Generic Virus Thread

[bannedfromHandV]

19 minutes ago, blandy said:

Perhaps an analogy will help with your wondering?

You know bullet proof vests. Think of the vivid vaccine a bit like them. They don’t stop people shooting at you, they don’t stop you being hit. They don’t always stop you getting injured if you catch a bullet. But they make serious injury or death much less likely.

Yes, they’re uncomfortable, a bit, but overall wouldn’t you want to wear one in a battleground?

I get the theory Blandy, I really do.

I appreciate what you’ve tried to do but I’m not so poor that I need it dumbing down to a level I can comprehend.

 

[jimmygreaves]

3 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I’ve shown you a clear fact already, my partners niece, had the virus before being jabbed and since and just as ill both times.

Mate, you must know that a single case can't be considered strong evidence against literally millions of other cases as counterpoints.

[Ingram85]

5 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I get the theory Blandy, I really do.

I appreciate what you’ve tried to do but I’m not so poor that I need it dumbing down to a level I can comprehend.

 

[bannedfromHandV]

Just now, jimmygreaves said:

Mate, you must know that a single case can't be considered strong evidence against literally millions of other cases as counterpoints.

Yep, but then I suspect that it’s not the only example out there.

The train of thought now seems to be that everyone who now catches the virus would be in a far worse position had they not already had the jabs (unless of course they’ve died, though I note there hasn’t been much data released around that, at least not to my knowledge anyway) but here’s the thing, before the jab the vast majority of people were only suffering mild or even no symptoms at all, so how do we know that the vaccination has made that much of a difference for those people - it’s an assumption as much as it is a fact.

As far as I’m aware, and I’m not an expert and people have invested far more time and energy than me in the numbers and data but so far as I’m aware, it’s still largely the old and infirm who are dying, sure there are exceptions as there always is but i don’t think the demographics for the deaths have shifted much in the past 2 years.

[blandy]

3 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I’m not so poor that I need it dumbing down to a level I can comprehend

Apologies if it came across as patronising. That wasn't the intention.

I do get the point that you understand the "theory" around vaccines, and I also get that it's entirely human and normal to have scepticism around what we're presented with. It's completely natural.

I mean I confess when the vaccines were first raised and mentioned, I thought "I'd better get one" (I'd already had covid by then and it was nasty - but once I got an appointment date I kind of ummed and ahed around "should I cancel the appointment?" because "it's all a bit unproven, I've already had covid, so I'm protected aren't I?" and a bit of a dislike of the whole drugs and medicines thing, unless I'm actually seriously ill/in pain - I mean I broke my collar bone quite badly a few years ago and didn't take one painkiller at all, for example, though it hurt like hell. I'm not a zealot for medicines and drugs and stuff.

But I did get the vaccine, not just for me, but for others. And since then and since the number of deaths and all that has happened I'm really glad I did. Same with the booster. We've had a year, now of people getting jabbed and a handful of people from the 10s of millions have had an adverse reaction. It's completely safe. It works. For all the bonkers stuff about microchips and 5G, to the more normal scepticism or worry, or "I'm low risk from Covid, I'll be fine without it", it is absolutely established fact that it is safe and it works and it protects us.

I'm a ( I believe) rational, logical thinker.Others are better at emotional thinking, or creative thinking, but the way my brain work is based around facts and logic, and I'm absolutely certain that the vaccine is both a benefit for the population in general and for individuals - collective and personal benefit. It protects others by reducing the spread if you get infected, it protects people with other conditions by keeping more hospital beds and appointments available for those people. It protects us as individuals from severe covid symptoms, it protects health workers by reducing the number of infected people they come into contact with. That is all absolute fact.

On that basis, I struggle when people still, despite all that being established fact, freely and openly available, still decide "nah, ain't doing it". I get that people are scared of flying, or of spiders or of whatever, and we're only rational up to a point, but surely, eventually we have to recognise that this virus is real, vaccines are proven effective and we're not going to come to any harm from them, at the very worst. If we don't then frankly, there's no hope for people.

[sidcow]

1 hour ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I’ve shown you a clear fact already, my partners niece, had the virus before being jabbed and since and just as ill both times.

Ive also already clearly stated that I am in favour of offering jabs to those at risk, ie the elderly and infirm - as we already do for the common flu.

