Jump to content

Generic Virus Thread


villakram
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • VT Supporter

Had my second Pfizer on Thursday just gone. Pretty much the exact same reaction as my first Pfizer jab, sore/dead arm for 24-36 hours. I didn’t experience the headaches or other reactions that were predicted as a possibility by the person who administered it.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, a m ole said:

Moderna, but supposed to be the same isn’t it?

Wasn’t expecting it to be this strong though.

Yes, Moderna the same. Big reaction to second jab. 

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, a m ole said:

Moderna, but supposed to be the same isn’t it?

Wasn’t expecting it to be this strong though.

But at least you almost certainly won't die from Coronavirus now. 

Winner winner chicken dinner. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
1 hour ago, Mark Albrighton said:

Had my second Pfizer on Thursday just gone. Pretty much the exact same reaction as my first Pfizer jab, sore/dead arm for 24-36 hours. I didn’t experience the headaches or other reactions that were predicted as a possibility by the person who administered it.

Had my second today, shoulder aces like hell but its not spreading. Hopefully it stays that way.

Glad it's done

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, a m ole said:

Did anyone else have a really strong reaction to the second jab? My entire shoulder and neck is stiff and everything aches. No sickness but I’m **** nackered. Never had flu before.

Is Bill Gates controlling my wifi? 😕

Yes I had my second Pfizer Thursday before last, the doctor said people often wake during the night with flu like symptoms but as I work night shifts it hit me like a truck just before going home.  Could barely get out of my car I was so stiff and took the next night off as I was exhausted (insert shitty Carry On gif).  I was a bit annoyed they didnt pay me sick leave for a day but if I self-isolated for 10 days they would pay the whole lot.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

UK,  from 54k down to 23 k in 10 days is really encouraging. 

I truly believe the UK has beaten it now.  It was a brave move but it seems to have worked.

Really pleased for the UK I am.

I’m not so sure. It is encouraging, but I’m not sure what’s behind the drop . Think I read 132 died yesterday , but how many of them were on the way out anyway I’m not sure . 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
3 minutes ago, Rugeley Villa said:

I’m not so sure. It is encouraging, but I’m not sure what’s behind the drop . Think I read 132 died yesterday , but how many of them were on the way out anyway I’m not sure . 

Same here, I think everyone is scratching theirs heads at such a sudden drop because it doesn’t quite add up.

We should have seen an uptick as a result of the removal of restrictions. 

Maybe the cases were so high going into the “freedom day” because of the Euros that not doing that anymore has more than offset the uptick of opening nightclubs, bigger weddings etc. 

That’s the only thing I can thing of.

The sharp increase in deaths is as a result of the high spike that started a few weeks ago.

I’d be thrilled if we’ve finally got the worst of this behind us and it becomes manageable without major infringements on daily life. 🤞 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
10 minutes ago, Genie said:

Same here, I think everyone is scratching theirs heads at such a sudden drop because it doesn’t quite add up.

We should have seen an uptick as a result of the removal of restrictions. 

Maybe the cases were so high going into the “freedom day” because of the Euros that not doing that anymore has more than offset the uptick of opening nightclubs, bigger weddings etc. 

That’s the only thing I can thing of.

The sharp increase in deaths is as a result of the high spike that started a few weeks ago.

I’d be thrilled if we’ve finally got the worst of this behind us and it becomes manageable without major infringements on daily life. 🤞 

It could be this but it could also be that enough people have been vaccinated that is having an impact as well (certainly on hospital numbers). Has there been any concrete evidence that the vaccine is preventing transmission yet? I know that there is a suspicion is does but, not sure I have seen anything concrete. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
13 minutes ago, Genie said:

We should have seen an uptick as a result of the removal of restrictions. 

Not meaning to pick on you here, but this 'should' is the wrong mindset IMO. Simply, we don't really know why case growth starts at specific points and ends at others, it's too random and too much noise. Lockdowns seem to have an impact on transmission, but they don't seem to be necessary for a wave to end; waves have ended at far less than the herd immunity threshold in countries which have not bothered or barely bothered with any social distancing. The dynamics of the infection cycle are probably very complex and multi-causal; like you, I can imagine a just-so story where it's about less indoor mixing after the football ended, and better weather meaning people spent more time outdoors, but who knows really. Similarly, *maybe* cases will start rising again soon as a result of the relaxation of restrictions, but maybe they won't.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, cyrusr said:

It could be this but it could also be that enough people have been vaccinated that is having an impact as well (certainly on hospital numbers). Has there been any concrete evidence that the vaccine is preventing transmission yet? I know that there is a suspicion is does but, not sure I have seen anything concrete. 

