False and misleading claims about Covid

[johnhemming]

Can I please ask if you're at least open to the possibility that there may be simpler, operational reasons why a particular hospital may simply not be accepting COVID patients at this time, especially when it's clear that other London hospitals are shipping COVID patients hundreds of miles across the country to other hospitals?

The trusts concerned (which cover more than one hospital) are accepting transfers at the moment. I have seen the press reports. The MSOA prevalence figures were reported earlier last year.

Obviously it is possible that something is being reported wrongly, but within that limitation there is certainty on this. This is not a forecast.

[XFool]

The problem for these journalists who are paid for a “thought piece” each and every week is that they actually have to produce something each and every week. Half of them have nothing sensible to say. Reminds me of the introduction of 24 hour “news”. Surprise surprise we suddenly have breaking “news” for non-events, ill-thought out commentary for the sake of filling air time, etc. Sorry I appear to have gone off at a tangent. Back to the snooker.

Enjoy the snooker!

[Itsallaguess]

Can I please ask if you're at least open to the possibility that there may be simpler, operational reasons why a particular hospital may simply not be accepting COVID patients at this time, especially when it's clear that other London hospitals are shipping COVID patients hundreds of miles across the country to other hospitals?

The trusts concerned (which cover more than one hospital) are accepting transfers at the moment. I have seen the press reports. The MSOA prevalence figures were reported earlier last year.

Obviously it is possible that something is being reported wrongly, but within that limitation there is certainty on this. This is not a forecast.

There's that 'certainty' thing again...

On the Modelling thread, when discussing this specific issue, someone has said that staffing might be a possible reason behind the London trust anomaly - https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=98&t=22737&start=1060#p377789

In the middle of a highly contagious pandemic, hospital staffing issues are likely to be expected, would you agree?

And yet you seem 'certain' that there can be absolutely no 'operational reason' for a London hospital to have a period of time during a pandemic where they are unable to take COVID patients, even at a time when some of those relatively local patients were being shipped hundreds of miles across the country, rather than into your 'empty hospital' in an area of 'certain herd-immunity'....

Isn't that precisely where COVID patients should be getting sent - into an area where the local population can't possibly catch it?

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[Arborbridge]

I think most are giving johhemming too hard a time for his November peak preditcion.
Italy and France did peak in November, The UK had a minor peak in November before infections took off again possibly because of the new B117 variant.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/0 ... truggling/
Sorry behind a paywall but someone mentioned the Esc key can be helpful.

Haven't we been discussing it an October peak statement and in any case not a prediction since the quote Itsallaguess referred to was first posted on December 1st.

I apologise if I have mixed up two things and you meant something else, but that was the quote in question, AFAIK.

[Backache]

The interesting thing to me about the committee ruling here is that

and it was the Committee’s view that readers would understand “immunity” to refer to the presence of antibodies to a particular disease in an individual’s immune system which would offer future protection from that disease.

I think that is clearly wrong. For the committee to conclude that memory T Cell immunity is not immunity and that immunity is only related to antibodies is wrong.

7. The statement was significantly misleading. It misrepresented the nature of immunity and implied that people previously exposed to some common colds might be automatically immune to suffering symptoms and passing on Covid-19 to others. As the publication did not offer to correct this significantly misleading statement, there was a breach of Clause 1(ii).

Again I think the committee is plainly wrong.

10. The statement that cross-reactive T-cells mean “that the population of London is probably approaching herd immunity” was significantly misleading. It was misleading both as to how herd immunity is reached and whether it existed in London; and the inaccuracy had been relied on to support the article’s other arguments, such as the claims that “we can dispense with pointless social distancing measures” and that “the lockdown has done nothing”. As the newspaper did not offer to correct this significantly misleading statement, there was a breach of Clause 1(ii).

Why is the commitee plain wrong, is there any published evidence anywhere that suggests that T Cell reactivity to other coronaviruses will contribute to Herd immunity? I have heard no such thing and when I heard Shane Crotty talk about it in a podcast who discovered the cross reactivity he said he considered it unlikely and should not be suggested until demonstrated.

[Arborbridge]

That would be 18 months by my reckoning. So your big idea is to shut the world down for 18 months while we see if you can save the lives of 1 person in 500, or less?

