COVID-19 UK & Beyond

[woolley]

1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

Herd immunity does look rather sketchy at the moment. 

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/studies-report-rapid-loss-of-covid-19-antibodies-67650

It does, I quite agree. The problem is that so does everything else. People in general are a pretty mundane lot. They see economies opening up and they think doh that's that over then. Will be a big shock if it comes roaring back again. Fascinating to see what will happen around the world at that stage. I still wonder if there will be calls to try to eradicate it globally. We are a long way from that point now but if global capitalist forces see this going on for wave after wave, the pressure could build. 

[P.K.]

It's not as though global eradication hasn't been done before....

[woolley]

On 7/7/2020 at 9:28 AM, TheTeapot said:

You've really got to wonder about the scientific advice they've constantly claimed they followed. There has obviously been something going on behind the scenes, that Witty guy has certainly seemed uncomfortable with how things have been going and has almost stepped out of line a few times. I honestly do not understand how you can even consider herd immunity as a viable strategy for a NOVEL virus, and especially a coronavirus. Sure, it is possible it might work, but you cannot know when you have no/limited knowledge. It made no sense at the start to me, and I have posted to that effect previously (I think I described it as 'total shit'), and got shouted down for it. Now that the pandemic has been running for a while the evidence is showing how wrong this is. Read this if you're interested, pretty big sample size from a country that got hit hard

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31483-5/fulltext

or a more simple version on the beeb

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-53315983

I think the answer is that people are naturally optimistic and try to see things in the most favourable light. This extends to politicians and scientists, so when this beast appeared on the horizon, there was scientific modeling for herd immunity of other infections on file, it seemed plausible and would cause least damage to the economy so a consensus was reached to go with it. There is a further example of this optimism by the commentator in the BBC link who says that the optimum strategy is to find the best vaccine option whereas we all know that this is no more guaranteed than herd immunity. It's all very well Starmer et al bleating about things that have been done, but you can bet that whoever had been in power the response would have been remarkably similar and driven by the same scientists and optimism. 

[P.K.]

1 hour ago, woolley said:

I think the answer is that people are naturally optimistic and try to see things in the most favourable light. This extends to politicians and scientists, so when this beast appeared on the horizon, there was scientific modeling for herd immunity of other infections on file, it seemed plausible and would cause least damage to the economy so a consensus was reached to go with it. There is a further example of this optimism by the commentator in the BBC link who says that the optimum strategy is to find the best vaccine option whereas we all know that this is no more guaranteed than herd immunity. It's all very well Starmer et al bleating about things that have been done, but you can bet that whoever had been in power the response would have been remarkably similar and driven by the same scientists and optimism. 

Nonsense.

Enough was known at the time to calculate that to let the virus make it's own way through the population was to invite 500k fatalities.

There was no "consensus" either. It was a "political" decision which these days means unelected above the law Dominic Cummings telling Bozo what to do.

Of all the outright failures of Bozo's tenure to date the later than it should have been lockdown stands out as a main cause of thousands and thousands of unnecessary deaths. No doubt it will also prove to be the hardest to clarify at the inevitable Public Inquiry.

Incidentally Bozo's idiotic optimism and his slavish faith in "advisors" is his and his alone. So don't bother playing the "others would have been the same or worse" card again. Because it's bollox...

[woolley]

2 minutes ago, P.K. said:

There was no "consensus" either. It was a "political" decision which these days means unelected above the law Dominic Cummings telling Bozo what to do.

Of all the outright failures of Bozo's tenure to date the later than it should have been lockdown stands out as a main cause of thousands and thousands of unnecessary deaths. No doubt it will also prove to be the hardest to clarify at the inevitable Public Inquiry.

Incidentally Bozo's idiotic optimism and his slavish faith in "advisors" is his and his alone. So don't bother playing the "others would have been the same or worse" card again. Because it's bollox...

I know you have convinced yourself of this in increasingly apoplectic tones over the months, but it is simply wrong. I won't argue about it with you anymore, suit yourself what you believe, but any public inquiry will report the same about the advice from the retained government scientific establishment. The change in course came later when the government scientists were persuaded by the increasingly hysterical reaction from commentators, social media and wider scientific opinion. But even now, opinion is all it is. As I keep saying, nobody has the answer to the problem. Not the universities and commercial laboratories who are researching vaccines, not the Germans or the Spanish and certainly not politicians of any colour. All are wondering around hoping it will go away.

