Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

The home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
9873210
Lemon Slice
Posts: 984
Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
Has thanked: 226 times
Been thanked: 295 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#475611

Postby 9873210 » January 23rd, 2022, 6:47 pm

Mike4 wrote:
Lorna, I wonder if you have a fundamental misunderstanding (like a lot of people, I think) of the purpose of covid testing.

I may have it wrong myself but my understanding is that testing primarily is done to assist the government in developing public health policy and large scale responses. The result of each test might be useful to each individual member of the public taking a test but that is a by-product - they can never be definitive due to false positive and false negative rates involved but it suits the government to let people think it is for their own benefit, otherwise fewer people would bother to get tested.

Mine might be an overly cynical view, but I'm always ready and willing with good cause, to be disappointed by this government's management of this pandemic.


Way too cynical. Testing individuals before a party and excluding those that test positive will reduce the risk of people catching covid at the party. How much it reduces the risk will depend on the circumstances, and has to be guessed at, with some guesses better than others. Of courses "reduces the risk of catching covid" could be from 99.9% to 99%, or 50% to 10% or from 1% to 0.01%. Even if we have a good guess about which it is reasonable people will view those differently.

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7084
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3791 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#475612

Postby Mike4 » January 23rd, 2022, 6:49 pm

9873210 wrote:
Mike4 wrote:
Lorna, I wonder if you have a fundamental misunderstanding (like a lot of people, I think) of the purpose of covid testing.

I may have it wrong myself but my understanding is that testing primarily is done to assist the government in developing public health policy and large scale responses. The result of each test might be useful to each individual member of the public taking a test but that is a by-product - they can never be definitive due to false positive and false negative rates involved but it suits the government to let people think it is for their own benefit, otherwise fewer people would bother to get tested.

Mine might be an overly cynical view, but I'm always ready and willing with good cause, to be disappointed by this government's management of this pandemic.


Way too cynical. Testing individuals before a party and excluding those that test positive will reduce the risk of people catching covid at the party. How much it reduces the risk will depend on the circumstances, and has to be guessed at, with some guesses better than others. Of courses "reduces the risk of catching covid" could be from 99.9% to 99%, or 50% to 10% or from 1% to 0.01%. Even if we have a good guess about which it is reasonable people will view those differently.


Even your example is all about public health, the testing you describe not being for the benefit of the testee, but for everyone else at said party.

Which reinforces my point.

9873210
Lemon Slice
Posts: 984
Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
Has thanked: 226 times
Been thanked: 295 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#475614

Postby 9873210 » January 23rd, 2022, 7:02 pm

Mike4 wrote:
9873210 wrote:
Mike4 wrote:
Lorna, I wonder if you have a fundamental misunderstanding (like a lot of people, I think) of the purpose of covid testing.

I may have it wrong myself but my understanding is that testing primarily is done to assist the government in developing public health policy and large scale responses. The result of each test might be useful to each individual member of the public taking a test but that is a by-product - they can never be definitive due to false positive and false negative rates involved but it suits the government to let people think it is for their own benefit, otherwise fewer people would bother to get tested.

Mine might be an overly cynical view, but I'm always ready and willing with good cause, to be disappointed by this government's management of this pandemic.


Way too cynical. Testing individuals before a party and excluding those that test positive will reduce the risk of people catching covid at the party. How much it reduces the risk will depend on the circumstances, and has to be guessed at, with some guesses better than others. Of courses "reduces the risk of catching covid" could be from 99.9% to 99%, or 50% to 10% or from 1% to 0.01%. Even if we have a good guess about which it is reasonable people will view those differently.


Even your example is all about public health, the testing you describe not being for the benefit of the testee, but for everyone else at said party.

Which reinforces my point.


I rarely party with people I want to infect with covid.* I consider keeping granny et. al. alive and happy a benefit.

* And if I did, I can still think of a good reason to test before any party.

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#475622

Postby Bouleversee » January 23rd, 2022, 7:38 pm

Mike4 wrote:

Lorna, I wonder if you have a fundamental misunderstanding (like a lot of people, I think) of the purpose of covid testing.