There are 8,769,122 over 70s in the UK, according to the most recent official data (2018 midpoint, published June 2019 and updated June 2020).

2 million already vaccinated in the UK or thereabouts?

Lockdown lovers do love their lockdowns. Do they secretly enjoy a situation where people cannot go anywhere or do anything? Deriving some kind of perverse pleasure from the discomfort and inconvenience of others? Surely there is more to it than spite?

Where are these lockdown lovers? Another of your flights of imagination, perhaps. I've not seen anyone writing or in real life conversation who wanted a lockdown, let alone love a lockdown. Surely almost all of us would like a return to normal life? I ca\n't wait to get my life back, frankly. One year "wasted" some would say, and another year look's like it will be severely inhibited. I doubt lockdown lovers exist.

Some people can appreciate that lockdown might be the better way of managing the virus and available resources, but that's far from saying they are lockdown lovers. Pinning labels is easy (I've done it, but realise it's a failing!) but too simplistic. Like "Remoaners" or the other infamous simplistic slogans eg "Take back Control".

Arb.

[XFool]

Lockdown lovers do love their lockdowns. Do they secretly enjoy a situation where people cannot go anywhere or do anything? Deriving some kind of perverse pleasure from the discomfort and inconvenience of others? Surely there is more to it than spite?

Where are these lockdown lovers? Another of your flights of imagination, perhaps. I've not seen anyone writing or in real life conversation who wanted a lockdown, let alone love a lockdown. Surely almost all of us would like a return to normal life? I ca\n't wait to get my life back, frankly. One year "wasted" some would say, and another year look's like it will be severely inhibited. I doubt lockdown lovers exist.

Well yes! What a weird way of looking at things.

To drag out that well worn, but still useful, WW II analogy again: Were people sheltering in their garden air raid shelters during air raids "Morrison shelter lovers"?

(Perhaps they were, as the bombs were falling!)

[johnhemming]

Why is the commitee plain wrong, is there any published evidence anywhere that suggests that T Cell reactivity to other coronaviruses will contribute to Herd immunity? I have heard no such thing and when I heard Shane Crotty talk about it in a podcast who discovered the cross reactivity he said he considered it unlikely and should not be suggested until demonstrated.

I have tried to find something from someone not associated with CEBM or the lockdown sceptics side of things and I think this provides what you need.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 6220300231

[johnhemming]

Isn't that precisely where COVID patients should be getting sent - into an area where the local population can't possibly catch it?

Its a timing thing. Initially the local hospital can cope and it is a bit silly to send people elsewhere. At a later stage it gets harder so they look for alternatives.

[funduffer]

Why is the commitee plain wrong, is there any published evidence anywhere that suggests that T Cell reactivity to other coronaviruses will contribute to Herd immunity? I have heard no such thing and when I heard Shane Crotty talk about it in a podcast who discovered the cross reactivity he said he considered it unlikely and should not be suggested until demonstrated.

The only thing I have seen is the case of Japan, which has the oldest population in the world, and yet a death rate from Covid of 35/1m compared to say 1300 /1m for the UK.

The article suggest one possible reason for this:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-53188847

Tokyo University professor Tatsuhiko Kodama - who studies how Japanese patients react to the virus - believes Japan may have had Covid before. Not Covid-19, but something similar that could have left behind "historical immunity".

This is how he explains it: When a virus enters the human body, the immune system produces antibodies that attack the invading pathogen.

There are two types of antibody - IGM and IGG. How they respond can show whether someone has been exposed to the virus before, or something similar.

"In a primary (novel) viral infection the IGM response usually comes first," he tells me. "Then the IGG response appears later. But in secondary cases (previous exposure) the lymphocyte already has memory, and so only the IGG response increases rapidly."

So, what happened with his patients?

"When we looked at the tests we were astonished... in all patients the IGG response came quickly, and the IGM response was later and weak. It looked like they had been previously exposed to a very similar virus."

He thinks it is possible a Sars-like virus has circulated in the region before, which may account for the low death rate, not just in Japan, but in much of China, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and South East Asia.

I am no expert, but there is no doubt the Far East has found it a lot easier to control deaths from Covid.

FD

[johnhemming]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-53188847

That is another cross reactivity issue, but relates to antibodies. I did see a paper with cross reactivity of 6% I think it was mainly children.

