Coronavirus (2021) thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
For sure, nobody would dispute that. In wave one, you didn't even get a test unless hospitalised.

Seroprevalance (blood antibody tests) are generally used to assess how many people have had it.
But does that not assume they would still have evidence or even got sick enough to mount a response visible months later?


Its a better guide to a minimum level. But I think that may be all it is.
 
With Scotland having a subsidised economy, of course she can appear stricter. Locking down earlier and re-opening later.
She comes across like somebody on benefits or who get paid regardless, telling people like me who are self employed that i should stop work to protect others.
I'm not being political, but in the real world, these decision affect some more than others.

No disrespect, but I think you place far too much weight on this supposed subsidised economy. Westminster treasury has the money. It's posed no problems when donating billions to their pals for ridiculous contracts which serves nobody, so don't let them kid you they're so hard pressed whilst Holyrood can squander money on whatever they like - it doesn't work at all like that.
 
With Scotland having a subsidised economy, of course she can appear stricter. Locking down earlier and re-opening later.
She comes across like somebody on benefits or who get paid regardless, telling people like me who are self employed that i should stop work to protect others.
I'm not being political, but in the real world, these decision affect some more than others.

You are being completely political. Your opening sentence sets the tone and you stick to it in the rest of the post.
 
I guess we will find out as if the level is way below 50% still we have a race on and many weeks of awful numbers.

If they do start to wane before the vaccines take effect either lockdown really is working or the numbers of those susceptible are lower than we suspect.
 
But does that not assume they would still have evidence or even got sick enough to mount a response visible months later?

There's problems with any methodology, yes. Assumptions have to be made, and models used to fill the gaps. But there seems to be good agreement that however assessed, the vast majority of people are yet to be affected nationwide. And then there are second order questions like how much protection having been infected gives both soon after and into the future.

As you point out, of course, that doesn't mean in some localities, infection has been quite different, both up and down.
 
I agree we cannot assume anything on immunity or levels of 'herd immunity' but they may well yet prove the hidden factor that gets us out of this. Like in War of the Worlds humanity being less susceptible to a cold virus than martians because we had lived with it for so long ended up turning the tide when all looked doomed
 
I guess we will find out as if the level is way below 50% still we have a race on and many weeks of awful numbers.

If they do start to wane before the vaccines take effect either lockdown really is working or the numbers of those susceptible are lower than we suspect.

Numbers are a function of social distancing as well as prevalence.

The last week's case numbers strongly suggest that the social distancing imposed by lockdown has had a strong effect (there's no way the *total* infected has changed significantly in a week, even with current transmission)
 
Scotland figures pretty bad in every aspect today, last few days had looked a bit more positive in some aspects but today's a dampener.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.