Jump to content

Coronavirus


faraway saint
 Share

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, FTOF said:

Just to provide some balance.

TBH I hope, and early evidence points to this, that the cases are nearing their peak.

I'm fully aware, even with a lower rate of illness etc that bigger numbers can see an increase in medical help but, again, we are vaccinated to the hilt, which is why I dont see this being anywhere near the seriousness of the previous waves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Do you all remember that study where they claimed the first two jabs weren't effective against omicron but the booster was, a study carried out when about eight people had it in the country? 

Well, entirely unexpectedly, it turns out to be crap.

Data from the ONS, as analysed by the daily sceptic, says you are 4.5 times more likely to catch omicron if you are triple jabbed and 2.3 times more likely if double jabbed. Looks like you'd have been as well injecting water into yourselves than the vaccine as, sadly, it would have been as effective.

Fortunately it's not that dangerous for most. Unfortunately, if the vaccines don't work and with our current "leaders" in charge, we'll be locked down till May. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

TBH I hope, and early evidence points to this, that the cases are nearing their peak.

I'm fully aware, even with a lower rate of illness etc that bigger numbers can see an increase in medical help but, again, we are vaccinated to the hilt, which is why I dont see this being anywhere near the seriousness of the previous waves.

I hope so too.

There were four other work colleagues who were in close contact with "typhoid Mary" who didn't get Covid. Guess what? They had all had their boosters. Apparently they don't work though.:lol:

 

 

 

Edited by FTOF
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Do you all remember that study where they claimed the first two jabs weren't effective against omicron but the booster was, a study carried out when about eight people had it in the country? 
Well, entirely unexpectedly, it turns out to be crap.
Data from the ONS, as analysed by the daily sceptic, says you are 4.5 times more likely to catch omicron if you are triple jabbed and 2.3 times more likely if double jabbed. Looks like you'd have been as well injecting water into yourselves than the vaccine as, sadly, it would have been as effective.
Fortunately it's not that dangerous for most. Unfortunately, if the vaccines don't work and with our current "leaders" in charge, we'll be locked down till May. 


The figure of 4.5 times is from a sample of 185 folk.

That will be why they wrote numerous times that it was only likelihood and probably. With the very 1st note that the figures were provisional, subject to change and are 2/4 weeks old.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:


 

 


The figure of 4.5 times is from a sample of 185 folk. emoji1787.png

That will be why they wrote numerous times that it was only likelihood and probably. With the very 1st note that the figures were provisional, subject to change and are 2/4 weeks old.

 

He'd have been better quoting The Dandy or The Beano as his sources.

They'd have been more reliable.:wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a little footnote from me on the 7 or 10 day isolation thing.

My son is in the RAF , he tested positive for Covid on Monday , mild symptoms for most of the week but today has lost his sense of smell n taste.  His Girlfriend was one day before him and has suffered worse symptoms. 

His bosses have told him the isolation period to be 100% sure is 14 Days from first positive LFT which will be  3rd Jan .  
Her bosses say her date to be back at work is Wednesday 29th   .🤷‍♂️

Confused ?  You betcha !! 
 

Seasons greetings to all Buddies 🎄 🎅 

Edited by Callum Gilhooley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

Just a little footnote from me on the 7 or 10 day isolation thing.

My son is in the RAF , he tested positive for Covid on Monday , mild symptoms for most of the week but today has lost his sense of smell n taste.  His Girlfriend was one day before him and has suffered worse symptoms. 

His bosses have told him the isolation period to be 100% sure is 14 Days from first positive LFT which will be  3rd Jan .  
Her bosses say her date to be back at work is Wednesday 29th   .🤷‍♂️

Confused ?  You betcha !! 
 

Seasons greetings to all Buddies 🎄 🎅 

A lot would depend on how you are feeling.

The majority are neither up nor down (Omicron variant I'm talking about here)and, as long as they test negative, back to work as soon as possible will see some benefit to services.

If people aren't feeling too good they can easily stay off until they are fit enough to work. 