[swill453]

Isn't that precisely where COVID patients should be getting sent - into an area where the local population can't possibly catch it?

Its a timing thing. Initially the local hospital can cope and it is a bit silly to send people elsewhere. At a later stage it gets harder so they look for alternatives.

Nevertheless, herd immunity is only one possible interpretation of the limited data we have. To state "We now know that some areas of London ... did have herd immunity" is simply, literally, wrong, because we can't know it from that data.

Scott.

[Backache]

Why is the commitee plain wrong, is there any published evidence anywhere that suggests that T Cell reactivity to other coronaviruses will contribute to Herd immunity? I have heard no such thing and when I heard Shane Crotty talk about it in a podcast who discovered the cross reactivity he said he considered it unlikely and should not be suggested until demonstrated.

I have tried to find something from someone not associated with CEBM or the lockdown sceptics side of things and I think this provides what you need.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 6220300231

At a quick scan none of that suggests there is a contribution to herd immunity from infection from other coronaviruses . The suggestion is that previous infection from other coronaviruses may account for some of the variability in disease. If they were to be protected form some of the symptoms but still get infected which is likely with some degree of T Cell protection they may circulate more freely in the community because they are less unwell/asymptomatic and thus contribute to the spread.
The quote in the attached paper is this:
''The finding of SARS-CoV-2-responding T-cells in unexposed subjects has now been reported in several geographic locations and, if it holds up to further study, might explain some of the variability of clinical outcomes for COVID-19.''

[johnhemming]

At a quick scan none of that suggests there is a contribution to herd immunity from infection from other coronaviruses . The suggestion is that previous infection from other coronaviruses may account for some of the variability in disease. If they were to be protected form some of the symptoms but still get infected which is likely with some degree of T Cell protection they may circulate more freely in the community because they are less unwell/asymptomatic and thus contribute to the spread.
The quote in the attached paper is this:
''The finding of SARS-CoV-2-responding T-cells in unexposed subjects has now been reported in several geographic locations and, if it holds up to further study, might explain some of the variability of clinical outcomes for COVID-19.''

additionally

This observation also suggests potentially testable protective strategies for COVID-19 prevention through exposure to betacoronavirus common colds (the original vaccine of Jenner against smallpox, of course, was induced by intentional natural infection with a zoonotic virus that caused mild symptoms in humans).

[Lootman]

Lockdown lovers do love their lockdowns. Do they secretly enjoy a situation where people cannot go anywhere or do anything? Deriving some kind of perverse pleasure from the discomfort and inconvenience of others? Surely there is more to it than spite?

Where are these lockdown lovers? Another of your flights of imagination, perhaps. I've not seen anyone writing or in real life conversation who wanted a lockdown, let alone love a lockdown. Surely almost all of us would like a return to normal life? I ca\n't wait to get my life back, frankly. One year "wasted" some would say, and another year look's like it will be severely inhibited. I doubt lockdown lovers exist.

Well yes! What a weird way of looking at things. To drag out that well worn, but still useful, WW II analogy again: Were people sheltering in their garden air raid shelters during air raids "Morrison shelter lovers"?

(Perhaps they were, as the bombs were falling!)

It was more a reflection of the fact that there are some Lemons who support lockdowns a little too passionately, almost to the point of religious fervour. As evidence by the rudeness shown by some to JohnHemming and others who have the audacity to suggest that it may be more political than anything else. As in "don't just sit there - lock down something" Of which the most recent travel restrictions are just one more faux gesture.

I am by no means a virus denier. But I am sceptical that ever more stringent lockdown is the solution. After all we have already had three so how well can they work?

[Backache]

This observation also suggests potentially testable protective strategies for COVID-19 prevention through exposure to betacoronavirus common colds (the original vaccine of Jenner against smallpox, of course, was induced by intentional natural infection with a zoonotic virus that caused mild symptoms in humans).

And the fact that we get recurrent coronavirus infections suggest it may be protective against disease but is highly unlikely to be protective against infection.
They are suggesting a hypothesis that may be explored and provide no evidence whatsoever that it is likely to be protective against infection.

[XFool]

Well yes! What a weird way of looking at things. To drag out that well worn, but still useful, WW II analogy again: Were people sheltering in their garden air raid shelters during air raids "Morrison shelter lovers"?

