shmmeee
Well-Known Member
If you can recatch it in a short (I.e. less than a year) period, a vaccine won’t be coming. I think it was Whitty who made that point right at the start of all this.
I hope Johnson is right otherwise there's every chance life wont be the same until a vaccine is found
A small aside and question, why are we heading vaccine rather than antiviral? Surely minimising the effects would be sufficient?
(We have expoert accountants, lawyers, whatever on here, we must have a medic with an interest in the macro!)
Those tests occurred on different daysNot really, my wife was admitted to hospital friday evening after they treated her they also covid 19 tested her. She was again admitted on sunday evening ( womens trouble) and after treatment again covid tested,so two tests in two days on the same patient, how many more would have been double tested too?
Sent from my Alba7Nou using Tapatalk
Not good reading. Saw this a couple of days ago as well which is also troubling.Earlier lockdown could have prevented three-quarters of UK coronavirus deaths, modelling suggests
It’s not like we had at least 2 weeks head start, no one could have seen this coming despite the the warnings in January, why do I hate my country so much, I need to stop being negative, I would rather live in Italy etc.
I'm assuming, maybe naively, this is being looked into with as much effort as a vaccine. If we can relatively quickly get to a situation where popping a few pills makes getting the virus comparable to flu or anything else we don't go into a complete panic about then we're good to go.A small aside and question, why are we heading vaccine rather than antiviral? Surely minimising the effects would be sufficient?
A small aside and question, why are we heading vaccine rather than antiviral? Surely minimising the effects would be sufficient?
(We have expoert accountants, lawyers, whatever on here, we must have a medic with an interest in the macro!)
Great news about the NHS surcharge
Pretty embarrassing for Johnson though. In PMQs yesterday he was insisting it couldn't be removed and that removing it would cost £900m, a figure that was quickly proved to be incorrect by over £800m.
I don't know if it's just me being really stupid but they keep putting up this lockdown easing graphic and it's really starting to bug me,
Surely the horizontal axis is time and the vertical axis is R, so surely the line for R=1 should be horizontal, not vertical. It's bugged me since they first showed it but no-one else seems to have noticed or mentioned it, so it is just me being really dense and misunderstanding the graphic?
My only other thought is that the horizontal axis is R, but decreases from L-R rather than the usual increasing and the vertical axis is cases?
Utter nonsense.5% of the uk has already had coronavirus from a study the government carried out, imagine how many people have actually had it once the antibody tests are rolled out! I rekon 50/60%.... hopefully next weekend lots of stuff reopens safely
Why would the anti body test show the study to be so wrong? I think you're wrong on this one Dom. Even if the antibody test showed 10% of the population had been affected it would be a huge huge difference from modelling5% of the uk has already had coronavirus from a study the government carried out, imagine how many people have actually had it once the antibody tests are rolled out! I rekon 50/60%.... hopefully next weekend lots of stuff reopens safely
I think the y-axis is Covid caseload and the vertical line marks the case load that implies R=1
So basically all it's showing is when cases plateau, because each infection is resulting in 1 new infection. Would've been useful if they'd actually labelled the axes. And put a bit in the graphic showing what would happen if R goes above 1 and cases increase again so people are under no illusion this could come back and just because it's on a downward trend it'll remain that way. However, I suspect that's partly due to wanting it to look good for them and positive for the public but also due to them not wanting to show they'll put measures back in place even if it does so they could continue to have eased restrictions.
I think he is not understanding how these studies work.Why would the anti body test show the study to be so wrong? I think you're wrong on this one Dom. Even if the antibody test showed 10% of the population had been affected it would be a huge huge difference from modelling
Sent from my ELE-L29 using Tapatalk
Not really, other folk are having to go back work.Anyone else getting pissed off with people asking about football??? I miss it as much as the next guy but FFS there is much more important issues going on at the moment!!!
Anyone else getting pissed off with people asking about football??? I miss it as much as the next guy but FFS there is much more important issues going on at the moment!!!
I don't know if it's just me being really stupid but they keep putting up this lockdown easing graphic and it's really starting to bug me,
Surely the horizontal axis is time and the vertical axis is R, so surely the line for R=1 should be horizontal, not vertical. It's bugged me since they first showed it but no-one else seems to have noticed or mentioned it, so it is just me being really dense and misunderstanding the graphic?
My only other thought is that the horizontal axis is R, but decreases from L-R rather than the usual increasing and the vertical axis is cases?
I think we are looking at antivirals as well, but the obvious answer is that some people have undiagnosed underlying illnesses and there’s been lots of reports of people suddenly deteriorating in a matter of hours after feeling OK, so you’d still get significant excess deaths even if hospital survival rates improved dramatically.
Anyone else getting pissed off with people asking about football??? I miss it as much as the next guy but FFS there is much more important issues going on at the moment!!!
So basically all it's showing is when cases plateau, because each infection is resulting in 1 new infection. Would've been useful if they'd actually labelled the axes. And put a bit in the graphic showing what would happen if R goes above 1 and cases increase again so people are under no illusion this could come back and just because it's on a downward trend it'll remain that way. However, I suspect that's partly due to wanting it to look good for them and positive for the public but also due to them not wanting to show they'll put measures back in place even if it does so they could continue to have eased restrictions.
Be fair, when Scotland did this (second wave) people on here were slating then for not having exact time periods between labelled.
It wasn't so much that as them sticking question marks all over the graphic
I don’t see the issue TBH. But maybe because I liberally use question marks for unknown stuff.
See they've got Robbie Savage in today to ask the hard hitting questions. That will show people who say this government tries to avoid serious scrutiny.
What makes you think 50-60%?5% of the uk has already had coronavirus from a study the government carried out, imagine how many people have actually had it once the antibody tests are rolled out! I rekon 50/60%.... hopefully next weekend lots of stuff reopens safely
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?