Edited by faraway saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Do you all remember that study where they claimed the first two jabs weren't effective against omicron but the booster was, a study carried out when about eight people had it in the country? 
Well, entirely unexpectedly, it turns out to be crap.
Data from the ONS, as analysed by the daily sceptic, says you are 4.5 times more likely to catch omicron if you are triple jabbed and 2.3 times more likely if double jabbed. Looks like you'd have been as well injecting water into yourselves than the vaccine as, sadly, it would have been as effective.
Fortunately it's not that dangerous for most. Unfortunately, if the vaccines don't work and with our current "leaders" in charge, we'll be locked down till May. 


4.5 and 2.3 times more likely than who or what, exactly?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'mon the Danes.........................highly vaccinated. :thumbs2

Denmark's detailed, nationwide program for coronavirus testing and analysis gives its scientists a trove of real-time data about the pandemic. Because of that - and because it was one of the first countries outside of Africa to witness omicron's explosive potential - it has turned into a European bellwether for what to expect with the omicron variant.

And over the last week, the country has fared better than it was expecting. After surging to record-breaking levels, the number of daily cases has stabilized. Officials recorded 12,500 cases on Thursday, compared to 11,000 late last week.

More important, hospitalizations have come in - so far - on the very low end of what was projected. A week ago, Denmark's government science institute was said daily new coronavirus hospital admissions could range between 120 and 250 patients by Christmas Eve. In recent days, daily admissions have hung around 125.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Slarti said:


 

 


4.5 and 2.3 times more likely than who or what, exactly?

 

More likely to get the omicron variant than any other variant like delta. Its really evidence that the vaccine and in particular the booster is ineffective against the new now more prevalent variant, despite being told for weeks it was effective.

The study does however only measure the likelihood of getting infected, not whether the vaccine would mitigate against serious illness - I'm sure that data will be available in time. However, we have also been told the booster will reduce the seriousness of disease despite the data not being available for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More likely to get the omicron variant than any other variant like delta. Its really evidence that the vaccine and in particular the booster is ineffective against the new now more prevalent variant, despite being told for weeks it was effective.
The study does however only measure the likelihood of getting infected, not whether the vaccine would mitigate against serious illness - I'm sure that data will be available in time. However, we have also been told the booster will reduce the seriousness of disease despite the data not being available for that.
So they are more likely to get the most prevalent variant than any other variant? No shit!

Given that front line medical staff, carers etc were among the first to get multiple doses, those numbers are not surprising to be honest. You know, the folk that are most likely to come into contact with infected people. Also, the elderly and those who have suppressed immune systems, i.e. those whose natural defenses are less likely to aid in fighting it off. It's not exactly difficult to work out.

What are the numbers for those who are unvaccinated?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Slarti said:

So they are more likely to get the most prevalent variant than any other variant? No shit!

Given that front line medical staff, carers etc were among the first to get multiple doses, those numbers are not surprising to be honest. You know, the folk that are most likely to come into contact with infected people. Also, the elderly and those who have suppressed immune systems, i.e. those whose natural defenses are less likely to aid in fighting it off. It's not exactly difficult to work out.

What are the numbers for those who are unvaccinated?

This study is a study of those infected - that is its limitations and it is not intending to say whether the vaccinated or unvaccinated are more likely to get infected. What it says, though, is if you are infected, those triple jabbed are much more likely to get the omicron variant, meaning the vaccine still seems to hold up well against delta but not omicron.

My point about this is for the last few weeks, the government have continually claimed that the booster will protect against omicron based on one study with a tiny sample size, yet this data contradicts this.

There has been a high level of manipulation of the public from both government and media, a narrative created where big pharma are our saviours, anecdote being passed off as fact, and anyone who questions this being dismissed as a covid denier, conspiracy theorist or anti vaxxer. Experts with a different view, of which there are many, are not given any media air time. Meanwhile, those on the left have neglected their duty to speak out, silent as pointless vaccine passports are introduced and workers sacked for failing to undergo a medical intervention.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



What it says, though, is if you are infected, those triple jabbed are much more likely to get the omicron variant, meaning the vaccine still seems to hold up well against delta but not omicron.




Naw it doesn't, it meant that 20 something folk got it from 185.


