Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Nice.

I noticed on my lunctime run by the Mersey in S Manchester that there were a lot fewer people around, I guess they're all in the shops/pub/gym.

The town centre where I am is noticeably busier now even early morning which is nice to see people getting back out there and businesses opening again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Nice.

I noticed on my lunctime run by the Mersey in S Manchester that there were a lot fewer people around, I guess they're all in the shops/pub/gym.

It was nicely busy. The pub had 40 benches with about a quarter being used.

Rammed with bookings for the next 2 weekends which isn’t surprising.

This weekend will be carnage everywhere I’d imagine!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

It was nicely busy. The pub had 40 benches with about a quarter being used.

Rammed with bookings for the next 2 weekends which isn’t surprising.

This weekend will be carnage everywhere I’d imagine!

Made me laugh coming home from work on the bus on Monday...we stopped at some lights by a big river front pub in Oxford and at one of the tables there was a group of six people all sat together, none of them talking to each other and just playing on their phones!  You would have thought to have gone to all that effort to 'socalise' they would actually talk to one another!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gooner1990 said:

Made me laugh coming home from work on the bus on Monday...we stopped at some lights by a big river front pub in Oxford and at one of the tables there was a group of six people all sat together, none of them talking to each other and just playing on their phones!  You would have thought to have gone to all that effort to 'socalise' they would actually talk to one another!

🤣 things dont happen unless theyre tweeted or bunged on insta as soon as possible, for proof

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fraybentos1 said:

It's so clear these vaccines are all way better than anyone dared to hope for. At some point they're going to have to admit they cut transmission a lot instead of the current ' we don't know'.

 

More like at some point they’re going to have to admit that asymptomatic transmission was vastly overstated and vaccines are reducing transmission because in most people they prevent symptomatic disease. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, gooner1990 said:

I'm sure they were all doing a Facebook check in or a picture of their pint to go on Instagram! 😄

LOOK EVERYONE, I'M HAVING LOTS OF FUN AREN'T YOU ALL JEALOUS

well, go and have some fun then, and put your bloody phone down! 

(im on a pc right now btw, in case someone points out that im on a phone moaning about people being on their phones too much)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr.Tease said:

By sheer coincidence :

 

Pfizer/BioNTech to fast track additional 50m vaccine doses for EU

EU countries will receive 50 million more Covid-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and BioNTech by the end of June, the head of the EU Commission said on Wednesday, as deliveries expected at the end of the year will be brought forward.

Reuters reports:

Ursula von der Leyen said the earlier deliveries, which will start this month, will take total supplies to the EU from Pfizer to 250 million doses in the second quarter of this year.

She also confirmed the Commission was in talks with the two companies for a new contract for 1.8 billion doses to be delivered in 2022 and 2023, confirming a Reuters report last week.

The EU has already signed two contracts with Pfizer and BionTech for a total of 600 million doses to be delivered this year.

Von der Leyen thanked BioNTech and Pfizer for always having been reliable.

Yeah, until something happens with the Pfizer one - oh looks here’s another “1 in a million side effect” or “oh shit it works worse than the others against this new variant” - and they’ve closed the doors on all the other options. Rubbish short term thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BobWillis2 said:

More like at some point they’re going to have to admit that asymptomatic transmission was vastly overstated and vaccines are reducing transmission because in most people they prevent symptomatic disease. 
 

Why can't the vaccines be preventing asymptomatic/pre-symptomatic transmission?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Radiochicken said:

Yeah, until something happens with the Pfizer one - oh looks here’s another “1 in a million side effect” or “oh shit it works worse than the others against this new variant” - and they’ve closed the doors on all the other options. Rubbish short term thinking.

Last time I checked, there were about 20 cases of immune-mediated thrombocytopenia between Pfizer and Moderna in the US (so less than 1 in a million, think that was out over 20m doses as it was end of January when the data was collected...9 had Pfizer, 11 had Moderna). Some of those had prior problems with immune-mediated thrombocytopenia, 1 had a hereditary condition that made them prone to it, others had other underlying autoimmune disorders and about 13 of them had no prior issues. The first patient it happened in died, the others all required hospitalisation but were treated (for suspected immune-mediated thrombocytopenia) and are ok. The rate was not really any higher than the rate observed without vaccination, or at least it was in the same ballpark (which is not the case with the issues we are seeing with the two adenovirus vaccines, where incidence is 10-20 times higher (while still being extremely rare)). 