I found this study from PHE saying it cuts out transmission

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/one-dose-of-covid-19-vaccine-can-cut-household-transmission-by-up-to-half

Quote

This new research shows that those who do become infected 3 weeks after receiving one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or AstraZeneca vaccine were between 38% and 49% less likely to pass the virus on to their household contacts than those who were unvaccinated.

 

Protection was seen from around 14 days after vaccination, with similar levels of protection regardless of age of cases or contacts.

 

Edited by Mozzavfc
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • VT Supporter

Are they still releasing data on the number of tests being conducted as well as the volume of positive results? Surely that would be a clearer indicator of how things are moving rather than simply looking at the number of positive cases, if less tests are being conducted then it stands to reason that positive results will be trending downwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

Not meaning to pick on you here, but this 'should' is the wrong mindset IMO. Simply, we don't really know why case growth starts at specific points and ends at others, it's too random and too much noise. Lockdowns seem to have an impact on transmission, but they don't seem to be necessary for a wave to end; waves have ended at far less than the herd immunity threshold in countries which have not bothered or barely bothered with any social distancing. The dynamics of the infection cycle are probably very complex and multi-causal; like you, I can imagine a just-so story where it's about less indoor mixing after the football ended, and better weather meaning people spent more time outdoors, but who knows really. Similarly, *maybe* cases will start rising again soon as a result of the relaxation of restrictions, but maybe they won't.

In general terms though we know that more mixing tends to equate to an increase in infections and transmissions. Then the opposite is true hence the success of lockdowns and social distancing. Theres other factors as you listed too, but as general rules go, putting more people closer together causes infection to spread.

I think it’s fair to say that an increase was expected after the 19th over the previous 2-3 weeks.

However, It’s starting to look like those preceding weeks were not normal weeks because of the Euros so it skewed/hid the general uptick from more social mixing and reduction of number limitations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
2 hours ago, Genie said:

We should have seen an uptick as a result of the removal of restrictions

Why should we have seen this? I apart from the law forcing (lol) you to wear a mask, in reality what actually changed?

Many people are still wearing masks

Many pubs have kept table service

I said it before and I'm saying it now. What actually changed? The pubs are less full now than they were before because the football has finished

It was the lifting of almost no restrictions and those were lifted are still being practiced by a lot of people and by a lot of places. Places are less busy than they were before "the restrictions" were lifted

And thats before we go into the whole sunny weather and beer gardens etc

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • VT Supporter
20 minutes ago, bickster said:

Why should we have seen this? I apart from the law forcing (lol) you to wear a mask, in reality what actually changed?

Many people are still wearing masks

Many pubs have kept table service

I said it before and I'm saying it now. What actually changed? The pubs are less full now than they were before because the football has finished

It was the lifting of almost no restrictions and those were lifted are still being practiced by a lot of people and by a lot of places. Places are less busy than they were before "the restrictions" were lifted

And thats before we go into the whole sunny weather and beer gardens etc

I don’t think a single “expert” predicted a reduction of cases post 19th July which is why I think so many are scratching their heads.

Reopening of nightclubs and all other businesses told to close, scrapping of rule of 6 indoors, rule of 30 outdoors, unlimited visitors in care homes, removing table service, removing masks, removing 1m rule etc were all expected to have some sort of increase on the infection rate. 
 

Incidentally a colleague of mine had Friday off work last week to go to a wedding. It was a Asian style wedding day with 150 people. He said initially some people were wearing masks at times but then by the end of the day everyone was pissed and hugging, dancing, kissing etc. He said if one person had Corona before the wedding then dozens would have come away with it.

Now this is the world we live in. I’m not suggesting we don’t have big weddings or reintroduce restrictions. Just saying these kind of events are going to spawn new infections by the nature of how it moves from person to person.

The relationship between social interaction and virus transmission is very strong. I’m not sure why the point is being argued tbh, it’s not exactly a ground breaking theory.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
53 minutes ago, Genie said:

Reopening of nightclubs and all other businesses told to close, scrapping of rule of 6 indoors, rule of 30 outdoors, unlimited visitors in care homes, removing table service, removing masks, removing 1m rule etc were all expected to have some sort of increase on the infection rate. 

I'll concede the reopening of clubs will have an effect but I still suspect more people were out drinking in pubs for the football than have been since even with the re-opening of clubs. The rules of 6 and 30 have been pretty much ignored by the general population all year, I can't see how abandoning that will have had any effect whatsoever. Care homes are where absolutely most people are double vaccinated and given the ages of the people in them, the vast majority of visitors will be too. Table service remains in many many pubs, regardless of the rule being lifted. My observation of people's behaviour in shops etc is that many are still observing the 1m/2m rules albeit subconsciously and I don't see any more people in supermarkets than there were before. I notice more people not wearing masks when they go into a garage say than in supermarkets, people seem to be saying, if I'm in a place for a long time, I'll wear a mask, if I'm just nipping in to pay for fuel, I can't be bothered.

