COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Crouchinho said:


Thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

Same as when it was posted yesterday. He’s an antivax crank who was struck off the medical register for giving dodgy non FDA approved treatments to cancer patients.

5G isn’t doing this. Bill Gates hasn’t made this to take away anyone’s guns. I’d personally ban all links to these whack job conspiracy theory videos.
 
DrBlueBob said:
Someone posted that Scotland had fewer per capita cases than elsewhere, obviously as a country Scotland has a lot op open spaces but it tends be windy almost perpetually. Could this contribute I wonder.
Click to expand...
I have noticed that all four countries have different curves with N Ireland the best, Scotland and Wales pretty similar and the England. To be honest, I put this down to the impact of London which is a hot spot and has the worst level of deaths in the UK.
 
SWP's back said:
Same as when it was posted yesterday. He’s an antivax crank who was struck off the medical register for giving dodgy non FDA approved treatments to cancer patients.

5G isn’t doing this. Bill Gates hasn’t made this to take away anyone’s guns. I’d personally ban all links to these whack job conspiracy theory videos.
Click to expand...

Sorry man didn't realise it was posted. Just got thrown it earlier on. Looks like a few of his got pulled already
 
BlueAnorak said:
My daughter tells me the biggest help (pre vacine) would be to find a drug or drug combination that can turn off or dampen down the immune system to stop the Cytokine storm that results in the death of most people from this virus. Ironically the bat is one of the few animals that can do this naturally.

A paper on the subject:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7102614/#s0010title

Incidently there is a NHS trial for Tocilizumab (TCZ) for use on limiting Cytokine storm, as well as the anti-malrial drugs Chloroquine, and Hydroxychloroquin.
Click to expand...
Do you think that the vitd advice which actually assists the immune system would work for or against the attenuation of said immune system?
 
i8therags said:
Not read the link you provided. Apologies. It's just your post in its own right jumped out at me. I'm 99% certain I've had the virus. Had to speak to a doctor after ignoring the demand to go to A n E after filling in an E form on line for serious issues that I believe is related to after effects of this virus. I strongly believed I just needed antibiotics

Your post is very interesting. I've been banging on about vitamin D since February. A very long story why. I'm no conspiracy theorist or anything. In December I was prescribed 40000 iu's of vitamin D. In February I was really poorly. I am in the high risk category, but recovered with no major fight, unpleasant and a bit scary at times, but no worse than most of us have had at some time with some virus at my age and smoking drinking history. I'm on antibiotics now for a suspected kidney infection. Giving the doctor info regarding my vitamin D, symptoms in February etc, she had no hesitation in prescribing me the antibiotics. Oh and they are working BTW. Feeling good now. Oh nearly forgot, she was of the opinion I had had corona . Not the booze.
Click to expand...

the Dr Campbell videos have been mentioning vitamin D for quite a while now. He’s even done videos about why it helps. Vitamin D assists against Respiratory issues so he’s been advising everyone to take vitamin D.

It’s also being suggested this could be why darker skinned people are being hit harder as it’s harder for them to produce vitamin C naturally.
 
Last edited:
grunge said:
thise Dr Campbell videos have been mentioning vitamin D for quite a while now. He’s even done videos about why it helps. Vitamin D assists against Respiratory issues so he’s been advising everyone to take vitamin D.

It’s also being suggested this could be why darker skinned people are being hit harder as it’s harder for them to produce vitamin C naturally.
Click to expand...
So basically covid is racist?
 
Advice please.
I know the rules say not, but I want to gauge opinion.
My daughter is a nurse, works really hard and risk is high to her, she currently is very upset that she can’t meet up with her boyfriend even for a walk round a park. She feels that the rules are particularly unfair to her, she drives to work, does 12 hour shifts and comes home stressed. All she wants is a bit of down time to meet her fella on our local park and at least clap eyes on him.
I’m saying no, but feel it’s not the correct decision.
Thoughts
 
i8rags said:
Advice please.
I know the rules say not, but I want to gauge opinion.
My daughter is a nurse, works really hard and risk is high to her, she currently is very upset that she can’t meet up with her boyfriend even for a walk round a park. She feels that the rules are particularly unfair to her, she drives to work, does 12 hour shifts and comes home stressed. All she wants is a bit of down time to meet her fella on our local park and at least clap eyes on him.
I’m saying no, but feel it’s not the correct decision.
Thoughts
Click to expand...
I'd go for it but no touching.
 
i8rags said:
Advice please.
I know the rules say not, but I want to gauge opinion.
My daughter is a nurse, works really hard and risk is high to her, she currently is very upset that she can’t meet up with her boyfriend even for a walk round a park. She feels that the rules are particularly unfair to her, she drives to work, does 12 hour shifts and comes home stressed. All she wants is a bit of down time to meet her fella on our local park and at least clap eyes on him.
I’m saying no, but feel it’s not the correct decision.
Thoughts
Click to expand...
Get them to meet outside of a supermarket. They could spend hours in each others company there.
 
