Nor ad-hominem attacks. Strange that.Originally Posted by Baloo
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Nor ad-hominem attacks. Strange that.
Congratulations on becoming the latest victim of the CCMB bully boys. If you have any view outside of the accepted groupthink you will be mercilessly attacked and ridiculed, even if you are right about everything. That's just the way it is on here, alternative facts are the new ultimate truth
Apologise to Jon not me.
I haven't apologised to you.
In response to me saying that we have never before produced a vaccine in 18 months, Jon was as sarcastic in his response as I was in mine.
So, now you have the context let's see you come to a more reasoned conclusion.After extensive research (3 clicks on Google) I can reveal that a vaccine for Zika virus was developed and ready for testing in 7 months - back in 2015.
Fair enough
I was being a bit sarcastic, but that was in response to posts from CCFCC3PO that vaccines have never been developed in less than 5 years and his refusal to engage with the very many expert claims over recent months that a COVID9 vaccine may be available in 12-18 months based on current levels of research and collaboration. For what it's worth (contrary to his claim) I never said a Zika vaccine was produced in 7 months - I said I had found an online article that said the researchers were ready for clinical testing after 7 months (indicating rapid progress) but that the testing was never carried out because the virus fizzled out.Fair enough
This is mainly about how confident we can be about vaccine development - and what that means for lock down, the importance of testing and tracing, and the shape and speed of any exit strategy - not about our variable levels of ignorance. My level of ignorance is very high, but I have enough confidence in people who do know stuff to think that CCFCC3POs insistence on 5 years minimum is overly pessimistic.
I have no problems with the sarcasm, and I am sure you have no problems either.
With regards to the Zika vaccine - getting a vaccine to clinical trial in 7 months does not equate to having a fully working vaccine, nor does it equate to having enough of the vaccine to immunise the population that needs it (i.e. the people living in countries where the virus is prevalent). They are still working on a vaccine for the Zika virus by the way.
Nobody has achieved a vaccine on such a scale in 12-18 months, and that is why I am incredibly cautious about pinning hopes on getting a working vaccine out and to 60% of the population of the world (since it is affecting practically every country in the world) in that time. 60% is the figure I see quoted for herd immunity.
I have not insisted that a vaccine will take a minimum of 5 years. I am suggesting that people treat the headlines with caution. It could well be that we have a virus in 12 months, it could be that there will be enough to immunize the suspected 60% of the population that requires it (i.e. to achieve herd immunity) in 12-18 months. If it happens, it will be an incredible achievement, the like of which we have not seen before.
Taken from the Guardian's rolling coverage of COVID 19 earlier this morning;-
"10:47
An interesting study has emerged in the US which found that the number of people infected with coronavirus could be as much as 85 times higher than previously thought.
The research from Stanford University, which was published on Friday, tested samples from 3,330 people in Santa Clara county, in California, and found the virus to be 50 to 85 times more common than official figures indicated.
The study, the first large-scale one of its kind, has yet to be peer reviewed and was conducted by identifying antibodies in healthy individuals through a finger prick test, which indicated whether they had already contracted and recovered from the virus.
At the time of the study, Santa Clara county had 1,094 confirmed cases of Covid-19, resulting in 50 deaths. But, based on the rate of people who have antibodies, it is likely that between 48,000 and 81,000 people had been infected in the county by early April – a number approximately 50 to 80 times higher."
The extrapolation from this is that infection rates are dramatically less than Govt. 'experts' are telling us. I posted last week an article from a leading advisor to the Home Office who said as much. also today [can't find it now] a leading expert in Finland said infection rates were closer to 0.14%. These are staggering differences to the current zeitgeist prevailing. One other thing - the countries who have applied the strictest lockdowns have had the most cases of COVID 19. The ones with the fewer restrictions , less cases. We've got 1000's of beds ready for CV19 patients, empty. We've cancelled critical treatment for the other 99% of the population...
Surely the extrapolation is that infection rates are much higher? Would like to see your working on that.
As for the lockdown/case comparison, are you saying that lockdown means it spreads more? I would imagine that number of cases is linked to number of tests more than anything else. And a country who takes it seriously enough to do lots of testing is also likely to take it seriously enough to have a lockdown.
I think you meam infection rates are dramatically higher? Why do you put experts in inverted commas, what is it that they are saying that makes you think they are not experts?
I meant mortality rates - my error. If you find one expert you can find another with a different view. The Govt. opted for Ferguson. That's why we have 1000's of empty beds in specially built facilities lying almost empty. Also practically every other type of operation has been cancelled - even critical heart and cancer ones. Specialist wards are almost empty with spare staff. Experts said ventilators were crucial, two weeks ago there was a mad panic. Now it seems they're actually responsible for more deaths.
