Andy Onchan Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 1 hour ago, woolley said: First bridges, now tunnels. Ye gods, can we at least have the DoI finish the feckin' prom before they start on bridges & tunnels?! 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 His greatness HQ has been on the wireless today dispelling rumours of cases on Island. https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/chief-minister-says-fake-news-to-rumours-of-active-covid-cases/ I have no reason to doubt him of course, but we've been here before... 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Newbie Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 17 minutes ago, TheTeapot said: His greatness HQ has been on the wireless today dispelling rumours of cases on Island. https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/chief-minister-says-fake-news-to-rumours-of-active-covid-cases/ I have no reason to doubt him of course, but we've been here before... He’s right. There was some dim bitch kicking off on Facebook last night that Manx people were going to bring back death from holiday as Guernsey now has 6 cases and that the flight bridge should be closed immediately and why weren’t government doing it. Won’t somebody please think of the children! We’re all going to die etc etc !! Then several people pointed out that that was Jersey and she’d got the wrong island entirely. So many clueless retards about talking absolute crap just scaring other idiots. They do need to do something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: I was addressing a more general perception that you personally[1[1] One of the problems with the English language is the way we use 'you' to mean 'one' or even 'some people'. Don't blame the language. It's doing its best. It's usage that's the problem. There is the perfectly serviceable pronoun "one" that can be used to avoid such confusion, as in substituting "one" for "you" in: You (One) need(s) something like 94% for 'herd immunity'. When (one) you add(s) to that the possibility that immunity may be quite quickly lost for some people, then claiming that people who haven't yet had it will be somehow immune is just wishful thinking, I'm afraid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_(pronoun) If one is afraid of sounding too much like the Queen, the language is even flexible enough to reconstruct the sentences entirely to avoid the pronoun problem altogether, as in: Something like 94% is needed for herd immunity, and it is likely that immunity may be quite quickly lost for some people in any case. Claiming that people who haven't yet had it will be somehow immune is therefore just wishful thinking, I'm afraid. However, the main reason I thought you were addressing your reply to me was that you quoted my post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Trench Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 All these infected folk heading back....we'll have to keep our eyes peeled captain! It reminded me of a song. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 2 hours ago, wrighty said: Not for covid. You need 1-1/R0 for herd immunity - the R0 for covid is about 3, so it'll be about 67%. Measles is closer to 90% since its R0 is about 10. And as for antibodies - they may not be the main mode of immunity. Perhaps the real reason that many people either don't seem susceptible or have a very mild illness (and don't generate an antibody response) is due to pre-existing T cell immunity (or NK cell immunity). Regarding R0, even retrospective analyses for Wuhan give "a range from 1.4 all the way up to 5.7", and the real problem, as that rather useful recent article suggests, is that it's so variable over (and within) populations and time that it's not very helpful anyway. It's pretty academic in any case because once you get over a certain level the vaccination or public health measures you take don't really differ much. And there's no evidence that anywhere is near that level. The large study done in Spain (n=61,075), which was very badly hit, only found about 5% with antibodies - though that varied by area with Madrid being over 10%. Among those who had "positive PCR more than 14 days before the study visit" (n=195) it was around 90%, which suggests that most people who do have it do develop antibodies. So even if they aren't the main means of providing immunity, they seem a pretty good marker for having had it. It's possible that there are other things that are preventing people from catching it in the first place, but the main reason looks to be that they haven't had it because they haven't been in contact with it. I don't know what the percentage of people who tested positive in the Abbotswood cluster was, but it must have been fairly high from the number dead and hospitalised and that was with efforts being made to protect people. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 1 hour ago, Mr Newbie said: He’s right. There was some dim bitch kicking off on Facebook last night that Manx people were going to bring back death from holiday as Guernsey now has 6 cases and that the flight bridge should be closed immediately and why weren’t government doing it. Won’t somebody please think of the children! We’re all going to die etc etc !! Then several people pointed out that that was Jersey and she’d got the wrong island entirely. So many clueless retards about talking absolute crap just scaring other idiots. They do need to do something. I listened. Big H was bang on the money. The problem is Facebook users in general are at biggest risk from themselves. This whole pandemic has really shown a number of people to be idiots as you say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Regarding R0, even retrospective analyses for Wuhan give "a range from 1.4 all the way up to 5.7", and the real problem, as that rather useful recent article suggests, is that it's so variable over (and within) populations and time