UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
News and current affairs => The Coronavirus and Covid-19 => Topic started by: John on April 13, 2020, 11:36:09 PM
-
Yes, its true, our government has done everything it can to prevent the public getting their hands on Covid-19 home testing kits.
But why I hear you ask?
The simple answer is control. The government want to control who is tested and who isn't. Most importantly in all of this however is the fact that the UK government want to control the data since to allow private home testing would deny this to them. To this end, they have now set up testing stations in a few cities around the UK including converting a number of MOT centres in Northern Ireland into Covid-19 test sites. Blood samples are taken at these sites and sent off for analysis to government approved laboratories. This ensures the government keep control of the data and can release it when and if they decide.
What is really going on though? The World Health Organization stated many weeks ago that the Coronavirus can only be tackled by testing, testing and more testing. So why is the UK so far behind in this process?
Can the UK government really test 67 million people or will testing be limited to the chosen few?
(https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/incoming/8d028/39115717.ece/AUTOCROP/w800/YE%20080420KB1%200138%202.jpg)
MOT testing centres in Northern Ireland converted to Covid-19 testing stations.
-
Yes, its true, our government has done everything it can to prevent the public getting their hands on Covid-19 home testing kits.
But why I hear you ask?
The simple answer is control. The government want to control who is tested and who isn't. Most importantly in all of this however is the fact that the UK government want to control the data since to allow private home testing would deny this to them. To this end, they have now set up testing stations in a few cities around the UK including converting a number of MOT centres in Northern Ireland into Covid-19 test sites. Blood samples are taken at these sites and sent off for analysis to government approved laboratories. This ensures the government keep control of the data and can release it when and if they decide.
What is really going on though? The World Health Organization stated many weeks ago that the Coronavirus can only be tackled by testing, testing and more testing. So why is the UK so far behind in this process?
Can the UK government really test 67 million people or will testing be limited to the chosen few?
(https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/incoming/8d028/39115717.ece/AUTOCROP/w800/YE%20080420KB1%200138%202.jpg)
MOT testing centres in Northern Ireland converted to Covid-19 testing stations.
Health England keep pushing the same mantra that no rapid test Covid-19 kits have been approved for use in the UK despite the many thousands that are manufactured here but have been shipped off abroad.
China has perfected these kits given their many advantages in this pandemic but all we get from the Tories is dither and delay. I agree though, they want to control the testing in approved centres so that they can manipulate the statistics later.
According to this article the government are lying through their teeth yet again?!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/02/government-has-bought-no-covid-19-home-testing-kits-despite/
-
Health England keep pushing the same mantra that no rapid test Covid-19 kits have been approved for use in the UK despite the many thousands that are manufactured here but have been shipped off abroad.
China has perfected these kits given their many advantages in this pandemic but all we get from the Tories is dither and delay. I agree though, they want to control the testing in approved centres so that they can manipulate the statistics later.
According to this article the government are lying through their teeth yet again?!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/02/government-has-bought-no-covid-19-home-testing-kits-despite/
china havent perfected the kits imo...thats the problem
-
From what I've read in general (not necessarily related to the UK), they need to be validated for specificity (the right virus) and sensitivity (low false results).
-
Do home testing kits exist anywhere in the world? Say they were being advertised on ebay or amazon, how would anyone know they were reliable? It’s true that an unreliable test is more harmful than no test at all so I wouldn’t want these things to be a commerically available off the shelf product.
-
Bring in the dogs?
https://www.citylab.com/life/2020/04/coronavirus-no-symptoms-dogs-smell-detect-covid-19-infection/609403/
God given cure?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8274351/Kingdom-Church-selling-fake-coronavirus-cure-investigation.html
AND
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jim-bakker-coronavirus-covid-19-fake-cure-televangelist-sued-by-missouri-symptoms-selling-treatment/
hal le loo yah
-
We need a reliable test and we need testing of the general population to see what the level of antibodies are.. I believe we have the reliable test now
-
We need a reliable test and we need testing of the general population to see what the level of antibodies are.. I believe we have the reliable test now
Time will tell...
-
Time will tell...
Early testing amongst other control methods seems to have paid dividends for New Zealand. Britain is well on track to achieving the highest death rate in Europe.
-
Early testing amongst other control methods seems to have paid dividends for New Zealand. Britain is well on track to achieving the highest death rate in Europe.
many factors involved...population density..
England 424
Germany 232
Italy 200
France 118
Spain 92
Sweeden 23
New Zealand 18
-
Engalnd population density 424
Belgium PD 376...deaths 7000...population 11 million...far worse that England
-
Engalnd population density 424
Belgium PD 376...deaths 7000...population 11 million...far worse that England
Hmm. Not sure if Belgium is really the best comparison.
Deaths in Belgium have been recorded as Covid-related even if there was just a suspicion. And has an urban density of 98%.
What's the urban density of England? I haven't been able to find it.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-why-is-belgium-a-europe-hotspot-for-covid-19-deaths-11975017
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/
-
Hmm. Not sure if Belgium is really the best comparison.
Deaths in Belgium have been recorded as Covid-related even if there was just a suspicion. And has an urban density of 98%.
What's the urban density of England? I haven't been able to find it.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-why-is-belgium-a-europe-hotspot-for-covid-19-deaths-11975017
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/population-by-country/
Its diificult to make any true comparison becasue there are many factors involved...but making comparisons and judging the govt is exactly what popele are doing. Does england have the highest death rate...who knows.
ive been watching Sweeden....population 11 million. Stockholm is an archipeligo of 14 islands so natural social distancing. it will be interesting if their next daily death rate is an upward or lower trend...nothing yet is clear.
Does the Uk have ahigher level of BAME...London certainly seems to...thats another factor
-
They keep saying that the only valid comparisons between countries is to compare excess death figures, information which won’t be available for some months.
-
Yes, loads of factors.
Re Sweden, the deputy PM explains why they chose a different strategy:
Covid-19 'is a marathon, not a sprint'
https://edition.cnn.com/videos/world/2020/04/28/sweden-deputy-prime-minister-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic-lockdown-gorani-intv-intl-ldn-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/around-the-world/
Their biggest city, by far, is Stockholm with 1.5m. Then a few others above 150k, and the rest are somewhat smaller.
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/sweden-population/
According to one article / interview (to dig out), they were pretty nervous at one point as they wouldn't have had enough ICU beds, either. On the whole, however, people seem fairly well behaved in terms of respecting the guidelines.
They do have measures in place, but they are banking on eventually gaining herd immunity.
The only problem is that there doesn't appear to be any proof yet that the presence of antibodies would actually provide immunity. On the other hand, the stories of people testing positive after they've already had it could be just false positives for one reason or another.
-
They keep saying that the only valid comparisons between countries is to compare excess death figures, information which won’t be available for some months.
They're available for some countries, but not all yet.
A good explanation of the complexity of comparing countries (aside from @jburnmurdoch ) :
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/30/coronavirus-deaths-how-does-britain-compare-with-other-countries?CMP=share_btn_tw
-
Ah. If confirmed, a bit of good news.
A number of reported cases of coronavirus patients relapsing after overcoming the disease were actually due to testing failures, South Korean scientists say.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-scientists-conclude-people-cannot-be-infected-twice-11981721
-
(http://)
This is what we need for other countries to make an accurate assessmnet
and a bit of a reality check for those who claim more people die from flu
-
The FT has done this for a dozen or so countries so far.
https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest
-
The FT has done this for a dozen or so countries so far.
https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest
so England and wales 52%.....Belgium 60%....Spain 72% ....italy 90%..
So Uk certainly not heading for the most deaths....someones lying...and if you look at population density...the UK is doing pretty good...
Sweeden at 23% ...with such a low population density may be considered to be doing badly.
I do like numbers
-
I'm not sure who you think is lying.
The FT is using excess deaths as a proxy, but is waiting to see if the concept pans out.
I'm not sure why they're only counting England and Wales. Either there were no excess deaths in Scotland or NI, which seems unlikely, or they haven't got the figures yet.
At the moment, it seems to be a useful indicator of where countries have been over or under reporting for whatever reason.
-
I'm not sure who you think is lying.
The FT is using excess deaths as a proxy, but is waiting to see if the concept pans out.
I'm not sure why they're only counting England and Wales. Either there were no excess deaths in Scotland or NI, which seems unlikely, or they haven't got the figures yet.
At the moment, it seems to be a useful indicator of where countries have been over or under reporting for whatever reason.
It really is quite simple.. those who I think are lying are those taht suggest that the Uk will have the worst record re deaths re co-vid..... It's far to early to make that claim and if you look at the figures i've shown its not supported by the evidence
-
Theres alot of misinformation that need to be challenged...there are claims that the WHO have published data that shows mobile phone radiation may cause cancer...thats true ...but at the same level as pickled vegetables and talcum powder...and below the level of meat
-
Yeah, well.
Anyway, here's another challenge for those trying to keep tabs on Covid numbers.
Read the explanatory para.
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1256255822025428992
The UK isn't the only one that has changed its reporting system, and some change their formating, which messes up automated updating and it takes time to sort through.
Another example is the US:
NOTES:
In accordance with new CDC guidelines:
New York: the numbers shown below include probable deaths (and, consequently, probable cases for the same number) as reported by New York City
Maryland: includes probable deaths, as reported by the Department of Health (Section: "COVID-19 Statistics in Maryland")
Wyoming: includes probable cases, as reported by the Department of Health
Most state reports and dashboards (such as Texas, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Missouri, etc.) lag behind or show incomplete data with respect to the data shown by individual counties on their official websites and dashboards, which is what we collecte and aggregate when possible to show the most updated and accurate number in the table below. We will soon publish state-level pages with graphs and the breakdown by county.
-
It really is quite simple.. those who I think are lying are those taht suggest that the Uk will have the worst record re deaths re co-vid..... It's far to early to make that claim and if you look at the figures i've shown its not supported by the evidence
There are some people who actively WANT Britain to have the worst record for deaths, for politically motivated reasons. They may pretend otherwise of course...
-
It's not a football league scoring points.
It can be easier to look at numbers and forget that each person was a living human being, someone's mum or dad, uncle or aunt, husband or wife, cousin, or even someone's child. Or best friend. Whether that's in the UK or at the other end of the world.
-
It's not a football league scoring points.
It can be easier to look at numbers and forget that each person was a living human being, someone's mum or dad, uncle or aunt, husband or wife, cousin, or even someone's child. Or best friend. Whether that's in the UK or at the other end of the world.
To some ..including posters here...it is about scoring points in order to attack the governement. Deaths in excess of the "norm" are probably the best indication of the true rate of deaths we can have at the moment. By looking at the numbers in other countries it can help us decide the best option going forward to minimise deaths. The problem is that there are other factors involved such as population density which can play a major part. Sweeden seems to have gone down the herd immunity route but that may well have been an absolute disaster in the UK. Then there is more than one strain of the virus....could it be possible that New Zealand has a less virulant strain.
-
To some ..including posters here...it is about scoring points in order to attack the governement. Deaths in excess of the "norm" are probably the best indication of the true rate of deaths we can have at the moment. By looking at the numbers in other countries it can help us decide the best option going forward to minimise deaths. The problem is that there are other factors involved such as population density which can play a major part. Sweeden seems to have gone down the herd immunity route but that may well have been an absolute disaster in the UK. Then there is more than one strain of the virus....could it be possible that New Zealand has a less virulant strain.
All our cases seemed to be able to be traced back to various persons who had travelled overseas. I don't think there was one variant going around.
-
How do you feel that Jacinda has handled it so far, Rob? From the outside, IMO, she seems to have been on the ball.
-
How do you feel that Jacinda has handled it so far, Rob? From the outside, IMO, she seems to have been on the ball.
She is one remarkable person. In the beginning, I thought she had locked the country down too early, as I imagined they were hoping for a controlled rate of spread of the virus through the population. But now they have basically eliminated the virus from the country.
OK so now we have 5 million people in desperate need of a working vaccine. When will the vaccine come? How likely will NZ be on the priority list?
I feel we will be waiting a long time.
Long before Covid 19 appeared on the scene I had developed the concept of using sub minimal infective doses of a disease to develop immunity.
So from what I've heard Covid 19 has a "minimal infective dose" of 1000 virus particles.
Therefore if it was possible to count the number of virus particles in a dose if we were to take a dose close to the minimal infective dose our bodies would develop immunity but we would remain without symptoms.
OK, I believe this would have to be applied in an isolated situation for I'm sure these people would still be spreading the disease, so they need to be isolated till they were noninfectious (approx 2-3 weeks).
I have written to the Director-General of Health regarding this proposal but I never got a reply.
As far as I know, no one else is using the minimal infective dose as a control method so there isn't an article backing my idea as yet. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238819-does-a-high-viral-load-or-infectious-dose-make-covid-19-worse/
-
It has been brought to my attention that some posters are still using inappropriate comments and remarks towards other members on the boards. Forum rules dictate that all responses should be amicable and constructive, there is no need to express any opinion or respond to any question aggressively.
Please keep this in mind guys when posting. TY
-
She is one remarkable person. In the beginning, I thought she had locked the country down too early, as I imagined they were hoping for a controlled rate of spread of the virus through the population. But now they have basically eliminated the virus from the country.
OK so now we have 5 million people in desperate need of a working vaccine. When will the vaccine come? How likely will NZ be on the priority list?
I feel we will be waiting a long time.
Long before Covid 19 appeared on the scene I had developed the concept of using sub minimal infective doses of a disease to develop immunity.
So from what I've heard Covid 19 has a "minimal infective dose" of 1000 virus particles.
Therefore if it was possible to count the number of virus particles in a dose if we were to take a dose close to the minimal infective dose our bodies would develop immunity but we would remain without symptoms.
OK, I believe this would have to be applied in an isolated situation for I'm sure these people would still be spreading the disease, so they need to be isolated till they were noninfectious (approx 2-3 weeks).
I have written to the Director-General of Health regarding this proposal but I never got a reply.
As far as I know, no one else is using the minimal infective dose as a control method so there isn't an article backing my idea as yet. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238819-does-a-high-viral-load-or-infectious-dose-make-covid-19-worse/
https://youtu.be/vrL9QKGQrWk A German virologist who is hypothesizing using low doses of the virus to get immunity in the population. "German virologist: Covid-19 is less deadly than we thought"
Worth thinking about.
-
TBH, I wouldn't particularly like to spend 6 weeks intubated on my tummy because of some virologist's "hypothesis".
I have been wondering for some time whether a tiny (inadvertent) dose would gradually build antibodies or not.
Two problems with that: most experts are warning that at the moment there is no proof that the presence of antibodies equates to immunity, and (my own concern) is whether a small build-up of the virus could end up with an overload. The triggering thought was that, e.g., a shopper is apparently likely to receive a smaller dose than a cashier in front of numerous customers per day.
-
TBH, I wouldn't particularly like to spend 6 weeks intubated on my tummy because of some virologist's "hypothesis".
I have been wondering for some time whether a tiny (inadvertent) dose would gradually build antibodies or not.
Two problems with that: most experts are warning that at the moment there is no proof that the presence of antibodies equates to immunity, and (my own concern) is whether a small build-up of the virus could end up with an overload. The triggering thought was that, e.g., a shopper is apparently likely to receive a smaller dose than a cashier in front of numerous customers per day.
Just because there is no proof doesnt mean its unlikely that infection results in immunity. it may well do but it would need a scientific study to prove it. Then there may not be permanent immunity......but perhaps a couple of years with reinfection after that but not severe....or reinfection that is worse than the original...like dengue fever.
Theres such a lot that simply isnt known because its a new virus.
Then...how likely or unlikely is it that a new..new virus could come along.
-
Just because there is no proof doesnt mean its unlikely that infection results in immunity. it may well do but it would need a scientific study to prove it. Then there may not be permanent immunity......but perhaps a couple of years with reinfection after that but not severe....or reinfection that is worse than the original...like dengue fever.
Theres such a lot that simply isnt known because its a new virus.
Then...how likely or unlikely is it that a new..new virus could come along.
I'm going to have to refresh as to what happens with Dengue Fever.
Look the same problem might happen after a Covid 19 vaccine, could it make reinfection worse than the original?
-
Just because there is no proof doesnt mean its unlikely that infection results in immunity. it may well do but it would need a scientific study to prove it. Then there may not be permanent immunity......but perhaps a couple of years with reinfection after that but not severe....or reinfection that is worse than the original...like dengue fever.
Theres such a lot that simply isnt known because its a new virus.
Then...how likely or unlikely is it that a new..new virus could come along.
Yes, that's what I'm wondering.
Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever
The risk factors for developing dengue hemorrhagic fever include:
having antibodies to dengue virus from a previous infection
being under the age of 12
being female
weakened immune system
https://www.healthline.com/health/dengue-fever#complications
-
I'm going to have to refresh as to what happens with Dengue Fever.