Something significant happens this week. 3,000 New Yorkers will have a pin-prick blood test for antibodies, with the results due at the end of the week. Perhaps then we can get an idea on the level of immunity and put to bed the concept of herd immunity.

I am struggling with this argument. Most including me were shocked when the UK's defacto leader: The Government's Chief Scientific Adviser to the Government, Sir Patrick Vallance said on the Today program, Radio 4 that,

Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease and we reduce the transmission, at the same time we protect those who are most vulnerable to it. Those are the key things we need to do.

The implication of this strategy is that huge numbers would die and the process of lockdown would go on in phases for 1-2 years. This felt unacceptable. I am not so sure now.

We are now past the peak but we have a spectrum in the range of responses defined by mass-testing. The first wave of the virus caught Italy and Spain unaware and the world scrambled to impose their lockdowns. The virus really was on its way. Some countries went further. The USA and Germany copied South Korea and instigated mass testing programs. It was too late to save New York but there is now a difference in approach between those countries who are adopting mass-testing and those who have not.

The UK we are told now has the virus infectivity rate (R) down to below 1. But are we really trying to depress it down to zero? I don't believe so. If we were, we'd be community testing. The UK deaths are very bad (the graph they show you of deaths is in absolute terms and ignores the fact that the US has a population 5 times the UK), but it's not a simple comparison to make. If you expend huge resources on mass-testing and protect your people from infection in wave one you will have low immunity and will be exposed in the future whereas a country that has experienced controlled infection maybe better protected in the future. This is one of those cases where there are known unknowns whose unknowns will change everything we believe:
  1. Is there a cure? Tentative suggestions there maybe some anti-virals that show good results
  2. Will we have a vaccine and when? August is a possibility. Ironically the most advanced vaccine trials will be slowed down by low infection rates (they need their vaccinated blind trial members to get infected to test the vaccine).

    If a cure or vaccine materialise this Summer. Then the right approach was to do everything to suppress the virus.

  3. What is the antibody rate?
New York's antibody survey will open a window on immunity.

We will soon find out if there is a significant trade off between death and immunity (the protection of future death). The UK has had a sustained controlled infection now. That has led to a high death rate per population but if it's been acquired with the benefit of immunity then that would be significant, and indeed be an argument to proceed with surveillance testing alone, but if immunity levels are very low then we should adopt mass-testing, protect the population and hold out for the vaccine.

At the moment I am pretty convinced that Sir P. Vallance still holds the view that it would be a mistake to totally suppress the virus. I am amazed that no one in the media has asked this very obvious and important question. We should soon find out whether the man had real insight or not. Whether right or not his initial opinion was based on his best understanding, and will have been made in good faith. At the outset many people reeled in horror at his comments but in truth there were too many unknowns at the outset to determine what was the way to go. I think a pragmatic approach to responding to events was best.

Had the world paid attention to South Korea we probably would not have had a problem in the developed world but we are where we are, and the general public might actually find out a lot more about what that world really is this week. I suspect the authorities already have a crude idea about immunity levels.
 
i8rags said:
Advice please.
I know the rules say not, but I want to gauge opinion.
My daughter is a nurse, works really hard and risk is high to her, she currently is very upset that she can’t meet up with her boyfriend even for a walk round a park. She feels that the rules are particularly unfair to her, she drives to work, does 12 hour shifts and comes home stressed. All she wants is a bit of down time to meet her fella on our local park and at least clap eyes on him.
I’m saying no, but feel it’s not the correct decision.
Thoughts
Click to expand...
My niece is a pharmacist at Kings so whilst not ICU she still is at increased risk. She gets irritated by people not caring about distancing when she walks to work but as she points out the ones who don't avoid her are probably more at risk from this than she is.
My point is that your daughter would feel awful if she ended up giving him the virus. She knows what is right, difficult as it may be.
Not sure that you want to give her this advice but say it comes from Bluemoon's faithful: Facetimesex. Older chaps such as myself didn't have that option.
Kudos to your daughter btw and thanks from me for what she does. Good luck.
 
A minor point, but I don't think antriretroviral drugs 'cure' anything generally, do they?
I thought the HIV drugs act to slow/inhibit the replication of it instead, so it stays at a low level, rather than remove it completely.

Happy to be corrected on that. I suppose a high enough level of antibodies would essentially be a cure by preventing the virus acting at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top