(Perhaps they were, as the bombs were falling!)

It was more a reflection of the fact that there are some Lemons who support lockdowns a little too passionately, almost to the point of religious fervour. As evidence by the rudeness shown by some to JohnHemming and others who have the audacity to suggest that it may be more political than anything else. As in "don't just sit there - lock down something" Of which the most recent travel restrictions are just one more faux gesture.

Yes, but it is with such un-evidenced opinions (assumptions? presumptions? prejudices?) that I - and I believe others - have difficulties.

"faux gesture"? OK, that's a fact because you think it is? I don't know (really!) but, as I posted above, I have heard a plausible, understandable explanation for the recent restrictions, which makes sense to me. Now, that doesn't mean it is factually correct, but I'd rather hear somebody reliably demonstrate that it is indeed not factually correct than hear, yet again, somebody's casual, un-evidenced presumption (prejudice?) about it!

I am by no means a virus denier. But I am sceptical that ever more stringent lockdown is the solution. After all we have already had three so how well can they work?

How would you define "work" or "fail" in this context? Have they not worked because "lockdowns don't work"? or because "our lockdowns haven't worked"? Perhaps even our lockdowns have worked (to the extent that they have). How would we know? What is the evidence? Or is everything just political opinion? THAT I just don't go for. Certainly not wrt a real world phenomenon, such as a biological virus.

It as if they "haven't worked" because they haven't made the virus disappear. But, if that is your criteria then nothing will "work" - apart from perhaps just wait 10, 50, 100(?) years.

Please tell us.

[johnhemming]

And the fact that we get recurrent coronavirus infections suggest it may be protective against disease but is highly unlikely to be protective against infection.
They are suggesting a hypothesis that may be explored and provide no evidence whatsoever that it is likely to be protective against infection.

Are you hypothesising that the existence of memory T-cells has no impact on the ability of an individual to pass on infection?

[Backache]

And the fact that we get recurrent coronavirus infections suggest it may be protective against disease but is highly unlikely to be protective against infection.
They are suggesting a hypothesis that may be explored and provide no evidence whatsoever that it is likely to be protective against infection.

Are you hypothesising that the existence of memory T-cells has no impact on the ability of an individual to pass on infection?

I am stating that I have seen no evidence whatsoever that memory T cells from historical non Covid coronavirus infection protect against transmission.

Anyone can hypothesise anything they want but in terms of likelihood the bloke who was one of the first discoverers considered it scientifically unlikely.
Who knows for certain? One can hypothesise that they will join together and form a rocketship to the moon but without evidence it is speculation.

[onthemove]

And the fact that we get recurrent coronavirus infections suggest it may be protective against disease but is highly unlikely to be protective against infection.
They are suggesting a hypothesis that may be explored and provide no evidence whatsoever that it is likely to be protective against infection.

Are you hypothesising that the existence of memory T-cells has no impact on the ability of an individual to pass on infection?

I am stating that I have seen no evidence whatsoever that memory T cells from historical non Covid coronavirus infection protect against transmission.

Anyone can hypothesise anything they want but in terms of likelihood the bloke who was one of the first discoverers considered it scientifically unlikely.
Who knows for certain? One can hypothesise that they will join together and form a rocketship to the moon but without evidence it is speculation.

I'll admit I'm not an expert in the minutiae of how the immune system works, so perhaps you're discussing at a detail where my understanding is limited so I'm not sure whether this is relevant or not... maybe you're already aware of this and instead specifically talking about transmission(?)... though even so, wouldn't a quicker immune response from T cells help combat the virus sooner, thereby reducing its ability to replicate and transmit?


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 100219.htm

"This discovery suggests that fighting off a common cold coronavirus can indeed teach the T cell compartment to recognize some parts of SARS-CoV-2 and provides evidence for the hypothesis that common cold viruses can, in fact, induce cross-reactive T cell memory against SARS-CoV-2."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 123510.htm

"The study is also the first to report cross-reactivity of memory B cells -- meaning B cells that once attacked cold-causing coronaviruses appeared to also recognize SARS-CoV-2. Study authors believe this could mean that anyone who has been infected by a common coronavirus -- which is nearly everyone -- may have some degree of pre-existing immunity to COVID-19."

Apologies if I've misunderstood the fine detail of what you're discussing and the above isn't relevant.