I think the "experts" are typical scientists, they don't live in the real world, they live in this world of models and stats without much appreciation of what was actually happening on the ground. They are indeed the sort of people you'd say.... need to get out more

For me the large increases in this wave were mostly about the Football. I'm driving around most evenings and the pubs and bars are generally empty on the inside. If its a nice day people are in the beer gardens, other than that the insides are empty unless its a food lead establishment and really nothing has changed in those types of pubs

I really do think football drove more people to drink than clubs opening and since then peoples attendance at pubs has significantly dropped. Clubs only cater to a very narrow age range, pubs and the football cater to all. Ones gone up but the other has come down significantly more

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Moderator
4 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Not meaning to pick on you here, but this 'should' is the wrong mindset IMO. Simply, we don't really know why case growth starts at specific points and ends at others, it's too random and too much noise. Lockdowns seem to have an impact on transmission, but they don't seem to be necessary for a wave to end; waves have ended at far less than the herd immunity threshold in countries which have not bothered or barely bothered with any social distancing. The dynamics of the infection cycle are probably very complex and multi-causal; like you, I can imagine a just-so story where it's about less indoor mixing after the football ended, and better weather meaning people spent more time outdoors, but who knows really. Similarly, *maybe* cases will start rising again soon as a result of the relaxation of restrictions, but maybe they won't.

I know what you're saying, and accept it. There is (to me) though some simplistic facts. The virus is still present and the virus spreads through aerosol transmission. There are still 30 million people not fully vaxxed, and 20 million not vaxxed at all. Vaxxed people can still catch and spread it. The R rate is still above 1.

Tests are down by nigh on a million a week, and positives from tests down by 100K a week.

We don't know the factors behind the big reduction in tests - is it because fewer people are getting what they think are symptoms and so reflecting an actual fall in cases, or are people deciding not to get tested even if they feel they might have it? or is it solely schools and workplaces testing less because of summer holidays? Clearly if you stop testing, or reduce testing you will detect fewer cases. I posted a while ago that it's hospital admissions that should be the driver at the moment in tracking and managing the pandemic in the UK, and these are still rising (nearly 6000 a week, now). Obviously they lag a week or two behind cases, but I think what I'm saying is you're right about "should", but the science people do, if not 100% know, then at least have strong scientific theory around why cases grow and decline and even end. The vaccination numbers are not sufficient, even with additional immunity from post covid illness protection to match the high level of infectiousness of the virus, given the 20 million+ unprotected people. It's more than a "don't really know" level of knowledge around growth and ending points, from my understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, bickster said:

I'll concede the reopening of clubs will have an effect but I still suspect more people were out drinking in pubs for the football than have been since even with the re-opening of clubs. The rules of 6 and 30 have been pretty much ignored by the general population all year, I can't see how abandoning that will have had any effect whatsoever. Care homes are where absolutely most people are double vaccinated and given the ages of the people in them, the vast majority of visitors will be too. Table service remains in many many pubs, regardless of the rule being lifted. My observation of people's behaviour in shops etc is that many are still observing the 1m/2m rules albeit subconsciously and I don't see any more people in supermarkets than there were before. I notice more people not wearing masks when they go into a garage say than in supermarkets, people seem to be saying, if I'm in a place for a long time, I'll wear a mask, if I'm just nipping in to pay for fuel, I can't be bothered.

I think the "experts" are typical scientists, they don't live in the real world, they live in this world of models and stats without much appreciation of what was actually happening on the ground. They are indeed the sort of people you'd say.... need to get out more

For me the large increases in this wave were mostly about the Football. I'm driving around most evenings and the pubs and bars are generally empty on the inside. If its a nice day people are in the beer gardens, other than that the insides are empty unless its a food lead establishment and really nothing has changed in those types of pubs

I really do think football drove more people to drink than clubs opening and since then peoples attendance at pubs has significantly dropped. Clubs only cater to a very narrow age range, pubs and the football cater to all. Ones gone up but the other has come down significantly more

I think there is something in this. 

The only REALLY big change is with clubs. But that's a fairly minor section of the population.  You're talking about what, 18-25s in the main? That's about 5m people.  How many go regularly?  How many don't go clubbing at all? 

The majority of those that WILL go clubbing will definitely have been socialising a plenty.  Illegal raves and house parties before the pubs reopened, drinking in pubs for the month before the clubs opened.

I wonder how much Covid actually ripped through that population (who wouldn't be too badly affected by it) already in the last 12 months?  

So from the 5m subtract those who have already had it, who don't really go clubbing and who have been double jabbed and you might actually end up with quite a small demographic. 

Edited by sidcow
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â