There has been a high level of manipulation of the public from both government and media, a narrative created where big pharma are our saviours, anecdote being passed off as fact, and anyone who questions this being dismissed as a covid denier, conspiracy theorist or anti vaxxer. Experts with a different view, of which there are many, are not given any media air time. Meanwhile, those on the left have neglected their duty to speak out, silent as pointless vaccine passports are introduced and workers sacked for failing to undergo a medical intervention.


Irony alert.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Niven's view.

Quote

 

DOCTORS AND NURSES The guys who’ve had it harder than any of us this year. Who, even as you read this, are clad head-to-foot in PPE gear taking care of people, even – especially – the unvaccinated. If they can do this for a 10-hour shift, I’m guessing you’d feel like an idiot for complaining about wearing a tiny bit of cloth over your face while you do your shopping. Right? Why wear that bit of cloth at all, you ask? Because of that other thing we need to be grateful for…

SCIENCE Every time I read some anti-vaccine nonsense on social media, every time I see a video of some anti-mask nutters who never went to university trying to make quasi-legal arguments about why they must be allowed to enter a shop or a restaurant unmasked, I think: “Thank God I believe in science.” Do likewise. Don’t “think for yourself”. Don’t “do your own research”. Accept that cleverer people than you have got this. Shut up. Get your vaccine. Get your booster. Limit your social mixing until we get through this next wave.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FTOF said:

John Niven's view.

 

I believe in science too. Just not bad science, where anecdotes are passed off as fact, where evidence is not provided, and where those questioning methodology are removed from platforms.

I get why this happens. It is natural to be self protective and err on the side of caution, especially when getting it wrong could lead to people dying. Unfortunately it means, when analysed, there are a lot of statements from experts, politicians etc which are designed to get the public to do things which won't do any harm (boosters, masks etc) but where the evidence they are doing any good is minimal. However getting compliance is the main thing so they can be seen to have done their bit - this isn't done deliberately, but is about a rule of pessimism - look at the worst case scenario and act accordingly. The problem with this approach is it means the assessment of these experts is diluted and encouraged to be diluted  - hence the lack of real evidence and vague statements with words like "could" and hysterical estimates of possible harms. Sage have got nearly every prediction wrong during this pandemic.

The quote you use - and usually on most issues the writer is decent - is typical of the current discourse. Don't question the scientists, they know more, just shut up. Except there are countless scientists who disagree with the current approach but are silenced. They, apparently, have to shut up too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This study is a study of those infected - that is its limitations and it is not intending to say whether the vaccinated or unvaccinated are more likely to get infected. What it says, though, is if you are infected, those triple jabbed are much more likely to get the omicron variant, meaning the vaccine still seems to hold up well against delta but not omicron.
My point about this is for the last few weeks, the government have continually claimed that the booster will protect against omicron based on one study with a tiny sample size, yet this data contradicts this.
There has been a high level of manipulation of the public from both government and media, a narrative created where big pharma are our saviours, anecdote being passed off as fact, and anyone who questions this being dismissed as a covid denier, conspiracy theorist or anti vaxxer. Experts with a different view, of which there are many, are not given any media air time. Meanwhile, those on the left have neglected their duty to speak out, silent as pointless vaccine passports are introduced and workers sacked for failing to undergo a medical intervention.
 
I was asking what the numbers were for the unvaccinated, as in, if you are unvaccinated are you more likely to get omicron/delta/other? If they have the numbers for those with boosters and 2 jags, then they surely have the numbers for 1 and none.

I really don't see what your issue is here. The results show that, if you get infected, you are 4.5 times more likely to get omicron than another variant if you are triple jagged. Therefore, people are getting the (apparently) most transmissible form of the virus. If you just take those numbers alone, the difference (4.5 to 2.3) between triple and double jagged shows that a third dose protects people more from the earlier, (apparently) more dangerous variants. It doesn't show that 4.5 times more triple jagged are being infected with omicron than any other group.

In reality, without lots of other data, any particular individual narrowly focused study is pretty worthless.

What should be getting concentrated on and reported on is (1) number of deaths, (2) number of serious illnesses, (3) number of hospitisations, both in hard numbers and in %ages of population/doses/age/etc. That is all that really matters, especially the deaths and serious illnesses.