I may have it wrong myself but my understanding is that testing primarily is done to assist the government in developing public health policy and large scale responses. The result of each test might be useful to each individual member of the public taking a test but that is a by-product - they can never be definitive due to false positive and false negative rates involved but it suits the government to let people think it is for their own benefit, otherwise fewer people would bother to get tested.

Mine might be an overly cynical view, but I'm always ready and willing with good cause, to be disappointed by this government's management of this pandemic."

Be that as it may, we all have a right to decide what amount of risk we are prepared to take, which will depend on our individual circumstances, and we can't know what the risk is unless we have the correct facts. I was not aware that an individual, as opposed to an event with a considerable number of attendees, could be a super-spreader and I think I asked a valid question. It comes down to whether, even with a more contagious variant, I could still risk having one or two friends of similar age and behaviour in my fairly large drawing room, separated as far as possible, and with the top windows open but joining a large number of people who continue to socialise in groups where infections pop up regularly would not be worth the much larger risk (I already decided that). I might think differently if and when I ever get my affairs in order and my tax return finished, but I think the only way that is going to happen is not spending so much time following emails leading me to TLF or other articles on medical and financial matters. I had dropped out of coronavirus discussions for a while but my sister's hospitalisation some weeks before Christmas due to symptoms never diagnosed and probable imminent death after getting a positive Covid test last Tuesday (I gather she is now receiving palliative care) makes me want to try to inform myself and not just swallow the PR exercises so I will keep dipping in but not necessarily asking questions. It's just as enjoyable as going to a party or trailing round a supermarket anyway and I never did go to pubs.

Incidentally, the son of an elderly neighbour who hadn't been anywhere other than a brief visit to his local supermarket although wearing a mask caught the virus and is now isolating. I will continue to order on-line. I think a lot of HV elderly people are likely to succumb in the next few weeks but time will tell.

88V8
Lemon Half
Posts: 5766
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:22 am
Has thanked: 4096 times
Been thanked: 2558 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#475632

Postby 88V8 » January 23rd, 2022, 8:25 pm

Bouleversee wrote:...although wearing a mask caught the virus ...

Sorry to hear about your sister.

As regards the mask, if it does not fit well it will do little good.
I am afraid that many people wear masks that only fit where they touch.

V8

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#475633

Postby Bouleversee » January 23rd, 2022, 8:29 pm

88V8 wrote:
Bouleversee wrote:...although wearing a mask caught the virus ...

Sorry to hear about your sister.

As regards the mask, if it does not fit well it will do little good.
I am afraid that many people wear masks that only fit where they touch.

V8


And it won't do much good if virus carriers choose not to wear them either.

Hallucigenia
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2612
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 3:03 am
Has thanked: 165 times
Been thanked: 1716 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#476030

Postby Hallucigenia » January 25th, 2022, 2:26 pm

It's perhaps telling that this thread had dropped to page 4 of the active topics, but someone was asking about omicron-specific vaccines, Pfizer have just started a trial as a booster and as a full course :
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-relea ... cron-based

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#476054

Postby Bouleversee » January 25th, 2022, 3:16 pm

An article in The Times on Saturday, headed "New Omicron strain 'evades PCR testing'" says that a sub-strain of Omicron that could be even more transmissible has been officially designated a "variant under investigation". BA.2 has shown early signs gthat it may be spreading more rapidly and has been called "stealth" Omicron because it lacks a genetic feature that allows it to be spotted using PCR tests. More investigation is being undertaken and I expect more info can be found on UKHSA. London has the highest no. of cases (246) in UK so far, as is to be expected and Denmark has the highest no. of samples uploaded. It's not yet known whether it casues more severe illness than BA.1.

Hallucigenia
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2612
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 3:03 am
Has thanked: 165 times
Been thanked: 1716 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#476062

Postby Hallucigenia » January 25th, 2022, 3:40 pm

Bouleversee wrote: has been called "stealth" Omicron because it lacks a genetic feature that allows it to be spotted using PCR tests.


That's misleading. It can be detected as SARS2 just fine by PCR. The difference is that it lacks the mutation that causes "S-gene dropout" - some PCR tests look at three different parts of the virus genome, and alpha and "classic omicron" both have a mutation that is different in one of those three parts, which means that only two of the three PCRs show positive. This doesn't affect the identification of it as SARS2, but is a quick and dirty way to track the epidemiology of variants that have this mutation without the slow and more expensive process of full genome sequencing.

