Covid-19 discussion thread

[Pamplemousse]

Even more so-called 'professionals' now appear to be entertaining the idea that the virus might now be mutating into a far less deadly strain, in fact even a high-ranking specialist at one of the major hospitals within the West Midlands conurbation announced it in one of our regional papers today, hard on the heels of our mighty Dr John Campbell.

As ever, I'm likely to say "I'll believe it when I see it" as to me the cases vs. deaths thing is being skewed by many cases now being in the younger age groups who statistically are more likely to survive it, whilst the more 'at risk' and cautious are being just that - cautious. Also HMG isn't filling up care homes with the diseased any more.

From the point of view of a virus, since its sole purpose is to reproduce it would be better for it not to kill its hosts because then it dies with it.

[Pamplemousse]

Lots of good info there Lencoboy. On a more localised level, I've been thinking about the lack of anecdotal covid in my own town.

Where I live it's a feeder into a city with a number of cases but according to the stats there haven't been any cases here for ten weeks, at least. A mate of mine in Yorkshire says he learned of two people in their 80s dying in his village; both had "multiple pre-existing conditions", that phrase that's supposed to make it better but it doesn't alter the fact that the complete ineptitude of this Government - as ever, putting profits before people - probably hastened their deaths.

[Gary A]

I still think the lower amounts of deaths are due to a mixture of younger healthier people contracting the virus and more positive diagnosis in asymptomatic cases.

In my opinion, asymptomatic detection is now down to routine testing in certain workplaces. Also, people being traced as close contacts, for the most part, aren’t going to wait to develop symptoms, they’re going to book a test aren’t they?

If you consider that at the absolute height of the pandemic in the UK, several thousand people per day were being diagnosed. These were ALL cases that were sick enough to be hospitalised or, at the very least, require medical intervention.

Now, the majority of cases diagnosed are either minor cases or completely asymptomatic, due to testing being carried out routinely in many settings. If this was being done from the get go, think how many more cases would have been diagnosed at the height of the pandemic.

[fishman65]

I still think the lower amounts of deaths are due to a mixture of younger healthier people contracting the virus and more positive diagnosis in asymptomatic cases.

In my opinion, asymptomatic detection is now down to routine testing in certain workplaces. Also, people being traced as close contacts, for the most part, aren’t going to wait to develop symptoms, they’re going to book a test aren’t they?

If you consider that at the absolute height of the pandemic in the UK, several thousand people per day were being diagnosed. These were ALL cases that were sick enough to be hospitalised or, at the very least, require medical intervention.

Now, the majority of cases diagnosed are either minor cases or completely asymptomatic, due to testing being carried out routinely in many settings. If this was being done from the get go, think how many more cases would have been diagnosed at the height of the pandemic.

That puts the current figures in a much better light Gary. Do you think there will be a 'second wave' if we can keep on top of these outbreaks?

Our Dr Campbell here returning to the subject of hydroxychloroquine and evidence that it is efficacious at the correct dose, but the medical big guns were using a dose that was too high. Very strange.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uzXHnUViro

[Gary A]

That puts the current figures in a much better light Gary. Do you think there will be a 'second wave' if we can keep on top of these outbreaks?

I don’t, no. That is, I don’t feel that the cases will be at the same level that they were in late March and April, I feel that we’ve already seen good evidence of effective containment measures in places like Leicester and Aberdeen so that bodes well for keeping the infection rate down.

I do think that the cases will rise to around 1500-2000 per day as restrictions are further eased, but i think it will level off around that point until suitable vaccines and treatments are found. Unfortunately, this virus is just far too contagious to expect anything less unless we go for a full on lockdown again.

It’s not a “wave” as such, more a slow and steady burn. It’s not ideal but I think that’s just a reality we need to live with for at least another year.

[MyNameIsTerry]

I'm minded to point out Matthew 6:5 here.

We think we are so advanced yet Matthew well understood virtue signalling. He just didn't need a fancy buzzword

[MyNameIsTerry]

I still think the lower amounts of deaths are due to a mixture of younger healthier people contracting the virus and more positive diagnosis in asymptomatic cases.