Anyway, I’m done, I’ve ranted and said my piece, I knew who would respond and how, honestly I’m having a bad few days with my mental health so it’s manifesting in this stuff but I stand by everything I’ve written.

I'm sorry to hear your having a bad few days. There's a thread on here somewhere about people taking a break from social media and finding it beneficial for their mental health.  Maybe have an think about that. Keep the phone in the pocket for a while. 

At least Christmas is here to make everyone a little bit more miserable! 

[blandy]

3 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

before the jab the vast majority of people were only suffering mild or even no symptoms at all, so how do we know that the vaccination has made that much of a difference for those people - it’s an assumption as much as it is a fact.

It's more than an assumption. What the scientists do is they take blood from people who have been jabbed and then infect it with the virus and  analyse what happens. The results show that the vaccine creates anti-bodies and T-cells, which fight the virus (previous variants). They also showed that for the Omicron variant, they don't do nearly as well. Then they take blood from people who have had a booster and repeat the test, and the results are much better - the vaccine is effective in reducing the viral effects of Omicron.

Then, there's human statistics from populations across the world - the percentage of people jabbed becoming seriously ill v the percentage unjabbed becoming seriously ill. Once vaccinated, the percentage drop hugely, increasing again as time goes by, but still better than not jabbed.

This stuff is being constantly monitored, measured and reported on, in peer reviewed reports across the world. So we do know.

And this process, this peer reviewing, scientific reporting is what is showing the differences in the genetic make up of Omicron, of the (so far) reduced medical impact compared with the Beta variant in South African their population. There's nothing being hidden by the science. Politicians in various places have under-reacted, over-reacted, denied the existence of the virus, suggested drinking disinfectant and all kinds of crap, but the evidence led process is free to follow and view and read.

[sidcow]

26 minutes ago, blandy said:

It's more than an assumption. What the scientists do is they take blood from people who have been jabbed and then infect it with the virus and  analyse what happens. The results show that the vaccine creates anti-bodies and T-cells, which fight the virus (previous variants). They also showed that for the Omicron variant, they don't do nearly as well. Then they take good from people who have had a booster and repeat the test, and the results are much better - the vaccine is effective in reducing the viral effects of Omicron.

Then, there's human statistics from populations across the world - the percentage of people jabbed becoming seriously ill v the percentage unjabbed becoming seriously ill. Once vaccinated, the percentage drop hugely, increasing again as time goes by, but still better than not jabbed.

This stuff is being constantly monitored, measured and reported on, in peer reviewed reports across the world. So we do know.

And this process, this peer reviewing, scientific reporting is what is showing the differences in the genetic make up of Omicron, of the (so far) reduced medical impact compared with the Beta variant in South African their population. There's nothing being hidden by the science. Politicians in various places have under-reacted, over-reacted, denied the existence of the virus, suggested drinking disinfectant and all kinds of crap, but the evidence led process is free to follow and view and read.

I'm in awe of your considered reasoning. 

I'm more a fly off the handle kind of guy

[Swerbs]

U.K. Study Finds No Evidence Omicron Cases Are Less Severe Than Delta

Quote

A previous Covid-19 recovery provides little shield against infection with the omicron variant, a research team from Imperial College London showed in a large study that underlines the importance of booster shots.

Having had Covid probably only offers 19% protection against omicron, the study showed on Friday. That was roughly in line with two doses of vaccine, which the team estimated were as much as 20% effective against omicron. Adding a booster dose helped dramatically, blocking an estimated 55% to 80% of symptomatic cases.

The Imperial College London team analyzed all the PCR test-confirmed Covid cases in England between Nov. 29 and Dec. 11, making it one of the most expansive examinations yet at omicron's potential to evade the body's defenses. The results were in line with the picture emerging of the variant's capacity to elude protection from previous infection or inoculation and spread faster than previous iterations of the virus.

There was no evidence of omicron cases being less severe than delta, based on the proportion of people testing positive who had symptoms or went to the hospital, the team said.

Just how severe omicron cases will be remains unclear. It's too soon to say how hospitalizations will play out in the U.K. In South Africa, which announced the discovery of the variant on Nov. 25, authorities said on Friday the rate of hospitalizations seems to be lower than during the country's earlier wave of delta infections.

