COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
Interesting paradox we're in right now: testing healthy people then calling them ill, whilst ignoring and refusing to treat those who are genuinely sick.
27,630,000 lost GP appointments since March 2020.
350,000 lost cancer referrals.
62,000 lost urgent cancer referrals.
12,000 lost secondary cancer treatment appointments.
Millions of lost cancer screening appointments.
Cardiac appointments down by 50%.
It is only going to get worse.
Click to expand...
People are not being tested and then called sick, they are being tested and then called infectious there is a difference.

The overwhelming majority of health service users are those who are at high risk for severe covid what is being done to protect them in the health service inevitably restricts the productivity of the health service and is a seperate issue to public restrictions.
 
johnnytapia said:
Just some of the schools in Stockport that currently have classes/year groups in isolation due to positive cases:

  • St Winifred’s RC Primary, Heaton Mersey
  • Didsbury Road Primary School, Stockport - (Year 1)
  • Adswood Primary, Stockport - (Year 1, Year 2, one class from Y5/6)
  • Cheadle Hulme Primary School, Stockport - (Two classes from Year 2)
  • Cheadle Hulme School, Cheadle Hulme - (Cases confirmed in Years 8, 12 and 13)
  • Broadstone Hall Primary, Stockport - (One class from Year 3 and one class from Year 6)
  • Gatley Primary School, Stockport - (Reception)
  • St Anne's RC High, Stockport - (Year 11)
  • The Kingsway School, Stockport - (Confirmed cases)
  • Great Moor Junior School, Stockport - (Year 3)
  • Werneth School, Stockport - (Confirmed case in Year 7, bubble of 80 students isolating)
  • Marple Hall School, Stockport - (Year 8)
  • Cheadle Hulme High School, Stockport - (Two confirmed cases, plus confirmed case in sixth form)
  • Priestnall School, Stockport - (Year 8)
  • Stockport School, Stockport - (Confirmed case, 19 students isolating)
  • St James' Catholic High, Cheadle - (Years 8, 9, 10 and 11)
  • Ludworth Primary, Marple Bridge - (Case confirmed, Reception isolating along with some Year 1s, some Year 2s and a Year 4 class)
  • Bridge Hall Primary, Stockport - (Case confirmed)
  • Valley School, Stockport - (Staff member isolating)
  • Bolshaw Primary, Stockport - (Year 5/6)
  • Thorn Grove Primary, Cheadle Hulme - (One Year 5 class isolating)
  • Cale Green Primary School, Stockport - (Confirmed case)
  • Harrytown Catholic High School, Stockport - (Year 11)
  • Hazel Grove High School, Stockport - (Two cases confirmed, including one staff member. Some Year 8s isolating)
  • Vale View Primary, Stockport - (Reception, Year 1 and Year 5)
  • St Joseph's Catholic Primary, Stockport - (Case confirmed)
  • Rose Hill Primary, Marple - (Case confirmed)
  • Pownall Green Primary School, Stockport - (Confirmed case)
  • Bramhall High, Stockport - (Case confirmed)
  • Etchells Primary, Stockport - (School closed to all years)
  • Vernon Park Primary, Stockport - (Case confirmed)
  • Reddish Vale High, Stockport - (Case confirmed in Year 11, close contacts isolating)
  • Castle Hill High, Offerton, Stockport - (Case confirmed in Year 12)
Click to expand...
Thank you, that makes a lot more sense.
 
Cityfan said:
People are not being tested and then called sick, they are being tested and then called infectious there is a difference.

The overwhelming majority of health service users are those who are at high risk for severe covid what is being done to protect them in the health service inevitably restricts the productivity of the health service and is a seperate issue to public restrictions.
Click to expand...
Tested then told they’re infectious? Might well be true, if only symptomatic were being tested, but we all know they’re not.
We need to stop thinking of positive or negative but ’how positive’?

When somebody has tested positive previously (and at some time been infected), we have no simple and reliable way of distinguishing a repeat infection from non-viable, leftover RNA, although it is likely that somebody who actually has current infection – and who may be infectious to others – will have a much higher quantity of viral RNA on any swabs.

PCR tests work by repeatedly doubling the amount of genetic material in the original sample, until there is a detectable quantity of it. Each doubling is referred to as a “cycle”; and the number of cycles or doublings before there is a detectable quantity of genetic material is called the “cycle threshold” (CT or Ct). The larger the amount of viral RNA there is in the sample, the smaller the number of cycles that are required before it can be detected. And since the number of cycles is the CT value, the lower the CT value, the more virus there was in the original sample, and the more likely it is thought to be that the case was actually infectious, rather than still carrying leftover RNA, which is not clinically significant. Some of our labs do up to 47 cycles.....
 
grunge said:
Anywhere reliable? DM are well known for misrepresentation of data.
Click to expand...

