Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

so we're to go clubbing in hot, sweaty crowded rooms but wear masks while we do? or what? does anyone understand what the government's messaging is now?
 
I think the message is just Keep supporting your friendly blameless government - if you want to be careful then here is some sober face and some words about Vigilance for you, if you want to burn your mask & party go right ahead, enjoy the gift of Freedom Day, either way, not our fault keep voting conservative thanks.

Yup. Since day one of this the government's power move has been positioning themself so that they can blame the public when shit inevitably gets worse.
 
This looks like an interesting bit of research - having the flu jab reduces the risks of certain outcomes in COVID.

This prompted my to check again about ACE inhibiters,
It seems they are slightly protective, but once you get to hospital then they have not effect if you end up in the ICU.

https://heart.bmj.com/content/106/19/1503 said:

Conclusion​

In this very large population-based study, ACE inhibitor and ARB prescriptions were associated with a reduced risk of COVID-19 RT-PCR positive disease in a hospital setting adjusting for a wide range of demographic factors, potential comorbidities and other medication. There was no evidence of an increased or decreased risk associated with either drug for ICU admission. There are marked variations in risk of COVID-19 disease and ICU admission by ethnic group, with highest rates among BAME groups. The strength of this association is greater with the more severe outcome and is not explained by age, sex, deprivation, geographical region or several comorbidities and intercurrent medications included in the analysis. The counterintuitive finding of smokers having a lower risk of COVID-19 disease requiring hospital admission and ICU admission deserves further study.
 

People who are vaccinated against influenza may be partly protected against some of the severe effects of coronavirus, and be less likely to need emergency care, according to a major study.

The analysis of nearly 75,000 Covid patients found significant reductions in stroke, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and sepsis, and fewer admissions to emergency departments and intensive care units, among those who had been given the flu jab.
Edit now I've caught up with the thread:
 
I'm sick of hearing the phrase if not now, when? It's clearly on the 'line to take' bit of their briefings before ministers go in front of the media. Junior health minister Edward Agar was using it again on the media rounds this morning.

If not now, when?

How about once the Delta wave has subsided, hospitals aren't filling up with Covid patients and everyone I meet doesn't have a story about someone they know who has Covid even though they've been double jabbed.
 
I'm sick of hearing the phrase if not now, when? It's clearly on the 'line to take' bit of their briefings before ministers go in front of the media. Junior health minister Edward Agar was using it again on the media rounds this morning.

If not now, when?

How about once the Delta wave has subsided, hospitals aren't filling up with Covid patients and everyone I meet doesn't have a story about someone they know who has Covid even though they've been double jabbed.

I’ve stopped listening to the lying shits on their morning round of lying to the public via the medium of the complicit media outlets, but can anyone tell me - is there any explanation at any point (or even are they asked for one) as to why the ‘if not now then when?’ removal of public health protections in favour of the economy includes mask wearing, which has effectively zero effect on economic output and productivity?
 
I’ve stopped listening to the lying shits on their morning round of lying to the public via the medium of the complicit media outlets, but can anyone tell me - is there any explanation at any point (or even are they asked for one) as to why the ‘if not now then when?’ removal of public health protections in favour of the economy includes mask wearing, which has effectively zero effect on economic output and productivity?
Because... errr... because... errr...

FREEDOM!
 
is there any explanation at any point (or even are they asked for one) as to why the ‘if not now then when?’ removal of public health protections in favour of the economy includes mask wearing, which has effectively zero effect on economic output and productivity?
Indeed - why has this become such an icon of "freedom" - when so many of us are looking at all unnecessary exposure to pathogens in the light of the current experience.
So many other things have been accepted - like seat belts and not smoking in hospitals ...

It was unfortunate that they got the messaging about masks so crazily wrong early on ...
 
very interesting this. Not much info in here but intriguing. If they can identify long covid via a test for these special kind of antibodies does that a treatment more likely to follow?

Might do, but given it's not a singular condition it seems unlikely currently. What this test (although it's quite early days for it) does raise is maybe some complex situations where people who are saying they have long covid then don't have the antibodies from this test, so any long covid diagnosis gets discounted.
 
Last edited:
very interesting this. Not much info in here but intriguing. If they can identify long covid via a test for these special kind of antibodies does that a treatment more likely to follow?

Maybe, probably, certainly not less likely. Knowing the aetiology of a disease is usually an important step in developing therapies. However autoantibodies are already known to be a part of a number of autoimmune disorders, and we don’t yet have much in the way of ‘cures’ (rather than ameliorations). It’s being worked on though, and presumably these ones will be added into the mix.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDC
A key thing that interests me is the differences between offering just the spike protein to teach the body's immune system and expecting it to learn to recognise the whole virus ...
I figure maybe it's going to be more "efficient" for teaching the immune system...
Presumably if the antibodies learn to attack a large variety of viral proteins, there's more chance of it attacking the wrong thing.
I still don't know if the "long flu" I had in 2019 was "ME" or just because I'd sailed into diabetic waters through inactivity ...
 
Last edited:
I had to laugh when Johnson said he'd continue wearing his mask on a crowded train. Yeah, so big of the man who's probably never been near public transport in his life and gets driven everywhere by a private chauffeur.

