When will this shit end?

[ShakeyCrash]

Lots of replies and get the general status quo and can certainly agree with lots of the points. Will look through all 12 as don’t agree with some of them being banded in the same category to be honest. The other point though is by leaning on this rhetoric are we hoping they don’t make the terrible decisions to begin with? If so, what about those that have already been made? We know BJ can be a stubborn nob when he wants so what chance of extending the furlough for the arts if he knows now that he has this stigma?

[gizmoman]

3 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Not quite sure if you read my post, but ID doesn’t form part of the name of the rapid test at all. I don’t really know where to begin with the other stuff, but it wouldn’t bother me in the slightest (I don’t pay for gigs with laundered cash and use a fake name, so they can’t find out who I am if they really wanted to!)...when I get on a plane, they check my passport, which literally is ID, so again, I don’t see the problem. 

? Maybe I didn't explain myself well, The point of the test is to prevent people with the virus from going to the gig (in your example) so they would have to prove to the person on the door they were covid free (or at least low). This system would require that all attendees were  positively identified otherwise it wouldn't work. YOU may not be worried about being being monitored but others do feel it is an intrusion on their rights and civil liberties. It's true you can't fly to another county without ID but would you feel it to be o.k. if you had to prove who you are to go to the corner shop? It would certainly cut crime but the potential for abuse by an authoritarian government is huge.

[Toilet Duck]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960076020302764?via%3Dihub

Oh yeah, I did actually read that one! Looks promising, small study, but a start at providing some solid trial-based evidence to support vitamin D related treatment. Odds ratio looks huge, but is probably a function of the small study size. Whether over the counter vitamin D supplements can provide the same impact as high dose calcifediol, as used here, remains to be seen, but deserves further investigation in a larger trial. My own institution is involved in one as it happens...

[squirrelarmy]

At what point do they implant the chip to receive the 5G signals to control our brains?

[Waterdeep]

17 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

it has been shown to be about as lethal as the Flu

Where are you seeing that? It hasn't been around long enough to study the long term effects so nobody really knows yet what the true fatality rate is.

[ShakeyCrash]

1 minute ago, squirrelarmy said:

At what point do they implant the chip to receive the 5G signals to control our brains?

Haven’t they done this already?

[gizmoman]

1 minute ago, squirrelarmy said:

At what point do they implant the chip to receive the 5G signals to control our brains?

Patience,

https://www.cnet.com/news/elon-musk-shows-neuralink-brain-implant-working-in-a-pig/

[Toilet Duck]

1 minute ago, gizmoman said:

? Maybe I didn't explain myself well, The point of the test is to prevent people with the virus from going to the gig (in your example) so they would have to prove to the person on the door they were covid free (or at least low). This system would require that all attendees were  positively identified otherwise it wouldn't work. YOU may not be worried about being being monitored but others do feel it is an intrusion on their rights and civil liberties. It's true you can't fly to another county without ID but would you feel it to be o.k. if you had to prove who you are to go to the corner shop? It would certainly cut crime but the potential for abuse by an authoritarian government is huge.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I’ve no problem identifying myself, I’ve nothing to hide. There’s no suggestion of having to do so in order to go to the shop, simply to engage in activities that would be considered high risk in terms of super-spreading. Thankfully I don’t live under an authoritarian government. 

[Toilet Duck]

1 minute ago, gizmoman said:

Patience,

https://www.cnet.com/news/elon-musk-shows-neuralink-brain-implant-working-in-a-pig/

Brain-machine interfaces aren’t really that new. The potential in terms of prosthesis development and many other possibilities is fantastic. Science simply invents, it’s up to society to decide what we want to do with that invention (I joked about cloning you earlier, but in all seriousness, the technology exists to do it...we choose as a society not to). I don’t think we should stop discovering things just because someone can see a more sinister use for something if it means that the positive uses they were developed for lose out as a result.

[dotdash79]

if the build the parks near a Pret then that might solve a problem or 2

[gizmoman]

5 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I’ve no problem identifying myself, I’ve nothing to hide. There’s no suggestion of having to do so in order to go to the shop, simply to engage in activities that would be considered high risk in terms of super-spreading. Thankfully I don’t live under an authoritarian government. 

