When will this shit end?

[Wellyboot]

5 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

whats happened to going out in the sun ? ive got some colour on me from my daily exercise .... those with gardens im so Jealous ...  and those with Gardens and amazing views ...

 

I'm still working so I miss the sunshine by the time I get home  and the days I've had off have been grey and rainy  typical!

[Bisque]

Need the sun to clear my psoriasis that normally comes out over Xmas, that & a pre-tan before Spring holiday to prevent getting burnt! I try not to make it a vain thing honestly.

[Ozanne]

27 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

I saw a big grin on Matt hancocks face when he was asked today ..... they hit 81,000 yesterday I think .... so won't be far away ... theres also bits on bbc news website about them probably hitting it ...

That was only the Housing Secretary saying he thinks they’ve hit it or come close. 

[Matt42]

Just seen that green tea peng, one of the largest anti vaccination, 5G mast, bill gates micro chip conspiracy theorists was booked for this year.

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

That was only the Housing Secretary saying he thinks they’ve hit it or come close. 

they won't be far away ... nothing worth quibbling about anyway ... its how  its used thats going to be important from here ... and those antibody tests ? which seem to have gone quiet of late ...

[Ozanne]

3 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

they won't be far away ... nothing worth quibbling about anyway ... its how  its used thats going to be important from here ... and those antibody tests ? which seem to have gone quiet of late ...

If it’s not worth quibbling about then they shouldn’t have set the target in the first place. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

3 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

they won't be far away ... nothing worth quibbling about anyway ... its how  its used thats going to be important from here ... and those antibody tests ? which seem to have gone quiet of late ...

Yep no point testing for testing sake, there is massive limit to the benefit of testing while we’re in lockdown anyway, the only benefits are for people who still need to physically go into a place of work, and want to know if they absolutely need to isolate or not.

Once we try and ease lockdown then they come into their own, that’s when we need to be testing anyone with symptoms or anyone who might have been infected.

 

[Crazyfool01]

Just now, Ozanne said:

If it’s not worth quibbling about then they shouldn’t have set the target in the first place. 

I disagree on that one ..... I set myself targets quite often and I might not always achieve them but without having something to go for I will never improve myself .... people have all said it was ambitious and thats also what I thought judging by the initial slow progress ....

[Madyaker]

1 hour ago, jparx said:

So we've had two, what seem to be overly optimistic and really bullish estimates about vaccines from Oxford and the US. Fingers crossed their optimism is well founded, otherwise they're really playing with peoples hopes! Talk of being able to vaccinate people in the Autumn seems incredibly hopeful but hey, team Oxford all the way at this point. Could use some hope as long as it's tempered!

The Oxford group’s optimism seems well founded to me. The reason they’ve been so quick is because they’ve been working on this since January. As far as I understand they are using a modified version of a vaccine they had been working on for SARS 1 so they had a head start. 

[mph]

6 hours ago, Gilgamesh69 said:

Flatmate keeps seeing his friends, and bringing them here. Told him he needs to stop it, especially because I have health issues which make me more vulnerable to the virus. He's still bringing friends over.

Reported him to the police via some online form but was told they can't really do anything about it as it's not in a public place.

 

Need a plan C 🙃

Are locksmiths in lock down? 

[steviewevie]

It's actually pretty impressive to get even close to 100k tests a day seeing where they were a few weeks ago.

[Toilet Duck]

17 minutes ago, Madyaker said:

The Oxford group’s optimism seems well founded to me. The reason they’ve been so quick is because they’ve been working on this since January. As far as I understand they are using a modified version of a vaccine they had been working on for SARS 1 so they had a head start. 