It's quoting the reports the data is coming from so must be some truth. On the flip side you have The Suns headline that Greater Manchester hospitals are out of beds. When you read the article it confirms that they are at around 80% which is what you would expect in October. Just shows how the media manipulates the way people think and see things.
 
True_Blue69 said:
It's quoting the reports the data is coming from so must be some truth. On the flip side you have The Suns headline that Greater Manchester hospitals are out of beds. When you read the article it confirms that they are at around 80% which is what you would expect in October. Just shows how the media manipulates the way people think and see things.
Click to expand...
Oldham's council leader was on BBC about an hour ago and said the same. Said media information was wrong.
 
Just on TV those British guys who had covid in Italy and were in isolation have finally been released after 61 days. The law in Italy was that they had to have 3 negative tests on consecutive days to be let out but they keep having inconsistent results so couldn't get out. The law eventually was changed so they were allowed out after 1 negative test.
 
True_Blue69 said:
Just on TV those British guys who had covid in Italy and were in isolation have finally been released after 61 days. The law in Italy was that they had to have 3 negative tests on consecutive days to be let out but they keep having inconsistent results so couldn't get out. The law eventually was changed so they were allowed out after 1 negative test.
Click to expand...
We can't get people to isolate for 6 days never mind 61!
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
Tested then told they’re infectious? Might well be true, if only symptomatic were being tested, but we all know they’re not.
We need to stop thinking of positive or negative but ’how positive’?

When somebody has tested positive previously (and at some time been infected), we have no simple and reliable way of distinguishing a repeat infection from non-viable, leftover RNA, although it is likely that somebody who actually has current infection – and who may be infectious to others – will have a much higher quantity of viral RNA on any swabs.

PCR tests work by repeatedly doubling the amount of genetic material in the original sample, until there is a detectable quantity of it. Each doubling is referred to as a “cycle”; and the number of cycles or doublings before there is a detectable quantity of genetic material is called the “cycle threshold” (CT or Ct). The larger the amount of viral RNA there is in the sample, the smaller the number of cycles that are required before it can be detected. And since the number of cycles is the CT value, the lower the CT value, the more virus there was in the original sample, and the more likely it is thought to be that the case was actually infectious, rather than still carrying leftover RNA, which is not clinically significant. Some of our labs do up to 47 cycles.....
Click to expand...
My understanding is that the work in America suggests that in the recovery phase if you are detecting rna at over 35 cycles it is unlikely to be infectious, and fewer cycles it may be infectious.
However as a practical problem whan you are doing screening how important is this?
We know from survey work after the first wave that the detected prevalence by pcr was 0.04% which included all detected which suggests that prolonged shedding is not common and other work suggests that the people who shed it longest are those who were worst affected so the majority of those detected are probably infectious or have just been infectious which is important for contact tracing.
 
Cityfan said:
My understanding is that the work in America suggests that in the recovery phase if you are detecting rna at over 35 cycles it is unlikely to be infectious, and fewer cycles it may be infectious.
However as a practical problem whan you are doing screening how important is this?
We know from survey work after the first wave that the detected prevalence by pcr was 0.04% which included all detected which suggests that prolonged shedding is not common and other work suggests that the people who shed it longest are those who were worst affected so the majority of those detected are probably infectious or have just been infectious which is important for contact tracing.
Click to expand...
I’d imagine it’d be a reasonable way to prioritise your track and trace stuff? “I’ve got a bloke here with 10 ct cycles only, best make sure we find him pretty sharpish”. “This one, with 33 cycles? Not so pressing”.
 
The Light Was Yellow Sir said:
I’d imagine it’d be a reasonable way to prioritise your track and trace stuff? “I’ve got a bloke here with 10 ct cycles only, best make sure we find him pretty sharpish”. “This one, with 33 cycles? Not so pressing”.
Click to expand...
You might want to find the first person quickest but the contacts of the second person quickest because assuming he is in the down phase rather than just starting he may have already seen more people.
 
True_Blue69 said:
What are they playing at? Should be held to account at times like these and only be allowed to report on actual facts.
Click to expand...
Minister also said rates currently at about 70 percent in some.
I know it will only take a small jump before capacity is threatened but panicky sensationalist headlines don't help.
Some though will say people do need "frightening" but I'm not sure The Sun has the remit to do that.
 
True_Blue69 said:
It's quoting the reports the data is coming from so must be some truth. On the flip side you have The Suns headline that Greater Manchester hospitals are out of beds. When you read the article it confirms that they are at around 80% which is what you would expect in October. Just shows how the media manipulates the way people think and see things.
Click to expand...
There was a report in the media last week about Blackpool hospital and that all covid beds were full. Reality of that was that they currently had only 8 beds set aside for COVID, but that wasnt reported at all. The media love to glorify it all and like you say, manipulate how people are feeling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top