In my opinion, asymptomatic detection is now down to routine testing in certain workplaces. Also, people being traced as close contacts, for the most part, aren’t going to wait to develop symptoms, they’re going to book a test aren’t they?

If you consider that at the absolute height of the pandemic in the UK, several thousand people per day were being diagnosed. These were ALL cases that were sick enough to be hospitalised or, at the very least, require medical intervention.

Now, the majority of cases diagnosed are either minor cases or completely asymptomatic, due to testing being carried out routinely in many settings. If this was being done from the get go, think how many more cases would have been diagnosed at the height of the pandemic.

More testing raising the figures is common sense and I think if the mortality rates were higher no one would be questioning it. But the question really is, as you say, if we had been testing this level back then would the mortality rates but tiny in comparison? My post code revealed an 11%+ mortality rate which is artificially high due to incorrect counting of deaths as covid related but also because only a small % of cases were being counted as infected.

Add to this how those less likely to be affected badly are likely returning closer to old practises as compared to at risk groups it makes sense it will rise with lockdown relaxation, level off, dip and be affected by spikes.

[Lencoboy]

Some very interesting views from others on here, which kind of match with my own.

That high-ranking 'specialist', who did an article in one of our regional newspapers yesterday, is an intensive care specialist at one of the West Midlands' major hospitals, and was/is trying to explain to us that the current situation is NOT a 'second wave', and superficially appeared to be urging us not to jump to conclusions at the present stage about a so-called 'second wave' possibly having already started.

Of course, only time will tell as to how things pan out over the coming months, especially the death rates.

[Gary A]

Some very interesting views from others on here, which kind of match with my own.

That high-ranking 'specialist', who did an article in one of our regional newspapers yesterday, is an intensive care specialist at one of the West Midlands' major hospitals, and was/is trying to explain to us that the current situation is NOT a 'second wave', and superficially appeared to be urging us not to jump to conclusions at the present stage about a so-called 'second wave' possibly having already started.

Of course, only time will tell as to how things pan out over the coming months, especially the death rates.

I don’t like the whole “second wave” thing as it implies that the virus is on some kind of hiatus but will return from its slumber eventually. Influenza viruses work that way, coronaviruses don’t.

Coronaviruses behave like cancers, not as serious or aggressive of course, but in the same way a cancer will grow uncontrollably without intervention, coronaviruses are the same. If we just let it do it’s thing it will engulf vast amounts of the population and it’ll do it very quickly.

This is why I can’t understand anyone protesting any control measures. The only reason this virus is in a kind of “slumber” is because we have intervened in its progress. The death counts are incredibly low, the infection rate is minimal, but that’s only because we acted.

The idea of a so called “second wave”, for me, does nothing more than fuel people’s hunger to act without caution. It puts the idea in our heads that we can breathe easy because, for now at least, the virus is gone.

[Lencoboy]

I don’t like the whole “second wave” thing as it implies that the virus is on some kind of hiatus but will return from its slumber eventually. Influenza viruses work that way, coronaviruses don’t.

Coronaviruses behave like cancers, not as serious or aggressive of course, but in the same way a cancer will grow uncontrollably without intervention, coronaviruses are the same. If we just let it do it’s thing it will engulf vast amounts of the population and it’ll do it very quickly.

This is why I can’t understand anyone protesting any control measures. The only reason this virus is in a kind of “slumber” is because we have intervened in its progress. The death counts are incredibly low, the infection rate is minimal, but that’s only because we acted.

The idea of a so called “second wave”, for me, does nothing more than fuel people’s hunger to act without caution. It puts the idea in our heads that we can breathe easy because, for now at least, the virus is gone.

I personally believe that the term 'second wave' is perfect fodder for the serial know-it-alls and certain newspapers, and obviously makes for more exciting reading.

After all, bad and shocking news sells papers and/or generates clicks, even if it isn't completely gospel.