but only one developed symptoms.

This is, of course, like a T-cell remembered response (which is what is said happens with Coronaviruses) rather than people having no immunity at all.

[Lootman]

You are picking Experts that you wish to agree with. We have universities that provide qualifications for expertise, but you are not concerning yourself with that, but instead whether an expert is on a particular committee or not.

Exactly, XFool has decided which experts he prefers and then seeks to promote them over other experts whose views he likes less.

In other words he doesn't advocate that we listen to experts but rather that we should believe the experts he prefers. In other words he seeks to present himself as the expert on experts. But on what basis?

Thank you Lootman, for simplistically (mis)representing what I think. How ever would people know what I think without you telling them? Indeed, how would even I know what I think without you telling me?

Those were your words that I quoted. You claimed to know which experts were right and which were wrong, based on some test you apply. I merely pointed out how subjective that is.

If instead you can clearly explain the objective reasons why you have more insight and judgement about this than others, then I will gladly withdraw my words. But you need to back up your claims to have credibility.

[XFool]

Exactly, XFool has decided which experts he prefers and then seeks to promote them over other experts whose views he likes less.

In other words he doesn't advocate that we listen to experts but rather that we should believe the experts he prefers. In other words he seeks to present himself as the expert on experts. But on what basis?

Thank you Lootman, for simplistically (mis)representing what I think. How ever would people know what I think without you telling them? Indeed, how would even I know what I think without you telling me?

Those were your words that I quoted. You claimed to know which experts were right and which were wrong, based on some test you apply. I merely pointed out how subjective that is.

Quoting words is one thing, correctly interpreting their intended meaning another. Especially on a BB where, for a variety of reasons, the words are necessarily an abbreviated version of the full message.

If instead you can clearly explain the objective reasons why you have more insight and judgement about this than others, then I will gladly withdraw my words. But you need to back up your claims to have credibility.

Regrettably, Lootman, I am not seeking "credibility" in your eyes.

[Lootman]

Thank you Lootman, for simplistically (mis)representing what I think. How ever would people know what I think without you telling them? Indeed, how would even I know what I think without you telling me?

Those were your words that I quoted. You claimed to know which experts were right and which were wrong, based on some test you apply. I merely pointed out how subjective that is.

Quoting words is one thing, correctly interpreting their intended meaning another. Especially on a BB where, for a variety of reasons, the words are necessarily an abbreviated version of the full message.

What is the alleged "correct" interpretation of the words you used when claiming to know which experts are correct?

[sg31]

But surely the problem with these regional variations is that people from high infection areas will simply hop in their cars and party in the neighbouring lower tier locations. It certainly feels like that to me (Tier 1 Lincolnshire with neighbours Tier 3 Notts and S.Yorks)

I too suspect another national lockdown (or at least tier3) is coming. I'd guess the govt are looking at their models to optimise release for Christmas. Probably followed by wave 3 after everyone crosses the country to visit their families.

Gryff

Same in this area of Worcestershire. We are getting large numbers from Birmingham coming into the area. Publicans are happy as it's throwing them a lifeline in difficult times. The locals generally are less enthusiastic.

[johnhemming]

Indeed, how would even I know what I think without you telling me?

Fortunately, we can always rely on you to supply this useful service.

You seem to have refined the art of delegating what you think to a wide range of mainly government appointed experts. Perhaps Lootman should also be appointed by the government. Maybe he is?

[XFool]

Indeed, how would even I know what I think without you telling me?

Fortunately, we can always rely on you to supply this useful service.

You seem to have refined the art of delegating what you think to a wide range of mainly government appointed experts. Perhaps Lootman should also be appointed by the government. Maybe he is?

Let's hope not!

[Lootman]

Indeed, how would even I know what I think without you telling me?

Fortunately, we can always rely on you to supply this useful service.

You seem to have refined the art of delegating what you think to a wide range of mainly government appointed experts. Perhaps Lootman should also be appointed by the government. Maybe he is?

Let's hope not!

You can be rude about the abilities of others here if you wish. But I asked a serious question about your claim to know which experts are "right" and all you have done is duck, dismiss and deflect. So again, what qualifies you to know better than most here which experts are right and which are wrong? Otherwise the point that John, I and others have made still stands.