 

Edit: I should add that the problems in these patients were bleeding problems with Thrombocytopenia not exactly the same clothing issue we have seen with the other vaccines...

Edited by Toilet Duck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I don't think that was his suggestion...

He is suggestion asymptomatic transmission didn't play a big role.  Which probably holds a lot of truth in reality.  

But the vaccines preventing transmission isn't evidence that asymptomatic (and pre-symptomatic) transmission isn't a big thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Switzerland is loosening up despite the increasing number of infections
"The numbers are increasing, but not very much," says Switzerland's Minister of Health, Alain Berset. That is why there will be a relaxation there on Monday. Among other things, restaurant terraces, cinemas and fitness centers are allowed to reopen from April 19. The trade associations had been pushing for the easing for days. The government is ready to "take a little more risks.“
It is compulsory to sit and wear a mask on the terraces. The masks may only be taken off for consumption. Indoor enclosures in zoos or greenhouses in botanical gardens are allowed to open. Outdoor events are again allowed with up to 100 guests, with up to 50 people indoors. Theaters and concert halls are only allowed to offer a third of their seating capacity. Universities are allowed to offer face-to-face teaching again. Inside, you must always keep clearances and wear masks, except for endurance training in fitness centers or choir rehearsals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

I don't think that was his suggestion...

He is suggestion asymptomatic transmission didn't play a big role.  Which probably holds a lot of truth in reality.  

Data from a mass screening programme in Luxembourg would suggest differently...

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00033-8/fulltext

Modelling also backs this up:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774707

 

But...there is an ongoing systematic review that suggests that while pre-symptomatic carriers have a secondary attack rate similar to symptomatic carriers, it is significantly less for truly asymptomatic carriers (ie, those that never develop any symptoms...with the caveat that environment plays an important role here and prolonged exposure to asymptomatic carriers, for example on a cruise ship or in a care home, still carries significant risk).

https://www.clinicalmicrobiologyandinfection.com/article/S1198-743X(21)00038-0/fulltext

There's other studies that looked at this in healthcare workers, household contacts, and even another couple of meta-analyses that all reach similar conclusions (symptomatic more infectious, pre-symptomatic not far behind, asymptomatic still infectious but not to the same degree, however, behaviour and environment are difficult to adjust for). The main thing that none of the studies so far take into account is the difference in disease progression with different variants (they really need to adjust secondary attack rates based on the variant). The B117 variant has a different disease trajectory to old school SARS-CoV-2 and lasts for a bit longer, so we don't know yet if there are people that are infectious for longer when they pick up this variant, or whether it's the same as the original one and somewhere around 5 days after symptom onset, infectiousness falls off a cliff. With the original Wuhan variant, household contact positivity was much lower than the newer variants, so the increased transmissibility of them may impact on asymptomatic/pre-symptomatic spread. It's still a bit early to be definitively declaring that those without symptoms at the time they have a close contact played little or no role in the spread of the disease. Of course, the vaccines should still control all of this...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Barry Fish said:

Doesn't a lot of that back up that I am right ?   Not every study can be taken as gospel either.  All this year its been frustrating to see people grab any none peer reviewed study as evidence for their beliefs.  Bloody hell this happens with masks!!! which compare someone coughing there lungs up with a mask vs someone without a mask when the reality is 99% of people will cover their mouth with their hands which probably is about as good as your average mask anyway 🙂 

Also - how on earth do you really measure it ?   If I got covid I won't have a clue who or where it came from ?  and half these asymptomatic cases actually had symptoms that people didn't properly recognised no doubt.  Its a massively hard thing to work out.

Just from a pure biology stand point a person who is asymptomatic is highly likely to be shedding much less virus than someone with it.  Your not going to have a asymptomatic person with the same level of virus as a symptomatic person ?  Not from a respiratory illness ?  I heard someone trying to use HIV as an example but that isn't even remotely the same thing.

That’s why we have systematic reviews! (Which we don’t have yet). I don’t think any of the evidence cited above suggests that asymptomatic transmission was “massively overstated”. It suggests that asymptomatic carriers are infectious, not as infectious as those with symptoms or about to develop them, but if you hang around indoors with them for long enough, you can pick it up from them. There are documented asymptomatic cases with pretty high viral loads (why they aren’t symptomatic is another question), but biologically, I guess if aerosols generated by speech etc are sufficient to spread the disease from the upper airways (rather than coughing to spread for the lower respiratory tract), then thinking of this in the same way as some other respiratory viruses is where we end up drawing incorrect conclusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...