It's only "stealth" in that it can't be readily identified from other variants, unless you're in the situation we have now where the background is almost 100% "classic" omicron infection, where S-gene dropout is the norm and variants that come up on all three PCR tests are "different".

Steveam
Lemon Slice
Posts: 974
Joined: March 18th, 2017, 10:22 pm
Has thanked: 1745 times
Been thanked: 534 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477067

Postby Steveam » January 29th, 2022, 2:47 pm

This article on lung damage of long Covid is very interesting.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60154398

One of my friends (a retired nurse) has been suffering breathlessness from Covid for the last 6 months or so. It is gradually getting better but medical checks haven't found anything.

Best wishes,

Steve

ReformedCharacter
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3120
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:12 am
Has thanked: 3590 times
Been thanked: 1509 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477457

Postby ReformedCharacter » January 31st, 2022, 10:56 am

OH had a positive PCR test 3 days ago, having felt off-nominal for a few days. She now looks fairly unwell. At the moment I feel fine but am wondering when I'm likely to become unwell too?

Also, when will it be safe to let OH back inside the house? It's getting a bit cold at night for sleeping in the car.

RC

pje16
Lemon Half
Posts: 6050
Joined: May 30th, 2021, 6:01 pm
Has thanked: 1843 times
Been thanked: 2066 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477461

Postby pje16 » January 31st, 2022, 11:12 am

ReformedCharacter wrote:Also, when will it be safe to let OH back inside the house? It's getting a bit cold at night for sleeping in the car.
RC

You could try the car yourself :lol:

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477472

Postby Bouleversee » January 31st, 2022, 11:37 am

ReformedCharacter wrote:OH had a positive PCR test 3 days ago, having felt off-nominal for a few days. She now looks fairly unwell. At the moment I feel fine but am wondering when I'm likely to become unwell too?

Also, when will it be safe to let OH back inside the house? It's getting a bit cold at night for sleeping in the car.

RC


I take it you meant "off-normal". May I suggest you confine her to the best ensuite bedroom with TV and books and take her delicious meals and drinks regularly, doing all the chores, till several days after she has returned to normal or nominal and is starting to get bored. RC? Maybe not sufficiently R yet. :lol:

As to danger of infectivity to yourself, I have read different opinions about that so will leave it to others to advise on that.

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477481

Postby Bouleversee » January 31st, 2022, 11:56 am

There is much debate on R4 today as regards whether the mandate deadline for care home staff to be vaccinated should be cancelled or not. I didn't hear anything about hospital staff, however. As mentioned higher up this thread, my sister had been in various bits of a hospital trust in the North since around Nov. 10, getting worse and worse without any diagnosis being achieved and then on 17 January she tested positive for Omicron and so far as I can gather the plug was pulled and she died on Friday morning.

I don't want to start any discussion which could be considered political on here but would just like you all to take care when going out and socialising as I don't think we are by any means out of the woods yet as there seems to be a chance that the latest variant of Omicron is even more infectious and it doesn't show up on PCR tests and if you are old and have other medical conditions you may well not get off so lightly as the youngsters and may not be able to count on the NHS getting to the bottom of things and administering the correct treatment. My sister had MS but an acute exacerbation of that, brought about by whatever, possibly even a lot of stress, has not been mentioned. They did test for UTI, which was negative. :roll: I shall try to find out what has been put on the death certificate as cause of death. All rather unsatisfactory and personally very distressing.

ReformedCharacter
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3120
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:12 am
Has thanked: 3590 times
Been thanked: 1509 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477489

Postby ReformedCharacter » January 31st, 2022, 12:21 pm

Bouleversee wrote:There is much debate on R4 today as regards whether the mandate deadline for care home staff to be vaccinated should be cancelled or not. I didn't hear anything about hospital staff, however. As mentioned higher up this thread, my sister had been in various bits of a hospital trust in the North since around Nov. 10, getting worse and worse without any diagnosis being achieved and then on 17 January she tested positive for Omicron and so far as I can gather the plug was pulled and she died on Friday morning.