[johnhemming]

It may be that the government are currently working 3 days behind on hospital admissions, but the last figure was 1279 for 26/10 up from 1186. This includes quite a big jump unusually in London from 118 to 155. Also a big jump in the Midlands from 220-278, but this time the North has not suffered that much. The normal figures on admissions for respiratory diseases are about 1000.

[redsturgeon]

It may be that the government are currently working 3 days behind on hospital admissions, but the last figure was 1279 for 26/10 up from 1186. This includes quite a big jump unusually in London from 118 to 155. Also a big jump in the Midlands from 220-278, but this time the North has not suffered that much. The normal figures on admissions for respiratory diseases are about 1000.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54718318
Bradford Royal admitted 50 Covid patients yesterday, 300 for the week! They will have every bed filled in four weeks with Covid patients at this rate.

Do you believe there is not an impending crisis in hospital capacity? If so what do you think should be done?

John

[johnhemming]

Do you believe there is not an impending crisis in hospital capacity? If so what do you think should be done?

There may be. Particular efforts should go into preventing those categories of people who are vulnerable to being admitted from catching the virus. We don't have the information the government has to enable particular details of this.

The government have access to detailed figures on admissions and the RCGP information.

The evidence is that generalised attempts to reduce infection are not working particularly in the north. Hence it should be more targeted.

The report you quote actually was 50 over two days, but the principle is still the same.

[scotia]

I for one have never thought this and, as I have posted previously, consider myself to be at higher risk than average due to age and a lifetime of compromised breathing. However I do think that the reaction to it by the authorities has been disproportionate and has led to significant other health issues.

My best wishes to your two friends.

Lets imagine you have it your way and little or no action is taken. The hospitals are likely to be overrun with dying patients. Do you agree?

What impact do you forecast this would have on the other services a hospital normally provides? Cancer care, maternity, organ transplants, general surgery, etc?

My own forecast is it would virtually stop them all. So avoiding overloading our hospitals with COVID patients seems essential to me.

Well, my team and I have really concerned ourselves fundamentally with a statistical analysis of patient treatment as a whole, in tandem with and related to a psycho-chemical and, broadly speaking, a behavioural analysis of over a thousand individual COVID patients. And we've come to the inevitable conclusion that the one course of action that the authorities must take, is to cut off their goolies
- or go down the Swedish model and dispense morphine in the care homes


- sd

Careful - Daniel Defoe was placed in the Stocks when people believed what he wrote in his satirical essay "The Shortest Way with the Dissenters"

[redsturgeon]

It may be that the government are currently working 3 days behind on hospital admissions, but the last figure was 1279 for 26/10 up from 1186. This includes quite a big jump unusually in London from 118 to 155. Also a big jump in the Midlands from 220-278, but this time the North has not suffered that much.

So when in one post you say the above

The evidence is that generalised attempts to reduce infection are not working particularly in the north. Hence it should be more targeted.

Then I give you evidence from the BRI, you say maybe the North is bad after all.

What it is?

Still don't think a National lockdown is the only way to stop this now?

John

[XFool]

Do you believe there is not an impending crisis in hospital capacity? If so what do you think should be done?

There may be. Particular efforts should go into preventing those categories of people who are vulnerable to being admitted from catching the virus. We don't have the information the government has to enable particular details of this.

How?

I mean, it is possible to think of how it could theoretically be done:

1. Everyone over (say) 75 rounded up and sent to an isolation camp.

2. Everyone over (say) 50 with existing health issues - e.g. Asthma, Diabetes, COPD, serious obesity - rounded up and sent to an isolation camp.

[johnhemming]

Then I give you evidence from the BRI, you say maybe the North is bad after all.

Still don't think a National lockdown is the only way to stop this now?

What I try to do when I post the hospital admissions is to give an idea as to the relative trends in NHS regions. Obviously the North already had the most admissions and that has not changed, but relative to my previous post it is not.

I have some real difficulty working out what the obsession is with having the same approach to the virus across England and at the same time have it as severe as possible.

The situation does vary across the country. Whatever approach people have there is a solid argument to respond to the situation in each area. Frankly that should be on smaller areas than NHS regions. We only have access to the data at the NHS regional level.

[johnhemming]

How?

It is quite possible to be careful about who people in vulnerable categories has contact with. Many people are doing that anyway. It may need more cash available in care homes to manage the carers to ensure that they don't infect people.

The current approach does not appear to be doing much good from the perspective of protecting people who are more vulnerable.