that it's not very helpful anyway. It's pretty academic in any case because once you get over a certain level the vaccination or public health measures you take don't really differ much. And there's no evidence that anywhere is near that level. The large study done in Spain (n=61,075), which was very badly hit, only found about 5% with antibodies - though that varied by area with Madrid being over 10%. Among those who had "positive PCR more than 14 days before the study visit" (n=195) it was around 90%, which suggests that most people who do have it do develop antibodies. So even if they aren't the main means of providing immunity, they seem a pretty good marker for having had it. It's possible that there are other things that are preventing people from catching it in the first place, but the main reason looks to be that they haven't had it because they haven't been in contact with it. I don't know what the percentage of people who tested positive in the Abbotswood cluster was, but it must have been fairly high from the number dead and hospitalised and that was with efforts being made to protect people. I agree that R is not particularly useful as a number - it's nice as a concept to be able to explain to people that, on average, one infected person passes it on to R other people. R0 is more helpful and gives some idea of what R is before anyone knows about the infection and takes steps to avoid it. A reasonable mid range estimate for R0 for covid is 3, which would imply you need 67% immunity to get herd immunity (effectively reducing your R to 1, as of the 3 people you would have infected, 2 of them are immune) I don't think anyone is banking on herd immunity from antibodies following infection. As you say, they're a good marker for recent infection, but they do seem to dwindle fairly quickly afterwards. T cells however may be - did you watch that video posted above? And my great hope is that T cell immunity is present to a degree from cross-reactivity with other common-cold causing coronaviruses, so that it'll be perfectly possible to have herd immunity with only about 5% of the population having had covid-19. The situation in care homes can't be applied to the general population - as we get old and frail our T cells naturally fall off. This again may in part be why the elderly are badly affected by covid and the young not so much. It'll also be the difficulty with vaccinations - they may work perfectly well in youngsters who wouldn't have had a problem with covid anyway, but they quite possibly won't in your 85 year old nursing home resident. This is where herd immunity will really come into its own - the only way to protect our elderly frail population will be if the younger robust population get immune, either by infection or vaccination. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 3 hours ago, Banker said: This is link to Guernsey borders policy setting out business tunnels. Seems like something we should do https://covid19.gov.gg/guidance/travel Agreed. But that'll send the loonatic fringe into utter meltdown. Some woman left a message read out at lunch time. DEMANDING government change the isolation with a house back to the entire family. Big H put her back in her box 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 7 hours ago, Mr Newbie said: It isn’t really. Sorry to say but it isn’t. People are being remarkably resilient and government money has helped keep many afloat for now but it’s far from business as usual for many places. I’m amazed how private fear and panic in some places hasn’t manifested itself in public anger as I know of many people who have not earned for getting on for months now as well as servicing debt and bills etc. The message from Tanrogan is a positive one. They’ve probably realized there is no point in paying a big lease for premises with next to no footfall when they’ve been doing deliveries which you could do from your garage without the overheads. They’ve also said they’ll be back in one form or another. Like a lot of people they’ve probably had a few months to consider whether they could be arsed with all the hassle just to pay someone else’s lease. You are correct, it isn't. Sidings for lunch today was packed, in a Wednesday! Young people, pensioners, business people. More packed than any given Friday before lockdown. Talking to a few friends this afternoon, many places are the same. Lots of local people with nowhere to go on holiday and plenty of money to spend, equals a buoyant economy. Sue some businesses will struggle. Some will fail. That is life. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2020/07/15/new-rules-on-covid-testing-for-arrivals/ New rules for Jersey arrivals, seems sensible enough... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 2 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: Agreed. But that'll send the loonatic fringe into utter meltdown. Some woman left a message read out at lunch time. DEMANDING government change the isolation with a house back to the entire family. Big H put her back in her box No reason why these tunnels should not happen. Day trip to London. Get home isolate until next business trip or 14 days, which ever is shorter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 2 minutes ago, quilp said: https://jerseyeveningpost.com/news/2020/07/15/new-rules-on-covid-testing-for-arrivals/ New rules for Jersey arrivals, seems sensible enough... What does it say? I refuse to randomly accept cookies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 6 minutes ago, Cambon said: What does it say? I refuse to randomly accept cookies. Gordon Bennett... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted July 15, 2020 Share Posted July 15, 2020 15 minutes ago, Cambon said: What does it say? I refuse to randomly accept cookies. You can choose to reject them on that site. Also, how on earth do you manage to use the internet? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.