Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

[redsturgeon]

Interesting that Sue Oliver had been on John Campbell's channel a while ago then the two diverged paths with JC currently on 2.58 million subscribers while SO is on 5.79 thousand subscribers. Clearly the truth does not pay on YouTube.

John

[GrahamPlatt]

As I read on another site : “Ain’t no vaccine for stupid”

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/tory-mp-accus ... 58673.html

[XFool]

Man to spend 'tough' third Christmas shielding

BBC News

A man who will spend his third Christmas shielding said it "can be tough" for him.

Karl Knights from Leiston, Suffolk, has cerebral palsy and is immuno-supressed.

[XFool]

Why those of us with long Covid finally have reason to feel hopeful

The Guardian

Indifference among politicians is still rampant, but thanks to new research and technology 2023 could be much brighter

[swill453]

There seems to be an extremely mild variant doing the rounds. Either that or the autumn booster is working very well.

My wife had first symptom on Saturday morning, mild sore throat. Turned into typical cold-like symptoms, runny nose, slight fever, no aches to speak of. If she hadn't been doing the Zoe Covid app she wouldn't have given it a second thought.

But the app prompted her to test, and we still had a supply of LFTs, so to our surprise she tested positive on Monday. Symptoms didn't get any worse, and she tested clear this morning, 5 days from first symptom.

I myself had a slightly rough throat last night and tested positive this morning with a faint line, but I don't feel it's getting any worse.

Scott.

[XFool]

For anyone here still mildly interested in the developing (cough!) career of Dr. Mike Yeadon, he seems to be committed to going 'Full Retard':

Dr. Mike Yeadon, Former Pfizer VP, Concludes "THERE ARE NO RESPIRATORY VIRUSES!"

https://article.wn.com/view/2022/08/26/Dr_Mike_Yeadon_Former_Pfizer_VP_Concludes_THERE_ARE_NO_RESPI/

Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad.

Mind you, going "mad" can be quite a good career move in today's Social Media world. Perhaps I am missing a trick?

[XFool]

Umm... I wonder if we have outed Andrew Bridgen's "cardiologist"?

BBC criticised for letting cardiologist ‘hijack’ interview with false Covid jab claim

The Guardian

Aseem Malhotra’s ‘misguided’ views linking some Covid vaccines to excess heart disease deaths should not have aired, say experts

"The BBC has come under fire from scientists for interviewing a cardiologist who claimed certain Covid vaccines could be behind excess deaths from coronary artery disease.

Experts have criticised Dr Aseem Malhotra’s appearance on the corporation’s news channel on Friday, accusing him of pushing “extreme fringe” views, which are “misguided”, “dangerous” and could mislead the public."

[Hallucigenia]

In "do as they do, not as they say" news, here's the head of the WHO talking to the VP of the Dominican Republic at Davos - HEPA air filter behind her chair, well ventilated enough that she needs to wear a thick coat over her jacket, and apparently they have a pretty ruthless system of PCR testing that disables your badge if you are untested or test positive :

[Hallucigenia]

You may have heard about the Argano et al paper claiming a benefit for vitamin D against Covid-19. Here's a takedown :

A new study is out on Vitamin D and COVID-19, and has reported a benefit, with massive acclaim from the usual suspects

It is, however, one of the worst papers I've ever seen. So many mistakes that it's hard to know where to start...

This is a huge claim, given that the largest, most well-controlled studies of D for COVID-19 have not found any benefits. How do the authors come to this conclusion? Well, let's start with the methods. Or rather, the lack of methods

The paper is missing much of the important information that you'd expect in a meta-analysis, such as how duplicates were removed, or how data was extracted...The paper also doesn't really match its own pre-registration. The pre-reg specifies that they were only going to include randomized trials, but the methods section does not mention this key inclusion criteria. Whoops! This is all bad, but let's move on quickly to the meta-analysis

Immediately, you can tell from the weighting that almost the ENTIRE RESULT is down to a single piece of research; Nogues et al

86% of the entire result is from this paper!

What is Nogues et al?
A non-randomized observational study. A VERY BAD non-randomized observational study that was preprinted incorrectly as an RCT and then retracted before being republished elsewhere...This was a terrible, woeful observational study that used poor methodology to come to a bad conclusion. I wouldn't include it in ANY meta-analysis, but it certainly shouldn't be included in this specific MA because it violates the inclusion criteria Even worse, the authors appear to have done their statistical analyses incorrectly - a fixed-effects model is completely inappropriate in this situation...If you run the correct model, excluding Nogues et al as the methods stated that you should, there's no benefit for vitamin D at all!...

Worse still, the authors say that they read Nogues et al, and rated it as LOW RISK for randomization. The study wasn't randomized! It's BY DEFINITION high risk!!!

On top of that, the authors excluded the single biggest trial of Vit D for COVID-19 that's been done (Coronavit*) because it was not conducted in hospitalized patients

That is according to their protocol, but it's also completely inappropriate and a terrible decision

This review is completely inadequate methodologically, and it takes almost no effort to see how problematic the paper is. A few minutes of critical reading and you can tell that the results should say that there was no benefit seen for Vitamin D in the main model...Based on high-quality research there is still no evidence that supplementing Vitamin D is beneficial for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 (although it could possibly be)

* Coronavit :
Participants 6200 people aged ≥16 years who were not taking vitamin D supplements at baseline.