[quilp]

12 minutes ago, P.K. said:

...Bozo's idiotic optimism and his slavish faith in "advisors" is his and his alone.

By "advisors" presumably you're referring to the scientists from whom he and government sought advice. I'm supposing none of "Bozo's bungling brexiteers" had a background in virological or epidemiological studies, little was known or accepted right at the start of the outbreak and there was a plethora of conflicting advice flying around from the scientists. So any reasonable person exercising discretion might rightly concur that any blame for the "bungling" should be proportionate. 

[P.K.]

8 minutes ago, woolley said:

I know you have convinced yourself of this in increasingly apoplectic tones over the months, but it is simply wrong. I won't argue about it with you anymore, suit yourself what you believe, but any public inquiry will report the same about the advice from the retained government scientific establishment. The change in course came later when the government scientists were persuaded by the increasingly hysterical reaction from commentators, social media and wider scientific opinion. But even now, opinion is all it is. As I keep saying, nobody has the answer to the problem. Not the universities and commercial laboratories who are researching vaccines, not the Germans or the Spanish and certainly not politicians of any colour. All are wondering around hoping it will go away.

I haven't convinced myself at all. The numbers are, unfortunately for Bozo and all those who have unnecessarily perished from the virus, completely inescapable. Hence not even you can argue against them.

Loved the "completely hysterical reaction from.....wider scientific opinion" - as bollox goes it's an absolute classic. Scientists with a "hysterical reaction" - what a good grin that is! Quite illustrative not only of your attempts to try and defend how useless Bozo is but also of your loyalty as a dyed-in-the-wool (geddit!) right whinger.

Another classic - "As I keep saying, nobody has the answer to the problem" - well Master of the Obvious I think you'll find that we pretty much all know there is no vaccine as yet. However treatments have been improving over time and experience but survivors have all sorts of problems.

Covid-19 is a truly horrible virus. I suggest everybody stays scared of it because that will help you keep safe....

[TheTeapot]

That 500k Imperial College model still seems horrendously wrong to me, I thought it at the time and still do. Still, 60000 even with the half arsed lockdown suggests it could have been worse.

Fortunately as the USA has basically given up we will now be able to see how accurate an apocalyptic model like that could actually be.

[P.K.]

18 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

That 500k Imperial College model still seems horrendously wrong to me, I thought it at the time and still do. Still, 60000 even with the half arsed lockdown suggests it could have been worse.

Fortunately as the USA has basically given up we will now be able to see how accurate an apocalyptic model like that could actually be.

IMHO not really. There are so many factors at play.

Back of a fag packet it depends on standards of healthcare, general health/lifestyle of the populace, quality of leadership leading to how seriously folks take the threat (e.g.that fucking idiot Bolsonaro, Trump, Bozo etc)  family demographics, population demographics and so forth.

It is thought that a factor in the disproportionate numbers infected in BAME communities could be because a lot live in extended family multi-generational households. Plus those who are obese suffer badly which puts Septics particularly at risk. 

Face it we are all absolutely certain that without the lockdown it would have been much much worse. But the scientists advise on the various scenarios and the politicians make the decisions. However the cracks are starting to show. The UK scientific community are under no doubt whatsoever that Bozo will happily blame anyone other than himself for things like the care homes disaster. The scientists flank Bozo at the pressers to lend scientific weight to what he says. But also part of their task is to avoid scaring/panicking the populace. They may not like Bozo's political choice but they still have their job to do. But it was very obvious at the "lifting the lockdown" presser that Prof Whitty was unhappy about it so he made a point of saying "Everything comes with a risk" i.e. blame Bozo and not us.....

[Phillip Dearden]

9 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

Herd immunity does look rather sketchy at the moment. 

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/studies-report-rapid-loss-of-covid-19-antibodies-67650

 

Isn't a reduction in the volume of antibodies a normal post-virus effect?

Surely it is the ability to re-create antibodies that matters, along with potency and volume and some stuff I don't understand.

Virus's and immunity are complex stuff and a bit beyond me but I gather the falling away of the volume of antibodies is expected.

