• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

Gutter Boy said:
Yes, but it's 13,000 down from last sunday

Half term wont effect the numbers for another 2-3 weeks

Things will oscillate a bit, but this does look like schoolkids have now hit saturation/herd immunity (they were up-to between 70-80% by all estimates a week or two ago).
Click to expand...

Nice. We not testing in schools now? If we are then half term will mean we aren't.
 
Gutter Boy said:
Yes, but it's 13,000 down from last sunday

Half term wont effect the numbers for another 2-3 weeks

Things will oscillate a bit, but this does look like schoolkids have now hit saturation/herd immunity (they were up-to between 70-80% by all estimates a week or two ago).
Click to expand...
Can you direct me to where those estimates are made? I work in public health and have seen no such figures.
 
Aldo said:
Why not?
Click to expand...
Tbh the Lateral flow tests are not great unless you are already showing symptoms which should trigger a PCR test anyway. By then the only advantage I can see is the turnaround time for the result of the LFT is around 24 hours quickerthan the PCR.
 
Robspur12 said:
Tbh the Lateral flow tests are not great unless you are already showing symptoms which should trigger a PCR test anyway. By then the only advantage I can see is the turnaround time for the result of the LFT is around 24 hours quickerthan the PCR.
Click to expand...

Tbh these days we shouldn't bother testing unless people are proper sick.

The ons testing keeps tabs on how many people have it and where the hotzones are. The rest is pretty much a waste. Other countries don't test anywhere near where we do.
 
Robspur12 said:
Can you direct me to where those estimates are made? I work in public health and have seen no such figures.
Click to expand...

It's the University of Cambridge data: https://www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/now-casting/nowcasting-and-forecasting-20th-october-2021/.

In the tables click to 'attack rate' then 'by age'.

This graph is produced from the data:

FCKedSIWYAovNMQ
 
Robspur12 said:
Tbh the Lateral flow tests are not great unless you are already showing symptoms which should trigger a PCR test anyway. By then the only advantage I can see is the turnaround time for the result of the LFT is around 24 hours quickerthan the PCR.
Click to expand...

we've been doing regular LF's for the school, they flagged my daughter last month as positive, she took another, also positive, so we did the PCR drive through next day, that came back positive too so we did the isolation/WFH as required, my daughter had no symptoms at any point
 
Robspur12 said:
Tbh the Lateral flow tests are not great unless you are already showing symptoms which should trigger a PCR test anyway. By then the only advantage I can see is the turnaround time for the result of the LFT is around 24 hours quickerthan the PCR.
Click to expand...
Whilst that may be the case, if the school is asking for the LFTs to be taken, then why wouldn't you?
 
Baleforce said:
we've been doing regular LF's for the school, they flagged my daughter last month as positive, she took another, also positive, so we did the PCR drive through next day, that came back positive too so we did the isolation/WFH as required, my daughter had no symptoms at any point
Click to expand...
That's good, the sensitivity is mostly around 58%-60% so generally it will only test positive for covid in a narrow window. Mostly the problem both anecdotally and in vivo has been false negatives. My lot test regularly, recently daily with my wife and son only testing positive after symptoms.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Robspur12 said:
That's good, the sensitivity is mostly around 58%-60% so generally it will only test positive for covid in a narrow window. Mostly the problem both anecdotally and in vivo has been false negatives. My lot test regularly, recently daily with my wife and son only testing positive after symptoms.
Click to expand...

three more of us in the house, did regular LF and PCR tests for the next two weeks, none of us tested positive at any point, which I found very surprising
 
Aldo said:
Whilst that may be the case, if the school is asking for the LFTs to be taken, then why wouldn't you?
Click to expand...
I dont necessarily disagree as @Baleforce says it has worked for his family. I am just concerned that kids are testing negative and getting false assurance. Personally I would prefer if the high school kids wore masks and maintained social distancing. All the other measures seem to have gone out of the window in favour of a not very sensitive test that most people don't complete. I don't blame @markysimmo at all.
 
Last edited:
glorygloryeze said:
Hi Steff,
I'm going to try and answer you before i go away for a few days.

What do i mean by a relative media blackout? Well, the fact that in the UK, over 1,600 people have died after having had the vaccine, in Europe the EMA report it as 30,000 plus whilst in the USA the figures are 10,000+.
Now, where is the discussion in the news about this? How can a 'vaccine' have the constant label of 'safe and effective', be slowly mandated across several countries and yet be killing this number of people in less than a year since rollout? Have you ever heard of such a lethal vaccine/medicine/treatment that wasn't paused, halted until investigations as to why the deaths are happening have occurred?

The swine flu vaccine was halted when there were deaths from it in the tens in the UK, as a comparison. In fact, there were steps to mandate various Health workers at that time before the rollout was halted because of such deaths and the fact some people (who were otherwise previously healthy) suffered narcolepsy afterwards. As an illustration, some of those people were granted compensation for their injuries years afterwards.

In my eyes the media has ramped up the covid fears in comparison to dampening down the side effects and deaths from the vaccine, whilst pushing for mandating them. Imagine, pushing for mandating people take a medicine that will often kill someone!

The reasons why this is being done?
Well i think it's multifaceted and perhaps we can go into it when i'm back but firstly i believe having access to the bodies of everyone on the planet via mandated jabs is a godsend for those who believe there are too many people on the planet (or too many of certain types of 'useless eaters' on the planet). There was even an article in The Spectator the other week that said if we are serious about saving the climate the best thing we can do is not have any offspring.
If some are dying prematurely from this vaccine, then those of that mindstate (like the author of that Spectator article) are like 'hey-ho'...