Pretty much this^

They had "first in man" studies last year, so they know a lot more about safety than the groups starting from scratch. Re-tooling SARS/MERS vaccines that were in development was always the quickest route (or in the case of GSK/Sanofi, re-tooling their flu platform). One thing that hasn't had a lot of widespread discussion is use of the vaccines we already have. BCG made the headlines given its impact on innate immunity (I still think this is a good idea, but ongoing trials will confirm it or otherwise), but Pneumococcal pneumonia vaccination was recommended early on  (due to the risk of secondary infection after developing COVID), and widespread use of this would be a good step for high risk groups. The flu vaccine hasn't cropped up in conversations at all (maybe it has, if so, I missed it), but since preventing the NHS (or any other healthcare system) from being overwhelmed is among the principal drivers of "lockdown", free, widespread use of it should reduce the numbers of admission from flu for the next season, leaving those beds free for COVID cases (and thus keeping us under capacity and removing the need for further lockdown). Surprised this hasn't featured prominently in the plan to manage this in the long-term (maybe it has, I mainly read scientific literature!). 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

6 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Pretty much this^

They had "first in man" studies last year, so they know a lot more about safety than the groups starting from scratch. Re-tooling SARS/MERS vaccines that were in development was always the quickest route (or in the case of GSK/Sanofi, re-tooling their flu platform). One thing that hasn't had a lot of widespread discussion is use of the vaccines we already have. BCG made the headlines given its impact on innate immunity (I still think this is a good idea, but ongoing trials will confirm it or otherwise), but Pneumococcal pneumonia vaccination was recommended early on  (due to the risk of secondary infection after developing COVID), and widespread use of this would be a good step for high risk groups. The flu vaccine hasn't cropped up in conversations at all (maybe it has, if so, I missed it), but since preventing the NHS (or any other healthcare system) from being overwhelmed is among the principal drivers of "lockdown", free, widespread use of it should reduce the numbers of admission from flu for the next season, leaving those beds free for COVID cases (and thus keeping us under capacity and removing the need for further lockdown). Surprised this hasn't featured prominently in the plan to manage this in the long-term (maybe it has, I mainly read scientific literature!). 

Have you watched the pandemic documentary on Netflix TD? I must admit I didn’t watch it all because I didn’t find it all that interesting in parts, but something they featured on that was a universal flu vaccine they were working on... or something along those lines. Is that still in the works?

Edit: Also I don’t know if you know of this chap, but every time he came on he reminded me of Brian Bedonde

Edited May 1, 2020 by Deaf Nobby Burton

[Toilet Duck]

Haven't watched it yet, must give it a go! They have been trying to make a universal flu vaccine for quite a while now. There's one called Flu-v I think that was in trials, not sure how it's panning out though!

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

I’m sure you’ll find it interesting. I just thought they had it up their sleeve and released it in January when Corona hit, but apparently it’s just very eerily timed, and the whole documentary is pretty much a warning about a global pandemic happening.

[fatyeti24]

1 hour ago, Matt42 said:

Just seen that green tea peng, one of the largest anti vaccination, 5G mast, bill gates micro chip conspiracy theorists was booked for this year.

At least she's tattooed her head so you know to keep your distance.

[Keithy]

Re: govn testing target. They are 'hitting it' because they've changed the way the count them.

https://www.hsj.co.uk/quality-and-performance/revealed-how-government-changed-the-rules-to-hit-100000-tests-target/7027544.article

They also used the conservative mailing list to target people

By no stretch of the imagination are they anywhere close to actually doing 100,000 tests a day, every day.

At best, by changing the way they count and a one off mass mailing, they will hit '100,000' on one day.

If they manage it consistently over the next few weeks then I'll tip my hat. As it stands now, it's data manipulation. 

Edited May 1, 2020 by Keithy

[Ozanne]

1 hour ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Yep no point testing for testing sake, there is massive limit to the benefit of testing while we’re in lockdown anyway, the only benefits are for people who still need to physically go into a place of work, and want to know if they absolutely need to isolate or not.

Once we try and ease lockdown then they come into their own, that’s when we need to be testing anyone with symptoms or anyone who might have been infected.

 

Will you ever call the government out on anything during this? Seems you are quite happy to give them a pass on nearly everything.

 

1 hour ago, crazyfool1 said:

I disagree on that one ..... I set myself targets quite often and I might not always achieve them but without having something to go for I will never improve myself .... people have all said it was ambitious and thats also what I thought judging by the initial slow progress ....

I get that 100%, I mean no disrespect here at all but it’s a bit different to a government setting targets relating to testing of an illness during a pandemic.

 

The target was partly set as a way to distract from the previous slow testing activity, to kick the can a month down the road and also to give Matt Hancock a big achievement if it was reached (of course the other reasons are there too as you say).