Irrespective of what certain individuals on here have claimed as facts, with no control group we will never be 100% sure if any of this (masks, lockdowns, vaccines, etc) has saved anybody, all we can do is concentrate on the things that are, from a scientific/medical outlook, likely to help. Any conclusions reached after this is all over will mainly be from statistical analysis of (mostly) anecdotal evidence, i.e. trying to work out the probability of causation given correlation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I was asking what the numbers were for the unvaccinated, as in, if you are unvaccinated are you more likely to get omicron/delta/other? If they have the numbers for those with boosters and 2 jags, then they surely have the numbers for 1 and none.


As I know, can i answer.

Aw fcuk it I'll answer it anyways. The odds are evens.

Yet from the sample of those who tested positive from covid and not vaccinated 536, only 14 were identified as PROBABLY having the Omicron strain.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hendo said:

I believe in science too. Just not bad science, where anecdotes are passed off as fact, where evidence is not provided, and where those questioning methodology are removed from platforms.

I get why this happens. It is natural to be self protective and err on the side of caution, especially when getting it wrong could lead to people dying. Unfortunately it means, when analysed, there are a lot of statements from experts, politicians etc which are designed to get the public to do things which won't do any harm (boosters, masks etc) but where the evidence they are doing any good is minimal. However getting compliance is the main thing so they can be seen to have done their bit - this isn't done deliberately, but is about a rule of pessimism - look at the worst case scenario and act accordingly. The problem with this approach is it means the assessment of these experts is diluted and encouraged to be diluted  - hence the lack of real evidence and vague statements with words like "could" and hysterical estimates of possible harms. Sage have got nearly every prediction wrong during this pandemic.

The quote you use - and usually on most issues the writer is decent - is typical of the current discourse. Don't question the scientists, they know more, just shut up. Except there are countless scientists who disagree with the current approach but are silenced. They, apparently, have to shut up too.

I think part of the beauty of scientific advancement is that someone puts out their thoughts and they are challenged by others.  Scientists setting out ideas and other scientists offering comment, corrections.

the “problem” arises when fruitcakes on the interweb offer opinions on a subject that are not based on any noticeable brain power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites






As I know, can i answer.

Aw fcuk it I'll answer it anyways. The odds are evens.

Yet from the sample of those who tested positive from covid and not vaccinated 536, only 14 were identified as PROBABLY having the Omicron strain.



So the unvaccinated are more likely to have the earlier "more dangerous" ones? You could be forgiven for thinking that the vaccines were doing good then. :whistle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think part of the beauty of scientific advancement is that someone puts out their thoughts and they are challenged by others.  Scientists setting out ideas and other scientists offering comment, corrections.
the “problem” arises when fruitcakes on the interweb offer opinions on a subject that are not based on any noticeable brain power.
Aye, but obviously the scientific method doesn't work and we should get all our knowledge from these fruitcake with no expertise in the field. It makes sense to me, I'm off to ask my dogs what they think.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, antrin said:

I think part of the beauty of scientific advancement is that someone puts out their thoughts and they are challenged by others.  Scientists setting out ideas and other scientists offering comment, corrections.

the “problem” arises when fruitcakes on the interweb offer opinions on a subject that are not based on any noticeable brain power.

My point is challenge is no longer allowed. There is a narrative which must be advanced.

Mainstream media gives only one viewpoint. On twitter, if you wade through people with no specific knowledge in this area, you do find scientists, epidemiologists and those with a knowledge challenging the  current narrative  - but they are nowhere to be seen on mainstream media. I wonder why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hendo said:

My point is challenge is no longer allowed. There is a narrative which must be advanced.

Mainstream media gives only one viewpoint. On twitter, if you wade through people with no specific knowledge in this area, you do find scientists, epidemiologists and those with a knowledge challenging the  current narrative  - but they are nowhere to be seen on mainstream media. I wonder why.

Sorry, Buddie…

…but I’ve been following the interesting development of this pandemic closely and so far haven’t been convinced by any suggestions that pandemic scientists are not offering sane, sensible, evidence-based information to the politicians.

 

There have been fruitcakes aplenty, of course….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...