Secondly, the idea of 'vaccine passports' as part of universally trackable biometric Identifiers has long been a goal for big tech and several people who rub shoulders with them in government and this is a great way in. I believe it also goes hand-in-hand with a new digitally-based economic system the World Bank wants to usher in.
The EU have had working documents and proposals around vaccine passports BEFORE this Covid-19 situation (see here: https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/default/files/vaccination/docs/2019-2022_roadmap_en.pdf)
Microsoft have a patent out for a new cryptocurreny system using "Body activity data". One has to ask how exactly will 'body activity data' be processed? Details of this patent are here: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020060606
Note: This all sounds like sci-fi, but remember that a massive corporation like Microsoft doesn't just apply for an international patent like this for a laugh, they must have a future plan and want to make sure their 'foot is in the door' early enough when this presumably becomes relevant.

Thirdly, the pharmaceutical corps involved have been given indemnity from prosecution by several governments for any vaccine injuries or deaths. I think that then means if people who suffer from them - and who took the vaccine on advice from the government, health authorities etc - organise and work together the focus of their ire will then be on said governments and health authorities who were supposed to be the 'referees' or 'guardians' protecting against any overreach by Big Pharma in the situation: i.e. they should be protecting the general population more once side-effects and deaths were known and not go the opposite way.
I think those two groups know this and whilst they might want to halt things also know the risk of mass revolts directly against them is too high and now are in self-preservation mode. A good way of hiding the side-effects/deaths is to have everyone take the vaccine; that way there is no 'control group' and deaths of healthy people more than a few weeks/months afterwards will not be so obvious and just put down to 'one of those things' - or even covid-19 itself! Imagine if a distinct population group far bigger than the Amish community in the States (who are also against taking any vaccines) don't show the same effects etc, then it will be hard to hide the issues. Hence, the policy is "let's make sure anyone who doesn't take the jab is demonized because 'they are killing granny' (even though Granny has taken her own covid-19 jab...)

I don't believe that report from the AMA. I believe several other scientists and doctors who point out that these mRNA type of vaccines have been trials to be developed, tested and rolled out years ago when there were the SARS and MERS outbreaks in the last 20 years. They could not get past the animal trials hence why no similar vaccines had been approved for human use until now (and even now, the FDA have granted them EMERGENCY approval rather than the usual full approval that normal vaccines get after passing both the animal AND human trail phases). In the UK, the FDA equivalent, the MHRA, have given the vaccine 'temporary authorisation'. The animal trials showed very bad outcomes for the animals involved (after initially showing encouraging results) and hence the developments couldn't get past the animal trail phase. If they could have, i think we'd have had mRNA vaccines for SARS/MERS etc long before 2020.
Papers on such studies are as follows:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/a...HlnwMqM-H-MvUksEdg80MS5lCrAIGvne00B08bIScOn-M

https://journals.asm.org/doi/full/10.1128/JVI.78.22.12672-12676.2004

Further discussion also here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-020-00462-y

These mRNA vaccines have not been administered en mass before, we don't know the long-term effects (and we know some people are dying and being maimed by them). It's new novel technology which we haven't used on this number of humans before.
As an emergency option for treatment for the vulnerable, i understand the emergency/temporary approval for the most vulnerable. But mandating it for the whole of society, otherwise one cannot 'take part in society freely'?? That is wrong (and that's me putting it mildly!)
Happy to get into this more when i get back end of the week.
Click to expand...

I appreciate the detailed response mate.
 
Robspur12 said:
So that's the percentage infected with covid nothing to do with herd immunity. Especially not in children where the immune response is usually small they don't tend to build up immunity.
Click to expand...

Where do you get that children only get small immunity? As far as i'm aware they have the best and most robust immune reactions of any age group.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210218/kids-robust-immune-systems-may-shield-from-covid

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...-are-better-protected-from-covid-than-adults/

I've said before i'm against vaccinating under 18s. It's not for their protection it's to try and reach herd immunity or slow spread. The risk from the vaccines actually seems greater than them catching the virus.
 
Last edited:
Lilbaz said:
Where do you get that children only get small immunity? As far as i'm aware they have the best and most robust immune reactions of any age group.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210218/kids-robust-immune-systems-may-shield-from-covid

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...-are-better-protected-from-covid-than-adults/

I've said before i'm against vaccinating under 18s. It's not for their protection it's to try and reach herd immunity or slow spread. The risk from the vaccines actually seems greater than them catching the virus.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the links an interesting read. Firstly I work in public health not immunology. Sorry I should have been clearer in my statement earlier, I have edited “usually” to “can be.” Those articles tell us what we already know, that some children elicit a stronger response to covid (not all btw there are multiple hypotheses as to why kids don’t get hit as hard including fewer ace 2 receptors in the lower respiratory system for the covid spike protein to bind to) . However, what they do not detail (because no one knows) is the degree of lasting immunity. We now know that both vaccine and post infection immunity wanes, hence the booster program so herd immunity is probably not possible to achieve especially with Delta. So even though kids are not affected by coronavirus in the same way as adults it does not mean they cannot contract it and pass it on. My 7 year old passed covid onto my wife and I know of other similar cases of that happening. If they can contract it once and covid belongs to the group of coronaviruses that mutate and evade immunity then they can catch it again and transmit. Therefore talk about herd immunity is wide of the mark.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back