Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

2. We are NOT going to have a vaccine for this, the rate of reinfection and absence of, or very low, antibody titre in those who have recovered makes this likely.

Its not wise to make confident predictions in either direction regarding vaccines right now.

This fucking thing has been on the go for far longer than is realised.*

In both cases, a hard dry cough was present, fever and headache. No sneezing, no runny nose, no sore throat. In the case of the lady, three people died of this on the ward she was on. All elderly people. I appreciate that an anecdotal sample of two people is hardly a robust sample, has anyone else encountered similar, starting from around the beginning of November last year?

A much earlier arrival of Covid-19 is inconsistent with how everything actually unfurled. It would not have taken so long to reach a peak number of deaths in April if the virus had been widespread long before the commonly accepted timetable of this pandemics spread. And there was a clear period where the normal influenza season dropped off, before the deaths from Covid-19 then started to rise up and become really obvious in the statistics.

The flu season was early this winter, which fits with your talk about November.

It is perfectly normal for people to attribute illnesses they have had in recent memory, with the big new disease thats in the news. Doesnt make it actually true, its mostly a mental phenomenon, dot joining.

Screenshot 2020-04-21 at 14.59.14.png

From https://assets.publishing.service.g...al_influenze_report_16_April_2020_week_16.pdf
 
Last edited:
The world has changed but Kuenssberg remains the same:




Thats how many had been reported, not how many had actually died in hospital by that point. Based on latest figures, by March 16th 153 had died in hospital, by March 17th it was 192, and those are just for England.



Bollocks. Some details will take a long time, but the broad mistakes can already be judged and thats been the case for quite some time.



Itchy chin.



Fuck that narrative:

It was never in doubt that, so long as they actually did something other than an impression of the mayor from Jaws, the spread of the disease would be slowed. Rather its a question of by how much, and how timely the actions were. If they acted week(s) later than they did then there would have been more death, if they had acted week(s) earlier than they did, there would have been less deaths.

As for the NHS not being overwhelmed, thats a complex issue. Some important parts of it are the very same timing issue mentioned in my first point, and we can be relieved about aspects of that. But I've already said before that I am concerned about the number of people who were not admitted to hospital and died at home. And the government failed to protect those who worked in the NHS and those who were in hospital for other reasons but ended up catching Covid-19 due to poor infection control and limited testing of suspected cases and staff.

The narrow and deliberate framing in that article, for political purposes, makes me sick.

Thank you for your understandable and accurate analysis.
 
With regard to vaccines.

Generally, actively suffering an infection produces a better antibody response than vaccination. The reports of very low antibody titres in recovered patients do cast a bit of a doubt on an effective vaccine. I may of course be entirely wrong, and hope that I am.
 
Can also see the normal winter/flu peak in the weekly death registrations for England/Wales.

Unfortunately the nature of the weekly data means that the figure for near the end of 2019 is artificially low, until I get a final version of the 2019 weekly figures, so please ignore the much shorter bar for one of the weeks.

Anyway this graph covers week 42 2019 to week 15 2020 (w/e April 10th). Because the flu season was early this year, there was plenty of time for the figures to return to 'normal' levels before the horrible Covid-19 death figures climb began. Some countries like Italy had a later flu season so the boundary may be less distinct for them, I havent had time to look.

Screenshot 2020-04-21 at 15.17.49.png
 
With regard to vaccines.

Generally, actively suffering an infection produces a better antibody response than vaccination. The reports of very low antibody titres in recovered patients do cast a bit of a doubt on an effective vaccine. I may of course be entirely wrong, and hope that I am.

Its a concern, but its too early in the process of investigating vaccines for me to dwell on it much. I certainly dont assume we'll get a brilliant vaccine, but nor do I rule it out. Rarely has there been quite this much impetus to find something, and I have no idea what that will mean in practice!
 
Its a concern, but its too early in the process of investigating vaccines for me to dwell on it much. I certainly dont assume we'll get a brilliant vaccine, but nor do I rule it out. Rarely has there been quite this much impetus to find something, and I have no idea what that will mean in practice!

I suppose that even a vaccine that ameliorates the disease is better than nothing. A bit of a decrease in severity would certainly save lives.
 
Various news reports. Your question though, reminds me of the stupidity of giving credence to ANY newspaper report.
There's lots of reports today about a low percentage of the world's population carrying antibodies, but I haven't seen anything about people having recovered not carrying antibodies or carrying low quantities. That would be noteworthy, but are you completely sure it is what you have seen?
 
There's lots of reports today about a low percentage of the world's population carrying antibodies, but I haven't seen anything about people having recovered not carrying antibodies or carrying low quantities. That would be noteworthy, but are you completely sure it is what you have seen?

Absolutely. I'm a retired nurse, so things like that 'pop out' when reading.

Have a gander at this:

 
have we had this yet?

UK ministers took a political decision not to be involved in an EU ventilator scheme, Sir Simon McDonald, the Foreign Office permanent under-secretary said today, so challenging previous claims that the UK did not take part due to missed emails.

McDonald was asked by a Labour MP, Chris Bryant, at the foreign affairs select committee whether the ventilator scheme was put to ministers. He said:

It was a political decision. The UK mission (UKREP) briefed ministers about what was available, what was on offer and the decision is known.

His remarks appear to blow a hole in the case originally made most prominently by the Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove.