And it doesn't need to be all or nothing. Just because masks will no longer be mandatory doesn't mean I'll be throwing mine away. I plan to use mine until at least a few weeks after the deadline for everyone being offered their second jab, and beyond that if things still haven't improved.
 
I'm in favour of keeping masks as a thing for a while but I wonder if it will become the next 'hand sanitiser', ie. something you get people to do to make it look like you're actually taking measures to reduce risk, while you just ignore a whole bunch of other stuff that would probably make a bigger difference.

For the first time in ages this weekend I went for a meal 'out' but sitting indoors. Something I am still planning to avoid as much as possible for a while. The place had hand sanitizer at the door, it had the NHS check in QR, the staff all had masks on. But then we were shown to a table in quite a large room, there was only one other table occupied but they put us at a table virtually next to them instead of one of the free ones at the other end of the room. It was a warm summer evening but exactly zero windows were open, and nor were the the full height patio doors. You had to put a mask on to go to the toilet though so it was all perfectly risk free.
 
I'm in favour of keeping masks as a thing for a while but I wonder if it will become the next 'hand sanitiser', ie. something you get people to do to make it look like you're actually taking measures to reduce risk, while you just ignore a whole bunch of other stuff that would probably make a bigger difference.

For the first time in ages this weekend I went for a meal 'out' but sitting indoors. Something I am still planning to avoid as much as possible for a while. The place had hand sanitizer at the door, it had the NHS check in QR, the staff all had masks on. But then we were shown to a table in quite a large room, there was only one other table occupied but they put us at a table virtually next to them instead of one of the free ones at the other end of the room. It was a warm summer evening but exactly zero windows were open, and nor were the the full height patio doors. You had to put a mask on to go to the toilet though so it was all perfectly risk free.
Did you mention any of your concerns to the management?
 
I'm in favour of keeping masks as a thing for a while but I wonder if it will become the next 'hand sanitiser', ie. something you get people to do to make it look like you're actually taking measures to reduce risk, while you just ignore a whole bunch of other stuff that would probably make a bigger difference.

For the first time in ages this weekend I went for a meal 'out' but sitting indoors. Something I am still planning to avoid as much as possible for a while. The place had hand sanitizer at the door, it had the NHS check in QR, the staff all had masks on. But then we were shown to a table in quite a large room, there was only one other table occupied but they put us at a table virtually next to them instead of one of the free ones at the other end of the room. It was a warm summer evening but exactly zero windows were open, and nor were the the full height patio doors. You had to put a mask on to go to the toilet though so it was all perfectly risk free.
Masks would make more of a difference to the spread of an airborne disease than hand sanitiser, but a lot of people do use them as a kind of talisman (masks & / hand sanitiser).
 
Masks would make more of a difference to the spread of an airborne disease than hand sanitiser, but a lot of people do use them as a kind of talisman (masks & / hand sanitiser).

Well, not having held the Euros would probably have helped even more, but apparently some things are more important and talismanic than others.

 
One thing I don't understand is supermarkets offering both hand sanitiser and antiviral spray ...
I just slop on the hand sanitiser and squidge it all over the basket handle and maybe wipe off the excess on my trousers...
 
A key thing that interests me is the differences between offering just the spike protein to teach the body's immune system and expecting it to learn to recognise the whole virus ...
I figure maybe it's going to be more "efficient" for teaching the immune system...
Presumably if the antibodies learn to attack a large variety of viral proteins, there's more chance of it attacking the wrong thing.
I still don't know if the "long flu" I had in 2019 was "ME" or just because I'd sailed into diabetic waters through inactivity ...

The immune system and response are intricately complicated things, and the many layers of it respond in different ways to different threats. Your speculations above are not really how it (probably) works in this case I don’t think, certainly not the idea that antibodies attacking lots of viral proteins leads to more cross-species attacks, or even that there’s any advantage in the antibodies attacking a wide range of proteins in this case.

The spike protein is the functional infection unit - so binding to it stops it working. This is key to the antibodies’ utility. T cells and the like need to be able to recognise infected cells - luckily the mode of this virus is to expose spike proteins on the surface of infected cells - so that recognising this is a good way of doing that.

As it’s a functional unit it can’t change that much without disabling itself. Other surface proteins can be much more polymorphic and so not so useful. It’s as if you are looking for a 7’8” tall fugitive man with red hair, 3 fingers on his left hand and wearing a navy greatcoat and glasses, and you want to train a bunch of searchers to look for him. He can easily change his coat, glasses and hair colour. Not so easily his fingers and height - so don’t bother teaching the searchers about the former, just the latter.
 
Last edited:
I’ve stopped listening to the lying shits on their morning round of lying to the public via the medium of the complicit media outlets, but can anyone tell me - is there any explanation at any point (or even are they asked for one) as to why the ‘if not now then when?’ removal of public health protections in favour of the economy includes mask wearing, which has effectively zero effect on economic output and productivity?
Only logic I can see is that masks retard the spread of the disease. It interferes with the mass infection policy.

The other line I can think of is that johnson has misjudged the public mood and thinks masks are something the public hate, in favour of some mythical unicorn 'freedom'. So, on the latter, he's a silly cunt and on the former, a murderous one.
 
Back
Top Bottom