Interventions Offer of a postal finger prick test of blood 25(OH)D concentration with provision of a six month supply of lower dose vitamin D (800 IU/day, n=1550) or higher dose vitamin D (3200 IU/day, n=1550) to those with blood 25(OH)D concentration <75 nmol/L, compared with no offer of testing or supplementation (n=3100). Follow-up was for six months....

Compared with 136/2949 (4.6%) participants in the no offer group, at least one acute respiratory tract infection of any cause occurred in 87/1515 (5.7%) in the lower dose group (odds ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.66) and 76/1515 (5.0%) in the higher dose group (1.09, 0.82 to 1.46). Compared with 78/2949 (2.6%) participants in the no offer group, 55/1515 (3.6%) developed covid-19 in the lower dose group (1.39, 0.98 to 1.97) and 45/1515 (3.0%) in the higher dose group (1.13, 0.78 to 1.63).

Conclusions Among people aged 16 years and older with a high baseline prevalence of suboptimal vitamin D status, implementation of a population level test-and-treat approach to vitamin D supplementation was not associated with a reduction in risk of all cause acute respiratory tract infection or covid-19.

[pje16]

As the latest articles on the BBC are, let say not exactly current
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/coronavirus
may I point out that in the last week cases in my London borough have tripled
I only know as I have the Zoe app on my mobile
it just isn't newsworthy these days

[redsturgeon]

Interesting summary of latest Lancet study of protection offered by previous infections against reinfection and severity of disease.

https://theconversation.com/how-much-im ... ues-200044

It suggests less protection against Omicron reinfection than previous variants at 45% vs 82%, dropping to 36% and 79% respectively over 40 weeks.

Better news is 88% protection against severe disease in all variants.

Study suggests need to consider previous infection history when looking at vaccination schedules.

John

[XFool]

Politics or Science, or both?

What do Matt Hancock’s WhatsApp messages show? Not what the Telegraph wants us to see

The Guardian

The messages confirm what advisers like me knew: that during the pandemic, ministers weren’t ‘following the science’ at all
Prof Devi Sridhar is chair of global public health at the University of Edinburgh

"Whatever the Telegraph’s intention, these WhatsApp messages will show the British public what’s been apparent to most of the world, and to scientists advising throughout the pandemic. By acting too late, and then with its conduct throughout the pandemic, the government let us down during arguably the largest crisis of our generation. Too many people died before their time. Too many health workers worked in unsafe and risky conditions. Repeated lockdowns decimated financial stability for small and medium-sized businesses. Schools were closed in Britain for far too long because preparations weren’t made on how to keep them open safely. Scientists took the brunt of the abuse and anger from the major losers. Ministers and their friends made their own rules and made money during the crisis. And Matt Hancock launched a lucrative media career off the back of it all."

[Bouleversee]

I don't know which is worst: being totally unprepared for a pandemic leading to excess deaths and a waste of a lot of money procuring often unsuitable kit too late in the day or lying about it afterwards.

[Mike4]

I don't know which is worst: being totally unprepared for a pandemic leading to excess deaths and a waste of a lot of money procuring often unsuitable kit too late in the day or lying about it afterwards.

They were lying about it at the time!

Remember that condescending slogan treating us like children "We are making the right decisions, at the right time, guided by the science".

Who was it basking smugly in the media spotlight saying this over and over again every day back then? Remind me, I've forgotten....

[Bouleversee]

I don't know which is worst: being totally unprepared for a pandemic leading to excess deaths and a waste of a lot of money procuring often unsuitable kit too late in the day or lying about it afterwards.

They were lying about it at the time!

Remember that condescending slogan treating us like children "We are making the right decisions, at the right time, guided by the science".

Who was it basking smugly in the media spotlight saying this over and over again every day back then? Remind me, I've forgotten....

Quite right. Delete "afterwards'.

[Julian]

I don't know which is worst: being totally unprepared for a pandemic leading to excess deaths and a waste of a lot of money procuring often unsuitable kit too late in the day or lying about it afterwards.

I agree, both unforgivable, but if I had to vote for one I'd say lying about it afterwards because doing that second thing makes it more difficult to learn the right lessons from the previous lack of preparedness which then makes it more likely that preparations for any future pandemic will also be inadequate. Basically the lying bit has the potential to keep the cycle of unpreparedness going across multiple pandemics whereas if there is a completely open, transparent, detailed and competent investigation, and if the necessary political will and funding is available to act on its findings, then we could and should do better next time.

What is slightly alarming is that we (the world) actually got somewhat lucky with this current pandemic due to it being caused by a coronavirus so the virus involved wasn't 100% novel since we had already encountered SARS-CoV1 and MERS-CoV. Because of that we already had a pretty good genetic analysis of some close-ish relatives that we could use as a blueprint to guide us in dissecting the SARS-CoV2 virus so quickly and isolating the spike protein amongst others. The Oxford vaccine group for instance had already been working for a while on a vaccine for MERS-CoV, using spike as the antigen, and had even started phase 1 human trials in December 2019 (https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2019-12-19-ne ... udi-arabia); that is a big reason why Oxford/AZ were able to respond so quickly. If something more novel in humans than a coronavirus had hit us then I dread to think how slow and ineffective our response would have been like.