I've nothing to hide either, from a democratic and free state, but to quote an old saying, ‘the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.’ it's certainly true that once a government take on new powers they seldom relinquish them, maybe i'm paranoid, but the way this year has gone i'm not optimistic.

[squirrelarmy]

8 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Brain-machine interfaces aren’t really that new. The potential in terms of prosthesis development and many other possibilities is fantastic. Science simply invents, it’s up to society to decide what we want to do with that invention (I joked about cloning you earlier, but in all seriousness, the technology exists to do it...we choose as a society not to). I don’t think we should stop discovering things just because someone can see a more sinister use for something if it means that the positive uses they were developed for lose out as a result.

I actually watched the presentation on Neuralink. It’s definitely something I’d consider doing, I doubt they will be doing trials in the UK though but I’d be up for seeing if having a chip in my brain can sort me out. 

[Toilet Duck]

7 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

I've nothing to hide either, from a democratic and free state, but to quote an old saying, ‘the price of liberty is eternal vigilance.’ it's certainly true that once a government take on new powers they seldom relinquish them, maybe i'm paranoid, but the way this year has gone i'm not optimistic.

In a sense, I do actually agree with you. And I most certainly agree that creeping erosion of civil liberties needs to be pushed back against. It is possible in a democracy to demand proper legislation though to enable things like this to temporarily provide greater freedom, without accepting it as the norm for eternity. Maybe I’m just less paranoid. 

Edited September 3, 2020 by Toilet Duck
Typos!

[stuartbert two hats]

1 hour ago, Toilet Duck said:

I’ll have a word and tell them to get a move on!😁

...more seriously though, the wait has been to produce the trial data to support it. Even hydroxychloroquine could still have legs if the inhaled trial data suggests a different route of administration could solve the problem of drug concentration in the lung being too low to show efficacy when delivered orally. But advocating these things as miracle cures without properly testing them is not best practice. 

Funny you should say that, Dr Campbell posted a video saying there is good evidence now, just that the dosage for previous trials was wrong:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302817?via%3Dihub

 

I was going to pick your brains on them.

[gizmoman]

12 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Brain-machine interfaces aren’t really that new. The potential in terms of prosthesis development and many other possibilities is fantastic. Science simply invents, it’s up to society to decide what we want to do with that invention (I joked about cloning you earlier, but in all seriousness, the technology exists to do it...we choose as a society not to). I don’t think we should stop discovering things just because someone can see a more sinister use for something if it means that the positive uses they were developed for lose out as a result.

 

That would be fine except the vast majority of people have no concept of this type of research and so have no say in it. The people involved are quite understandably excited by, and may well be richly rewarded by, the work they are doing, but that doesn't mean it is always justifiable or necessary. Maybe I watched too many Frankenstein movies as a kid, even though I've benefited from medical breakthroughs I'm still sceptical!

 

[gizmoman]

2 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Funny you should say that, Dr Campbell posted a video saying there is good evidence now, just that the dosage for previous trials was wrong:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302817?via%3Dihub

 

I was going to pick your brains on them.

I tried to post that earlier but must have buggered it up!, the vitamin  D study mentioned that they had treated the patients with hydroxychloroquine as well as D, maybe Trump isn't so stupid!

[Ozanne]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-03/johnson-accused-of-hypocrisy-over-speech-to-packed-tory-meeting?srnd=premium-europe

'At least 50 Tory members of Parliament crammed into the parliamentary meeting room on Wednesday evening for the meeting, despite a sign on the door warning only 29 should be allowed in to limit the spread of coronavirus.'

'Just 40 minutes after it finished, the prime minister’s office sent a tweet warning people not to attend gatherings of more than 30 people.'

 

 

[stuartbert two hats]

2 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

I tried to post that earlier but must have buggered it up!, the vitamin  D study mentioned that they had treated the patients with hydroxychloroquine as well as D, maybe Trump isn't so stupid!

He is.

[Toilet Duck]

5 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

That would be fine except the vast majority of people have no concept of this type of research and so have no say in it. The people involved are quite understandably excited by, and may well be richly rewarded by, the work they are doing, but that doesn't mean it is always justifiable or necessary. Maybe I watched too many Frankenstein movies as a kid, even though I've benefited from medical breakthroughs I'm still sceptical!