I know sod all about any of this except I don't swallow every bit of c**p I'm told. Probably an age thing. People of my generation are much more sceptical than the internet -savvy folk of today..
I do wonder what needs to happen for you to swallow your pride and admit that the virus is actually a problem and it's not the media and politicians being drama queens.
There's more to being skeptical than just being anti-Government or anti-"expert".
The need for extra hospital beds was based on a model that has revised the peak downwards at relevant stages. For example, the readiness of the UK population to adhere to social distancing. The original models factored in that only around 50% of the population would follow the social distancing guidelines. The fact is, that a significant number of people are adhering to the guidelines (more than 50%), which has had a positive impact on the infection rate.
If the models proved correct, and we were out of beds, I'm wondering if that would also be the fault of Professor Ferguson (and his team)?
Ok, sorry, let's pick through this post.
As Lardy says, how have you come to that conclusion?
You are in danger of believing the "experts" that suit your narrative.I posted last week an article from a leading advisor to the Home Office who said as much. also today [can't find it now] a leading expert in Finland said infection rates were closer to 0.14%. These are staggering differences to the current zeitgeist prevailing.
Can you provide examples so that we can contrast and compare?One other thing - the countries who have applied the strictest lockdowns have had the most cases of COVID 19. The ones with the fewer restrictions , less cases.
Would you rather have too many beds, or too few?We've got 1000's of beds ready for CV19 patients, empty. We've cancelled critical treatment for the other 99% of the population...
I mean no offence when I say this, but I think the media need to hold back on sensationalising studies that are awaiting peer review.
I'm not sure saying it is interesting while pointing out themselves that there has been no peer review yet is sensationalising it is it?
I agree it is interesting, but without peer review I don;t think it is newsworthy at the moment. I would say that 85 times more people having been infected would be a sensational figure. It would also be very welcome because it would suggest that a significant number of people are asymptomatic.
What were they incorrect with? Who would have been more correct?
There is a very useful app - I think you will find it in your play stores under the name "Dreamlab" run by Vodafone.
When your phone is left to charge overnight, it uses your phone to help the Imperial College make calculations. This is usually in the fight against cancer. They have recently extended it to Covid-19.
As long as your phone is on charge, and as long as the app is running, your phone will be brought in to assist in the calculations. You will need to select the project you want to assist with, there are a few there.
Search for Dreamlab on Google Play or Apple-store (whatever that one is called). Install it, set it to run and charge the phone overnight.
Breaking news tonight.Johnson missed 5 COBRA meetings.
The first on 24 January and 4 after as the virus took hold.
His first appearance was on March 2
This story by the Sunday Times is absolutely damning about Boris Johnson’s reckless attitude towards the coronavirus. https://t.co/3Cyp1mnW8D https://t.co/y5RZqivvk8
Joris Bohnson getting an absolute pasting here in the times of all places
The Times is behind a paywall, here's the article. Johnson and co getting absolutely savaged
http://archive.vn/ofnfS
thanks for link a really damning inditement of british gov policy and lack of leadership by the Times, should be read by all Boris fans to realise what an egotistical fraud he is
The whole thing is turning into a mess. Cometh the hour, cometh the man and Boris, Raab, Hancock, Drakeford, Gethin have failed.
Track and trace started well then all change. Rugby internationals, Cheltenham festival etc deemed OK because they were outdoor events. Rubbish, we all know the damage is done when we are toe to toe in the bars.
Eventually, after football clubs and similar had taken their own action because they could see the issues, the government takes action. Lockdown arrives as cases escalate.
After earlier messages that the NHS was set up to handle whatever was thrown at it, the realisation that it wasn't. Not enough beds, ventilators, PPE, doctors, nurses. So instead of the NHS saving us we are asked to save the NHS.
The daily briefings fill me with dread as they bumble through the agenda, and not just in England. Gethin and Drakeford tell us daily that we can do 5000 tests a day and we manage 800. Chaos in administration so sites like CC stadium are underused. Drakeford says no PPE issues in Wales. Nurses and care homes tell us otherwise.
Public Health bodies prove to be bureaucratic autocracies, reluctant to engage with the expertise in the private sector. I read recently of a local welsh company diverting its production and making face visors. All ready to go but waiting for them to be approved.
And finally today's papers talk of easing the lockdown in May when we are still not seeing a decline in daily cases in UK, and marginal in Wales. We could be setting ourselves up for a second wave as blustering leadership continues.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