 

[bobzy]

FWIW pals, I feel much better today… but am still isolating which is SO BORING. 

[El Zen]

I’ve been having a slight cough and a runny nose all week. Did a lat flow test monday night, which was negative, but stayed home from work anyway, to be sure. Did another lat flow today, which came up positive. Feeling just fine, but am fearing that xmas is buggered for me and the family. 

Edited December 17, 2021 by El Zen

[Wainy316]

1 hour ago, bannedfromHandV said:

As far as I’m aware, and I’m not an expert and people have invested far more time and energy than me in the numbers and data but so far as I’m aware, it’s still largely the old and infirm who are dying, sure there are exceptions as there always is but i don’t think the demographics for the deaths have shifted much in the past 2 years.

Well as very basic observation earlier this year we were having 1,000+ die a day with lower case numbers than we have now.

[bickster]

14 minutes ago, El Zen said:

I’ve been having a slight cough and a runny nose all week. Did a lat flow test monday night, which was negative, but stayed home from work anyway, to be sure. Did another lat flow today, which came up positive. Feeling just fine, but am fearing that xmas is buggered for me and the family. 

If its any consolation, a work colleague went out with friends on Saturday. by Sunday one of them tested positive with a Lat Flow. All seven then tested positive with Lat Flows. They did PCRs on the Monday... 3 still positive, 4 already negative

There's a few local stories like that with Omnicron. We already know the gestation period to symptoms in much shorter, it also seems that the virus generally hangs around in the body for most people a lot less than previous mutations

[Genie]

1 hour ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Yep, but then I suspect that it’s not the only example out there.

The train of thought now seems to be that everyone who now catches the virus would be in a far worse position had they not already had the jabs (unless of course they’ve died, though I note there hasn’t been much data released around that, at least not to my knowledge anyway) but here’s the thing, before the jab the vast majority of people were only suffering mild or even no symptoms at all, so how do we know that the vaccination has made that much of a difference for those people - it’s an assumption as much as it is a fact.

As far as I’m aware, and I’m not an expert and people have invested far more time and energy than me in the numbers and data but so far as I’m aware, it’s still largely the old and infirm who are dying, sure there are exceptions as there always is but i don’t think the demographics for the deaths have shifted much in the past 2 years.

If someone with cancer you knew had taken the treatment on offer but then sadly died, but that same treatment was effective for 70% of other patients would you say that the medicine wasn’t effective or didn’t work?

That’s seems to be the crux of the example of your relative. There’s a wealth of data showing how effective it is at reducing serious illness and death. Like every other medicine on the planet, it’s not 100%, but that doesn’t also make it ineffective.

 

[LondonLax]

22 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Well as very basic observation earlier this year we were having 1,000+ die a day with lower case numbers than we have now.

Although I’m only playing devils advocate the counter to that could be that the virus took the most vulnerable in the first waves and now has fewer left it can kill. 

[HanoiVillan]

40 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Well as very basic observation earlier this year we were having 1,000+ die a day with lower case numbers than we have now.

. . . in an almost entirely unvaccinated population.

[HanoiVillan]

51 minutes ago, El Zen said:

I’ve been having a slight cough and a runny nose all week. Did a lat flow test monday night, which was negative, but stayed home from work anyway, to be sure. Did another lat flow today, which came up positive. Feeling just fine, but am fearing that xmas is buggered for me and the family. 

I'm sorry to hear that boss. I find out tonight if I can fly to Canada on Sunday, I know that feeling of doom myself.

[Wainy316]

3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

. . . in an almost entirely unvaccinated population.

Yeah, that's the point of the post.

[HanoiVillan]

3 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

Yeah, that's the point of the post.

Gotcha, sorry, misunderstood what you were saying

[sidcow]

For those wondering why there is this huge call for booster jabs. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-59694961

Booster could provide 85% protection against Omicron - study

Quote

UK researchers have analysed the likely impact a Covid booster shot will have on Omicron and say it could provide about 85% protection against severe illness.

The protection is a bit less than vaccines gave against earlier versions of Covid, but it means the top-up dose should still keep many people out of hospital.

The modelling, from the team at Imperial College London, is based on limited information on Omicron.

The researchers say there is a high degree of uncertainty until more real world information is gathered.

Experts are still trying to figure out how mild or severe Omicron is compared to Delta or other Covid variants.