McDonald also said the prime minister will consider in the next few weeks whether to go for an extension of the deadline for EU withdrawal date beyond December. He said he was stressing the theoretical possibilities, and added he believed the prime minister will confirm the existing timetable.


:mad:
 
have we had this yet?




:mad:
Well we already knew that, but good to have it confirmed.

As for the brexit extension, first step in a climbdown process, I guess. Definitely no extension becomes Probably no extension becomes Hopefully no extension becomes We have an extension.
 
Well we already knew that, but good to have it confirmed.

As for the brexit extension, first step in a climbdown process, I guess. Definitely no extension becomes Probably no extension becomes Hopefully no extension becomes We have an extension.

apparently we don't know it now:



Kind of hard to square that with Hancock claiming just now that he was aware of the scheme and said yes to it.
 
Testing appears to be about as poorly organised as you might expect...

Coronavirus: NHS and care staff struggling to access tests
Home tests for coronavirus should be available to NHS staff across the UK "very soon", according to the government's testing co-ordinator. Prof John Newton acknowledged that health and care workers have struggled to access testing sites.
The government said lack of "demand" rather than capacity was behind the slow growth in testing numbers. But the British Medical Association (BMA), the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) and Unison have challenged this. They say long drives or difficulty accessing drive-through sites without a car were preventing staff from being tested.
The prospect of a home test offers some hope when it comes to another major barrier for staff: the test has to be done within the first few days of experiencing symptoms. Some have been missing out because people have been too unwell to drive to a testing centre, according to Saffron Cordery, head of NHS Providers, which represents hospital trusts.
 
I see you got that from the daily NHS numbers.


I also see they have just today started adding a chart that shows hospital deaths by date of death, and colour to indicate which of those deaths were announced today. So thats one less graph for me to feel the need to do myself very often!

View attachment 207914

Today on the BBC Fergus Walsh was showing off the BBC version of this graph. He made some comment about how today we could see this picture of the hospital deaths for the first time. No, people here will have very occasionally seen my version of the graph in the past. Because the NHS published all the figures required to create it since the start of April. And for a while before that, if you were on the press list, the same data was also available in a more cumbersome format.

Anyway at least it is being seen by people generally now so the April 8th peak is noted and obvious, for example.
 
View attachment 207893

Listening to this now. Sadly John Ashton is frozen - looks like he's not going to appear.

Points so far. Sorry bit scattergun:

Nightingale - glad it was done but did it divert too many resources? Mostly empty so far.

The lack of testing for nurses/doctors is shocking, and is leading to community spread.

Seven-day isolation from onset of symptoms probably not wise! Confusion about why advice conflicts with that in other countries.

Mystification about test and trace. The doctors being interviewed just don't know where it is, or where it could be coming from.

Dyson ventilators not appeared yet. Nurses will need training for them anyway. But will they ever happen? A basic wtf about that.

PPE: Point about it not being just hospitals that need it, and that the biggest problem is among social care workers. Emergency stockpiles lost pre-epidemic: point made that NHS instead relied on having a 'procurement chain' in place - ie some form of 'just in time ordering' - which has now broken down due to crisis.

They're insulted by Hancock preaching at them about how to use ppe.

They've made the point about the importance of migrant key workers. Need end to hostile environment. Also point about ending the practice of hospitals giving immigrant details to the home office. Plus need to capitalise on public appreciation to fight privatisation.

Need for some spare capacity in ICU before lockdown is lifted in case of a second surge. Also, need for test and trace first.


Got bored now. Don't think John Ashton is coming.
 
Testing appears to be about as poorly organised as you might expect...

Coronavirus: NHS and care staff struggling to access tests
Yunno the people taking the tests need appropriate PPE

I think it's all well and good having the testing capacity but if you don't have good infrastructure to support it ain't gonna wirky. Selecting who has a test, trained staff with PPE to take the samples, couriers etc to take the sample from the testing sites to the labs. But if an oversight I think.
 
I am a bit concerned about this "soft" opening this week as well that has been noted by others upthread.
Had an email from my work last week (retail), asking for volunteers to come back from furlough to support the online shopping operation which is currently being run just from a central warehouse, but is usually also fulfilled by some stores. Now in some ways this makes sense, and in fact prior to lockdown I had wondered - and even wanted - our mail order service to continue. There is certainly enough space to make the distancing very feasible if only a handful of staff are in on any given day. Otoh I strongly disagree with it because of the can of worms it opens in terms of travelling, especially in London where so many people live a long way from the centre. Now I happen to live within walking distance, but I count myself as excluded per their criteria by sharing a household with someone with increased risk (and because I am only just starting to enjoy sitting on the balcony now that I am not in perma-panic anymore!)
It was all very much couched in the language of being on a voluntary basis, and they were asking for people who can walk/bike as a priority...but then also said "or use public transport if comfortable with it". But the whole point is, it's not just about an individual's risk assessment, but about the wider effects (plus, in my understanding, Tfl are still asking to absolutely not use public transport in London, apart from actual key workers). And if this little bit is replicated amongst dozens, hundreds, thousands of businesses in London, even if it's within the parameters. .. it's a worry to me. Especially while there's no test and trace in place, and while I am sometimes getting the impression on my incredibly infrequent walks that some people haven't quite got that even with social distancing you are still not supposed to cough and sneeze at people...
 
Back
Top Bottom