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

get that 100%, I mean no disrespect here at all but it’s a bit different to a government setting targets relating to testing of an illness during a pandemic

yes absolutely .... I was trying to give an analogy that fitted .... I also think that the important thing is not attacking the govt just for the sake of it ... they have met a target ... but there are plenty of other things they have clearly failed on ... so go after them on these things would be my take on it 

[stuartbert two hats]

16 minutes ago, Keithy said:

Re: govn testing target. They are 'hitting it' because they've changed the way the count them.

https://www.hsj.co.uk/quality-and-performance/revealed-how-government-changed-the-rules-to-hit-100000-tests-target/7027544.article

They also used the conservative mailing list to target people

By no stretch of the imagination are they anywhere close to actually doing 100,000 tests a day, every day.

At best, by changing the way they count and a one off mass mailing, they will hit '100,000' on one day.

If they manage it consistently over the next few weeks then I'll tip my hat. As it stands now, it's data manipulation. 

They hit 100,000 a day as much as Glastonbury sold out on 2008.

[Ozanne]

16 minutes ago, Keithy said:

Re: govn testing target. They are 'hitting it' because they've changed the way the count them.

https://www.hsj.co.uk/quality-and-performance/revealed-how-government-changed-the-rules-to-hit-100000-tests-target/7027544.article

They also used the conservative mailing list to target people

By no stretch of the imagination are they anywhere close to actually doing 100,000 tests a day, every day.

At best, by changing the way they count and a one off mass mailing, they will hit '100,000' on one day.

If they manage it consistently over the next few weeks then I'll tip my hat. As it stands now, it's data manipulation. 

If I confirm I’m going to go Morrison’s on Sunday, do you think they’ll count me as footfall into the store today? 😂 utter joke. 

[Crazyfool01]

hadn't seen the above manipulation thing ... perhaps Laura will ask them about it at todays Press conference .... or will she ask the daily when are restrictions being lifted question ?

[Ozanne]

1 minute ago, crazyfool1 said:

hadn't seen the above manipulation thing ... perhaps Laura will ask them about it at todays Press conference .... or will she ask the daily when are restrictions being lifted question ?

😂 most likely she’ll ask that again. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

7 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Will you ever call the government out on anything during this? Seems you are quite happy to give them a pass on nearly everything.

 

I get that 100%, I mean no disrespect here at all but it’s a bit different to a government setting targets relating to testing of an illness during a pandemic.

 

The target was partly set as a way to distract from the previous slow testing activity, to kick the can a month down the road and also to give Matt Hancock a big achievement if it was reached (of course the other reasons are there too as you say).

Whereas you criticise them for absolutely everything irrespective of the circumstances, so what’s the difference?

This isn’t anywhere near over yet, so we don’t know who was right and who was wrong for many different things, so I’d rather reserve judgement for later on when we can really say what decisions were correct or not.

With regards to the testing, isn’t 100,000 a rather convenient number? As long as we have the ability to test who we need to, which we now appear to be able to, then isn’t it just pointless pedantry to be quibbling over whether we actually tested that many or not? Specifically because 100,000 was chosen which obviously isn’t the actual scientific number that we need to be testing anyway.

[gigpusher]

1 minute ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Whereas you criticise them for absolutely everything irrespective of the circumstances, so what’s the difference?

This isn’t anywhere near over yet, so we don’t know who was right and who was wrong for many different things, so I’d rather reserve judgement for later on when we can really say what decisions were correct or not.

With regards to the testing, isn’t 100,000 a rather convenient number? As long as we have the ability to test who we need to, which we now appear to be able to, then isn’t it just pointless pedantry to be quibbling over whether we actually tested that many or not? Specifically because 100,000 was chosen which obviously isn’t the actual scientific number that we need to be testing anyway.

I'd agree the number is ridiculous but I had a friend who has been referred to hospital twice with COVID symptoms after he had already self-isolated for 10 days. He has been x-rayed twice, given inhalers, steroids etc and told he most likely has or had the virus but still not been tested. You shouldn't in all honesty have to be a key worker to get tested. He has a wife and 2 children and the whole thing has been very stressful for them and they still don't know if he has had it/still has it as he hasn't fully recovered. Anyone who has symptoms that don't resolve after the self-isolation term should be tested. They could have any number of other conditions as well so testing to rule out COVID 19 is important.