Flying Fokker
Well-Known Member
UK Home | Daily Mail Online
MailOnline - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from MailOnline, Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Not sure i'd use the term "duty", but i posted this on a Twitter thread at the weekend, and it seemed to gain some traction ...It's the duty of young people to get the virus according to Professor Gupta from Oxford University
On the one hand: morons.
On the other: hardly surprising when you lock a bunch of 18 year olds away from him for the first time up together.
Whats happened?
Well they did climb onto a ping-pong table too! Utterly unacceptable behaviour!!Is that it?
Well they did climb onto a ping-pong table too! Utterly unacceptable behaviour!!
As long as when they are disciplined by the uni....and one or two possibly sent down. And when they are quarantined and isolated if the COVID rips through the Halls they don’t bleat that life’s so unfair. Actions have consequences and everyone knows what is currently happening. I don’t blame them for having a bit of fun but they have been found out.
As long as when they are disciplined by the uni....and one or two possibly sent down. And when they are quarantined and isolated if the COVID rips through the Halls they don’t bleat that life’s so unfair. Actions have consequences and everyone knows what is currently happening. I don’t blame them for having a bit of fun but they have been found out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Let them all get it, get over it, be immune to it (probably, at least for a few months), then not pose a risk to others who would suffer more severe disease.Fuck sake- sent down??
This is just another example of "blame the people instead of us for our mismanagement and demanding they went back in the first place"
Do you want to "send down" all those blokes who went to Trafalgar Square- I know which is riskier between that and these kids locked away messing about
Let them all get it, get over it, be immune to it (probably, at least for a few months), then not pose a risk to others who would suffer more severe disease.
The problem with that is the law, which says you and your household (see my earlier post in this thread) are required to self-isolate if you have it. So let them do all their learning online (which is being made achieveable in most unis), then get back into society after two weeks or so.
There needs to be a way of protecting the wider (more vulnerable) community and university staff. I don't know what that is, other than keeping them isolated (but supported) in some way.
Have a day off. Sent down?As long as when they are disciplined by the uni....and one or two possibly sent down. And when they are quarantined and isolated if the COVID rips through the Halls they don’t bleat that life’s so unfair. Actions have consequences and everyone knows what is currently happening. I don’t blame them for having a bit of fun but they have been found out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As far as i understand it, you need to have an active infection to be actively shedding the virus to pass on to others. What is one of the many unknowns at the moment (and i have asked for colleagues on the latest available -credible- data on this) is to what extent someone can pass it on if they don't have symptoms, as is the case for many 18-21 year olds.What am I missing here. Even if they all have immunity, does that stop them passing it on to other people?
It's on social media with beggy journalists all over it.As far as i understand it, you need to have an active infection to be actively shedding the virus to pass on to others. What is one of the many unknowns at the moment (and i have asked for colleagues on the latest available -credible- data on this) is to what extent someone can pass it on if they don't have symptoms, as is the case for many 18-21 year olds.
I'll update if i hear anything
But to my mind, every one of the students in that Daily Fail video is likely to be positive, unless they have had it previously.
What self-respecting student sends their videos to the fucking Mail anyway? Or are they just trawling social media?
"hi I'm so and so from some shit website or paper and we would love to use your video." Nonsense.Define Beggy???
As far as i understand it, you need to have an active infection to be actively shedding the virus to pass on to others. What is one of the many unknowns at the moment (and i have asked for colleagues on the latest available -credible- data on this) is to what extent someone can pass it on if they don't have symptoms, as is the case for many 18-21 year olds.
I'll update if i hear anything
But to my mind, every one of the students in that Daily Fail video is likely to be positive, unless they have had it previously.
What self-respecting student sends their videos to the fucking Mail anyway? Or are they just trawling social media?
That's what i am asking my epidemiology colleagues to clarify the latest data. But it appears that while antibody (B-cell) immunity is quite short-lived, the more persistent T-cells stick around for some time. The data on the repeat infections are not particularly convincing in my view, nor that surprising. There have been over a million deaths, and christ knows how many infected people, yet only a small handful of reports of repeat infection (and with much milder outcomes second time around), unlike chickenpox in which multiple infections is RELATIVELY common!I think the question being asked is that even though they will be able to fight the infection and it wouldn't last as long in their system, is there still a window that they could transmit it to others before their body fought it off, or just spread it via touching things because it's present on their skin?
That is also assuming that people have long term immunity after infection, which has yet to be confirmed and there do appear to be cases of people getting the infection a second time.
So glad camera phones weren’t really a thing in my day.
So glad camera phones weren’t really a thing in my day.
Let them all get it, get over it, be immune to it (probably, at least for a few months), then not pose a risk to others who would suffer more severe disease.
The problem with that is the law, which says you and your household (see my earlier post in this thread) are required to self-isolate if you have it. So let them do all their learning online (which is being made achieveable in most unis), then get back into society after two weeks or so.
There needs to be a way of protecting the wider (more vulnerable) community and university staff. I don't know what that is, other than keeping them isolated (but supported) in some way.
That's what i am asking my epidemiology colleagues to clarify the latest data. But it appears that while antibody (B-cell) immunity is quite short-lived, the more persistent T-cells stick around for some time. The data on the repeat infections are not particularly convincing in my view, nor that surprising. There have been over a million deaths, and christ knows how many infected people, yet only a small handful of reports of repeat infection (and with much milder outcomes second time around), unlike chickenpox in which multiple infections is RELATIVELY common!
I happen to believe that one of the lessons from Lockdown 1 is that it *worked* in bringing cases/hospital admissions/deaths DOWN. The drive to save the economy meant that it was eased too fast, too soon, which is causing this second spike (in many areas). But MUCH of that is due to household mixing, not students having a bit of a Freshers party.“in some way” doing a lot of heavy lifting in this post. Surely one of the lessons of lockdown 1 was that you can’t effectively bubble people in modern society?
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?