 

 

 

[wrighty]

7 hours ago, woolley said:

It does, I quite agree. The problem is that so does everything else. People in general are a pretty mundane lot. They see economies opening up and they think doh that's that over then. Will be a big shock if it comes roaring back again. Fascinating to see what will happen around the world at that stage. I still wonder if there will be calls to try to eradicate it globally. We are a long way from that point now but if global capitalist forces see this going on for wave after wave, the pressure could build. 

My big worry about herd immunity from natural infection not being achievable is that it doesn't bode well for vaccination being a useful means of achieving it.  How can it be that if infection with a fully active virus leads only to a month or two of protection, then inoculation with bits of virus or attenuated versions will be better?  Perhaps multiple sequential doses, or booster jabs will work, but I'm not optimistic.

I'm more interested in the T-cell immunity angle.  There is talk about 'immunological dark matter' being the reason many people don't get symptoms, or don't appear to be susceptible at all.  It's also interesting that your T-cells get old and start packing up at about retirement age, which could explain the susceptibility of the older population to covid while youngsters largely get off lightly.  I'm also interested in the mode of death - not something I've seen written about.  In the elderly is it viral infection and lung cell damage, but in the few younger folk that succumb is it an over-enthusiastic immune response?

Lots more to learn about this disease yet.

[wrighty]

Just now, Phillip Dearden said:

 

Isn't a reduction in the volume of antibodies a normal post-virus effect?

Surely it is the ability to re-create antibodies that matters, along with potency and volume and some stuff I don't understand.

Virus's and immunity are complex stuff and a bit beyond me but I gather the falling away of the volume of antibodies is expected.

 

 

 

It's whether we generate memory cells, which can be B-cell or T-cell, I seem to recall.  My immunology degree was almost 30 years ago and so much more has been learnt since then, not to mention my lack of memory cells (neurones) regarding the subject.

[woolley]

8 hours ago, woolley said:

There is a further example of this optimism by the commentator in the BBC link who says that the optimum strategy is to find the best vaccine option whereas we all know that this is no more guaranteed than herd immunity.

 

1 hour ago, wrighty said:

My big worry about herd immunity from natural infection not being achievable is that it doesn't bode well for vaccination being a useful means of achieving it.  How can it be that if infection with a fully active virus leads only to a month or two of protection, then inoculation with bits of virus or attenuated versions will be better?  Perhaps multiple sequential doses, or booster jabs will work, but I'm not optimistic.

Lots more to learn about this disease yet.

This was exactly the nuance I was driving at with my earlier post, quoted in part above. We have to try for an effective vaccine, but there doesn't seem to be much encouragement around.

What would your view be, wrighty, if it came to a choice between having to live with it and the inevitable associated deaths and restricted lives and economies indefinitely, or trying to eradicate it worldwide with a rigorously enforced global lockdown? Would that be feasible? Say 3 months draconian lockdown perhaps under military control? I know that it would take unprecedented co-operation in the world which would be a miracle in itself, but could we uninvent it that way as smaller jurisdictions like ourselves appear to have done? I appreciate that this is fanciful in the extreme, but I do wonder if it might be suggested if people continue to act like rabbits in headlights and refuse to return to normality.

[wrighty]

2 hours ago, woolley said:

 

What would your view be, wrighty, if it came to a choice between having to live with it and the inevitable associated deaths and restricted lives and economies indefinitely, or trying to eradicate it worldwide with a rigorously enforced global lockdown? Would that be feasible? Say 3 months draconian lockdown perhaps under military control? I know that it would take unprecedented co-operation in the world which would be a miracle in itself, but could we uninvent it that way as smaller jurisdictions like ourselves appear to have done? I appreciate that this is fanciful in the extreme, but I do wonder if it might be suggested if people continue to act like rabbits in headlights and refuse to return to normality.

I don’t imagine eradication is possible. No matter how draconian/military a lockdown. Possible in UK perhaps, with strict border control, but Brazil? India, Pakistan, Bangladesh? Not going to happen, and therefore eventually it’d come back. Like it will here. 
 

The virus will become less virulent in time - I think it already is - and we’ll get a degree of herd immunity through natural means and partially effective vaccination. But it’s not going away - it’ll need to be managed with testing, isolation, shielding of the vulnerable etc. Better drug treatments will come along, better testing, better understanding of the immunology etc. But it’s here to stay, I think. 

[woolley]

Nuffield seemed excitedly optimistic in the early days about having a vaccine by September, but they've gone a lot quieter recently.

https://www.ndm.ox.ac.uk/latest-news