I don't want to start any discussion which could be considered political on here but would just like you all to take care when going out and socialising as I don't think we are by any means out of the woods yet as there seems to be a chance that the latest variant of Omicron is even more infectious and it doesn't show up on PCR tests and if you are old and have other medical conditions you may well not get off so lightly as the youngsters and may not be able to count on the NHS getting to the bottom of things and administering the correct treatment. My sister had MS but an acute exacerbation of that, brought about by whatever, possibly even a lot of stress, has not been mentioned. They did test for UTI, which was negative. :roll: I shall try to find out what has been put on the death certificate as cause of death. All rather unsatisfactory and personally very distressing.

I'm sorry to read that. I'm sure that I'm not alone in offering commiserations for the loss of your sister.

RC

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7084
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3791 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477496

Postby Mike4 » January 31st, 2022, 12:34 pm

Bouleversee wrote:she tested positive for Omicron and so far as I can gather the plug was pulled and she died on Friday morning.


My sincere condolences Bouleversee. This seems so inadequate and I have so much to say, but I can't find the words to say it.

gadjet
Lemon Pip
Posts: 76
Joined: November 6th, 2016, 5:45 pm
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 18 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477511

Postby gadjet » January 31st, 2022, 1:20 pm

I am so sorry to hear about your sister.
Lets hope you can find out what really happened as it sounds as though there was a certain amount of negligence.

Sue

Hallucigenia
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2612
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 3:03 am
Has thanked: 165 times
Been thanked: 1716 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477512

Postby Hallucigenia » January 31st, 2022, 1:21 pm

Bouleversee wrote:there seems to be a chance that the latest variant of Omicron is even more infectious and it doesn't show up on PCR tests


Please stop spreading this misinformation.

As I said upthread, BA.2 (the "new omicron") is detected as SARS2 perfectly well by PCR tests. The only issue is that a "hack" no longer works for BA.2, that allowed the exact variant to be inferred from just a three-target PCR (quick, cheap) rather than full genome sequencing (slow, £££). In that regard it is just like delta and most other SARS2 variants.

Except that we are now in a situation where the background is 100% omicron BA.1 ("classic omicron") where the hack works, so if you get a PCR where the hack doesn't work, the working assumption is that you're dealing with BA.2.

So in the present background, BA.2 isn't "stealthy" at all. It's like someone wearing cammo is "stealthy" in a woodland, but is not "stealthy" at all against a white wall.

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477516

Postby Bouleversee » January 31st, 2022, 1:42 pm

Hallucigenia wrote:
Bouleversee wrote:there seems to be a chance that the latest variant of Omicron is even more infectious and it doesn't show up on PCR tests


Please stop spreading this misinformation.

As I said upthread, BA.2 (the "new omicron") is detected as SARS2 perfectly well by PCR tests. The only issue is that a "hack" no longer works for BA.2, that allowed the exact variant to be inferred from just a three-target PCR (quick, cheap) rather than full genome sequencing (slow, £££). In that regard it is just like delta and most other SARS2 variants.

Except that we are now in a situation where the background is 100% omicron BA.1 ("classic omicron") where the hack works, so if you get a PCR where the hack doesn't work, the working assumption is that you're dealing with BA.2.

So in the present background, BA.2 isn't "stealthy" at all. It's like someone wearing cammo is "stealthy" in a woodland, but is not "stealthy" at all against a white wall.


OK, I missed that post but I will tell TT journalist what you said. More importantly, is there any more news re infectivty and risk of severe disease with the latest variant of the latest variant?

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4652
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 1195 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#477528

Postby Bouleversee » January 31st, 2022, 2:13 pm

gadjet wrote:I am so sorry to hear about your sister.
Lets hope you can find out what really happened as it sounds as though there was a certain amount of negligence.

Sue


Difficult to know for certain as all my info. is 2nd or 3rd hand and questions don't always get answered or indeed asked by next of kin but much doesn't make sense to me. Short of initiating an enquiry, which I may not be entitled to do since her children are next of kin and on the spot, I will probably never know. It does seem ridiculous that one can pick up Covid in hospital, though, apart from anything else.

Thanks to all for your sympathy.


Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests