Re: Coronavirus
Whatever the outcome it won’t be a u-turn. :D
---------- Post added at 10:40 ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 ---------- Quote:
I do however welcome the renewed interest in child welfare. I trust that politicians and right wing talking heads will push for greater funding in schools, social work and to eradicate child poverty long after Covid-19 has been consigned to history. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
The idea of letting the virus run through the healthy population is to achieve herd immunity, so that the more vulnerable people don't get infected. With the vaccine we now have, your question can be answered more confidently. Concentrate those inoculations on the vulnerable and the health workers and you've clinched it. ---------- Post added at 10:51 ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Weaker variants can develop as easily as stronger ones. |
Re: Coronavirus
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55511662
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Anyway, time to get positive, if this forum can muster up enough positivity. We have a vaccine, it’s being delivered in order of priority and the virus will be under control within weeks. I get Maggy’s concern about infections being rife in schools, but children are largely unaffected by the virus. Vulnerable people need to keep isolated as much as possible in the meantime until they get their jabs, which will be administered within weeks. We will be able to look forward to a return to normality this spring/summer, with the removal of all restrictions. Good news at last, just waiting now for all your downsides....:D ---------- Post added at 11:21 ---------- Previous post was at 11:15 ---------- Quote:
The idea of protecting the vulnerable reduces the number of people it infects! Lockdowns only slow the virus, but it will go on to infect the same number of people in the end, (when the lockdown measures are relaxed again) but over a longer timescale, which is more dangerous. Fortunately, the vaccine gives us more options now. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
You claim that treating a pandemic as a health issue won’t wash when restrictions are still well supported by the public as a whole. I must have missed the referendum on it, but as I’m sure you are aware we aren’t a direct democracy in any case. I’d hoped you’d learned not to clutch at optimistic straw after optimistic straw throughout the pandemic but evidently not. The removal of all restrictions is very unrealistic in the timeframe you propose. Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
It certainly wasn't the Government being threatened with one. |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Here are some numbers... The SARS-COV-2 genome is roughly 30,000 letters long and the mutation rate is 10^-4 per letter per year so, on average, there will be 3 mutations across the whole genome in 1 year. BUT, this assumes that the disease is not infectious. If one person infects another, then you double the number of virus reproductions and so the numbers of mutations double. If they infect others, the number of reproductions increase along with this. Because lockdowns reduces the number of infections, it reduces the number of viral reproduction cycles and will therefore reduce the numbers of mutations. If someone catches the disease and the virus develops a really nasty mutation but they don’t infect anyone due to lockdowns and isolation, that strain becomes extinct. Hope this makes sense! |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Even if we vaccinate at the rate of a million per week, it will take over a year to hit 70% of the population (herd immunity levels) And the CMOs say there will be vaccine shortages for the next couple of months. https://www.ft.com/content/d97c72c5-...c-9cc10b21f007 |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
|
Re: Coronavirus
All these arguments about closing schools . . . can we apply the same to food factories please?
see how far that gets you :p: |
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Now shut up and get back to work that food won't make itself:) |
Re: Coronavirus
*Deleted* Just trolling again.
|
Re: Coronavirus
but . . but . . a third of us could/may/potentially be asymptomatic and spreading it merrily among our colleagues friends and families :shocked:
Surely that's reason enough to shut everywhere down for at least 3 weeks to eliminate the potential spread of this virus . . and the good news is that it could/may/potentially lead to a lowering of the transmission risk when warehouses and delivery drivers are laid off too :D oh, and bugger all to buy in shops would mean less shoppers spreading it, what could possibly go wrong? Maybe we should stop all football matches too . . oh hang on *££ kerching ££* |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:18. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.