- Julian

[XFool]

Did Boris Johnson ‘follow the science’ on Covid? He couldn’t even do the maths
Kit Yates is director of the Centre for Mathematical Biology at the University of Bath and author of The Maths of Life and Death

The Guardian

Leaked WhatsApps reveal his ignorance – from fluffed stats to ‘herd immunity’ – needing constant correction by advisers

"In another of the WhatsApp exchanges, Johnson posts a Spectator article suggesting that herd immunity might provide the way out of the pandemic for the UK. England’s chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, quickly refutes this piece, explaining that it’s not clear that infection provides the long-lasting immunity that would be required for herd immunity."

"In September 2020, Sage suggested a two-week “circuit breaker” lockdown to save lives and potentially prevent economically damaging longer restrictions later on. Instead, Johnson invited three fringe scientists to speak at Downing Street – one of whom was a proponent of the widely debunked Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated Johnson’s pet policy of shielding vulnerable people to achieve herd immunity. As a result, the proposed mitigations were tabled for more than a month. Despite the introduction of a tier system, cases rose until a lockdown was inevitably introduced in England in early November."

[servodude]

Did Boris Johnson ‘follow the science’ on Covid? He couldn’t even do the maths
Kit Yates is director of the Centre for Mathematical Biology at the University of Bath and author of The Maths of Life and Death

The Guardian

Leaked WhatsApps reveal his ignorance – from fluffed stats to ‘herd immunity’ – needing constant correction by advisers

"In another of the WhatsApp exchanges, Johnson posts a Spectator article suggesting that herd immunity might provide the way out of the pandemic for the UK. England’s chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, quickly refutes this piece, explaining that it’s not clear that infection provides the long-lasting immunity that would be required for herd immunity."

"In September 2020, Sage suggested a two-week “circuit breaker” lockdown to save lives and potentially prevent economically damaging longer restrictions later on. Instead, Johnson invited three fringe scientists to speak at Downing Street – one of whom was a proponent of the widely debunked Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated Johnson’s pet policy of shielding vulnerable people to achieve herd immunity. As a result, the proposed mitigations were tabled for more than a month. Despite the introduction of a tier system, cases rose until a lockdown was inevitably introduced in England in early November."

I'm beginning to think BJ was posting here at the time

[redsturgeon]

Did Boris Johnson ‘follow the science’ on Covid? He couldn’t even do the maths
Kit Yates is director of the Centre for Mathematical Biology at the University of Bath and author of The Maths of Life and Death

The Guardian

Leaked WhatsApps reveal his ignorance – from fluffed stats to ‘herd immunity’ – needing constant correction by advisers

"In another of the WhatsApp exchanges, Johnson posts a Spectator article suggesting that herd immunity might provide the way out of the pandemic for the UK. England’s chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, quickly refutes this piece, explaining that it’s not clear that infection provides the long-lasting immunity that would be required for herd immunity."

"In September 2020, Sage suggested a two-week “circuit breaker” lockdown to save lives and potentially prevent economically damaging longer restrictions later on. Instead, Johnson invited three fringe scientists to speak at Downing Street – one of whom was a proponent of the widely debunked Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated Johnson’s pet policy of shielding vulnerable people to achieve herd immunity. As a result, the proposed mitigations were tabled for more than a month. Despite the introduction of a tier system, cases rose until a lockdown was inevitably introduced in England in early November."

I'm beginning to think BJ was posting here at the time

I know what you mean...i forget what pseudonym he was using though.

[9873210]

What is slightly alarming is that we (the world) actually got somewhat lucky with this current pandemic due to it being caused by a coronavirus so the virus involved wasn't 100% novel since we had already encountered SARS-CoV1 and MERS-CoV. Because of that we already had a pretty good genetic analysis of some close-ish relatives that we could use as a blueprint to guide us in dissecting the SARS-CoV2 virus so quickly and isolating the spike protein amongst others. The Oxford vaccine group for instance had already been working for a while on a vaccine for MERS-CoV, using spike as the antigen, and had even started phase 1 human trials in December 2019 (https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2019-12-19-ne ... udi-arabia); that is a big reason why Oxford/AZ were able to respond so quickly. If something more novel in humans than a coronavirus had hit us then I dread to think how slow and ineffective our response would have been like.

- Julian

A virus that has almost everything needed and is one mutation away from a pandemic is likely to already be able to infect people at a lower level. It will probably already be endemic in humans or be repeatedly crossing into humans before it gets it exactly right. It's unlikely to be 100% novel.

This is why public health measures, such as surveillance and vaccination are so important. Particularly supporting these in poorer countries. So it's not exactly luck, more a case of getting lucky after decades of hard work. The only real luck was sane policies were supported by politicians, but the Smallpox Liberation Front is working on that.