Look the same problem might happen after a Covid 19 vaccine, could it make reinfection worse than the original?
They say SARS Cov II virus originated in bats but the genetic difference is quite substantial. I'm now wondering if a human that had both Dengue fever and a bat virus simultaneously allowed recombination of the genome to produce the SARS Cov II virus to form.
-
From what I've read, the genome fits well with a certain type of bat, but may have passed it to an intermediate animal (armadillo or some other type). Not clear yet.
-
From what I've read, the genome fits well with a certain type of bat, but may have passed it to an intermediate animal (armadillo or some other type). Not clear yet.
Abstract: "The origin of the severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus (SARS‐CoV) remains unclear. Evidence based on Bayesian scanning plots and phylogenetic analysis using maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian methods indicates that SARS‐CoV, for the largest part of the genome (∼80%), is more closely related to Group II coronaviruses sequences, whereas in three regions in the ORF1ab gene it shows no apparent similarity to any of the previously characterized groups of coronaviruses. There is discordant phylogenetic clustering of SARS‐CoV and coronaviruses sequences, throughout the genome, compatible with either ancient recombination events or altered evolutionary rates in different lineages, or a combination of both. J. Med. Virol. 74:369–372, 2004. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc."
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmv.20187
Has the Dengue virus been sequenced?
-
"Dengue fever and COVID-19 are difficult to distinguish because they share clinical and laboratory features [3]. Some authors described cases who were wrongly diagnosed as dengue but later confirmed to be COVID-19 [4]. Besides, co-infections with arboviruses and SARS-CoV-2 have not been well studied."
OK it is a long shot but could the similarity be due to the combination of the two viruses SARs and Dengue?
-
"Dengue fever and COVID-19 are difficult to distinguish because they share clinical and laboratory features [3]. Some authors described cases who were wrongly diagnosed as dengue but later confirmed to be COVID-19 [4]. Besides, co-infections with arboviruses and SARS-CoV-2 have not been well studied."
OK it is a long shot but could the similarity be due to the combination of the two viruses SARs and Dengue?
The original Wuhan one mutated. In one of his pressers, Andrew Cuomo pointed out that the strain in California was different to the one on the east coast.
The west coast one may well have come directly from China (shorter flying time, immigrant Chinese population...) and Cuomo said the one on the east coast came from Europe. Seems likely it mutated at some point over there.
There's a third strain, but I can't find the article for the mo.
Re dengue fever, Dr Fauci said the Covid-19 couldn't be transmitted by mosquitoes. It doesn't appear to be related to the coronaviruses, either.
-
The original Wuhan one mutated. In one of his pressers, Andrew Cuomo pointed out that the strain in California was different to the one on the east coast.
The west coast one may well have come directly from China (shorter flying time, immigrant Chinese population...) and Cuomo said the one on the east coast came from Europe. Seems likely it mutated at some point over there.
There's a third strain, but I can't find the article for the mo.
Re dengue fever, Dr Fauci said the Covid-19 couldn't be transmitted by mosquitoes. It doesn't appear to be related to the coronaviruses, either.
When they are talking about different strains the difference is relatively minor, a couple of base differences.
Has the virus got 29904 bases? So Covid 19 virus differs by around 5980 bases compared to the original bat virus it may be related to.
Why is Dengue only transmitted by certain types of mosquitoes? Covid 19 virus can infect the eyes and I've noticed some houseflies have a habit of landing on one's eye. So I wouldn't reject the idea that Covid 19 isn't transmitted by flies.
"How does an Aedes aegypti mosquito become a dengue vector? After a mosquito feeds on the blood of someone infected with the dengue virus, that mosquito becomes a dengue vector. The mosquito must take its blood meal during the period of viremia, when the infected person has high levels of the dengue virus in the blood. Once the virus enters the mosquito's system in the blood meal, the virus spreads through the mosquito's body over a period of eight to twelve days. After this period, the infected mosquito can transmit the dengue virus to another person while feeding. Does a mosquito infected with the dengue virus only transmit the virus to the next person it feeds on? No, once infected with dengue, the mosquito will remain infected with the virus for its entire life. Infected mosquitoes can continue transmitting the dengue virus to healthy people for the rest of their life spans, generally a three- to four-week period." https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/dengue-transmission-22399758/
So the virus infects humans and some species of mosquitoes.