 

I hate to break it you, Scientists usually get f*ck all when it comes to reaping the financial rewards of their endeavours! Luckily, it’s not why we do it! Or maybe the rich rewards are the satisfaction of actually creating/solving something, not quite sure which angle you were going for! To be honest, for me, the quest for knowledge is almost always justifiable (unless the only possible use for it is nefarious), again, it’s society’s role to decide what to do with that knowledge once gained. I do agree that greater engagement with the public is something science as a discipline still needs to work on. Most of our work is publicly funded, so we do have a duty to explain ourselves. 

[Toilet Duck]

12 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Funny you should say that, Dr Campbell posted a video saying there is good evidence now, just that the dosage for previous trials was wrong:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477893920302817?via%3Dihub

 

I was going to pick your brains on them.

Haven’t watched the vid, but the data from the hydroxychloroquine trials implied that not enough was getting to the lungs to work. There are inhalers that were being developed for asthma that are now being evaluated, so these might prove differently. The problem with hydroxychloroquine wasn’t that it was a bad idea (again, my own institution ran a trial), it was that it was being suggested as a bona fide cure without the data to support it. There’s still no data suggesting orally delivered hydroxychloroquine will work, so we still have to wait and see how the inhaled drug performs.

[zahidf]

Lol what a twat

 

 

[stuartbert two hats]

2 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Haven’t watched the vid, but the data from the hydroxychloroquine trials implied that not enough was getting to the lungs to work. There are inhalers that were being developed for asthma that are now being evaluated, so these might prove differently. The problem with hydroxychloroquine wasn’t that it was a bad idea (again, my own institution ran a trial), it was that it was being suggested as a bona fide cure without the data to support it. There’s still no data suggesting orally delivered hydroxychloroquine will work, so we still have to wait and see how the inhaled drug performs.

It's the links above the video that are important, (particularly the first one), not the video. The video is just an attempt to interpret the studies for a the general public - i.e not the likes of you!

He does tend to get quite excited about studies before all the results are in, so I'm more interested in your interpretation.

Note that the study linked above is new - from the 24th of August - is that the one you were referring to?

[gizmoman]

33 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

I hate to break it you, Scientists usually get f*ck all when it comes to reaping the financial rewards of their endeavours! Luckily, it’s not why we do it! Or maybe the rich rewards are the satisfaction of actually creating/solving something, not quite sure which angle you were going for! To be honest, for me, the quest for knowledge is almost always justifiable (unless the only possible use for it is nefarious), again, it’s society’s role to decide what to do with that knowledge once gained. I do agree that greater engagement with the public is something science as a discipline still needs to work on. Most of our work is publicly funded, so we do have a duty to explain ourselves. 

Nice to hear it, I was starting to think that Gates guy was funding everything! Thanks for the replies, I appreciate you probably have better things to do than debate with sceptics on the internet. I'll go now cause Stu needs answers too!

[Toilet Duck]

27 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

It's the links above the video that are important, (particularly the first one), not the video. The video is just an attempt to interpret the studies for a the general public - i.e not the likes of you!

He does tend to get quite excited about studies before all the results are in, so I'm more interested in your interpretation.

Note that the study linked above is new - from the 24th of August - is that the one you were referring to?

Ah, yes, had a quick look. Unfortunately they are retrospective studies, rather than prospective randomised trials. The Recovery trial data showed quite clearly that when you take the same group of patients and randomise them to HCQ or not, they received no benefit. There are a couple of further studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine that confirmed this, leading to the various trials being terminated. They also looked at it as prophylactic treatment in close contacts of patients diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection and found it not to be protective. However, follow up work has indicated a drug delivery problem which may explain why it doesn’t work, so there’s still a possibility that the inhalers might be useful. Unfortunately, when it comes to levels of evidence, prospective, randomised, double blind trials trump retrospective studies (even though the ones above have a lot of patients in them). I’ll be delighted if inhaled HCQ turns out to be successful (same with vitamin D), anything to improve outcomes...it just has to be based on sound evidence. 

[Toilet Duck]

8 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Nice to hear it, I was starting to think that Gates guy was funding everything! Thanks for the replies, I appreciate you probably have better things to do than debate with sceptics on the internet. I'll go now cause Stu needs answers too!

No worries!