No Holidays abroad Allowed

[Jim]

The irony is theres a uk variant sweeping through Europe raising their figures. Ive not heard of a german, french greek variant yet.

There is no Irony. The Kent Variant is known as such because the UK leads the world by some way in sequencing the virus to find new variants. If they are not sequencing nearly as much if at all in the US or Germany so you will not likley see a Boston or Berlin Variant.

pre, pandemic. https://www.genomicsengland.co.uk/50000-genomes-landmark/

Post pandemic. there are hundreds of references to our expertise in this area. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2021/02/11/britain-leading-way-sequencing-coronavirus-genome/

Our sequencing finds variants, that can come from anywhere, we find them because we are looking. We are No1 in the world at doing this; for perspective the US is 42nd.

 

[MITHRANDIR]

It’s my understanding that the greater the prevalence, the greater the risk of a mutation; that’s why it’s important to suppress it and why there’s a fear of a new Strain of Concern.

Our low levels of prevalence makes it less likely that a Strain of Concern will appear here.

Ian

Respectfully, i believe that thinking is flawed, i listened to a programme on radio 4 a while ago two professors talking about viruses not just covid and how they change and adapt.
They were saying that viruses will do what they can to survive, and that having suppression of a virus actually stimulates them to make genetic changes to survive and replicate more easily, that's why they are so difficult to eradicate, because they change constantly, and are able to adapt quickly.
We are suppressing the virus through vaccination aren't we?
My point was only viruses change anywhere/anytime/constantly, just because the prevalence rate is low doesn't mean no mutations.
Sobering listening though.
Very clever things, viruses.

 

[Northernraider]

What is the definition of “recovered” ?
I suggest there are a lot of people with “Long Covid” that would argue that they have not recovered...

Probably about 1% of that figure.

I now know about 20 folk that's had it or tested positive for it and the worst they've had is a flu

Granted there has also been 3 deaths of extended family but each of those were over 70 with other quite serious ailments.

The problem these days is weve got accustomed of trying to save everyone ....and theres an argument of whether thats a good thing or not

Its even extended to animals these days with folk keeping poor dogs with painful conditions alive because they cant bare to lose them.


Nature creates these things at somepoint we will be defeated

 

[suavecarve]

There's a very sobering article in the Times this morning looking at projections for this third wave - which was described as inevitable in the Downing Street briefing yesterday.

It's behind a pay wall but in summary it says the projections are if all restrictions were released after the over-50s have had their first jab the resultant death toll could be 100,000. Even the most gradual lifting of restrictions, waiting until the start of July, leads to 30,000 more deaths.

What I found sobering was the realisation that the vaccine does not prevent the disease on its own. It will but only when virtually everyone of all ages has had the jab and we aren't there yet which is why the lifting of restrictions is going slowly.

The Times & The Sunday Times

News and opinion from The Times & The Sunday Times

www.thetimes.co.uk

I ve started reading it (you knew I would because figures are involved !)

First thing I noticed was the 32,000 - 81,000 deaths between 12/2/21 (A Palindrome day for figures people) and note we have already lost 10,000 with 15 months to go and currently losing 334 a week but announcing 594 with rough 40% decrease could see us at 12,000 of these by the start of May, so a low 20,000 deaths in 13 months. (or more than we currently have dieing on the current actual figures)

Next up was a third of the over 50s to be infected !!! How did they come up with that figure ? 33% of the country infected. ??? Woweee. So far, in the last year, we have managed to have 5.4% of the whole country and they are suggesting 33% of half the population (ish) will catch it in the same time scale. No wonder the figures are high.

Now if my figures are wrong from their figures, and this report is correct, then why are we so concerned about the yet to appear mutant virus appearing from another country, it will appear fr0m these shores if this report is accurate

Wo betide going on a staycation.

And then I got to the comments section. I am not alone in not giving this article a lot of credence

The comments section are worthy of a read. This is getting slated as much as a previous Imperial model which is well known

Public Health England’s numbers make no sense WHO site show 2.7m deaths out of 123m detected cases this would mean that 2.2% of detected cases die which would give us 21 deaths in an unvaccinated population of 964 (due to the limitations of testing actual rate of deaths would be much lower I think studies put it at between 0.1 and 0.4% So taking the crude figure of 2.2% Public health England are suggesting that taking the vaccine increase your risk of death by 3 times!!!

Likewise I have been trying to see how they get to the conclusions they do from the odd snippet of info they give us - this ‘back of envelope’ calc is an insult to our intelligence - as though the envelope has been put through the shredder, the writer has taken out a couple of scraps which we can see plus the (seemingly) extreme conclusion

This has to be the worst article on Covid that I have read. It’s so bad it should be pulled. Worst case scenario stats are plucked out, massaged into an implausible short timescale and incorrect maths thrown in on top. Does no one check articles before they are published?

Edit, I m sorry I cant leave this article alone, it is that bad (not you DBK the article) they are working on under 50s only to create these figures of 32,000. To date we have 6,000 deaths under 60 (In England hospitals) and on average that is 2/3 of total for UK (it wont be that high because most of the 1/3 are care homes who dont have a high percentage of over 50s dieing of covid in them) so 9,000 lost souls under 60 and they are suggesting 32,000 minimum in the same time period after the possibility of vaccinations. I might be one of those deaths as I am having a thrombosis over this report !

 

[suavecarve]

Respectfully, i believe that thinking is flawed, i listened to a programme on radio 4 a while ago two professors talking about viruses not just covid and how they change and adapt.
They were saying that viruses will do what they can to survive, and that having suppression of a virus actually stimulates them to make genetic changes to survive and replicate more easily, that's why they are so difficult to eradicate, because they change constantly, and are able to adapt quickly.
We are suppressing the virus through vaccination aren't we?
My point was only viruses change anywhere/anytime/constantly, just because the prevalence rate is low doesn't mean no mutations.
Sobering listening though.
Very clever things, viruses.

I agree with you

However the scientists, in the main, disagree with both of us. I have virologists at work, who in the main, agree with us more than they differ, but they also acknowledge the other side of the coin.

I think our thought processes make more sense. But if they didnt I wouldnt agree with you !

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Coolcats]

We managed it twice last year without a vaccination and this year we would have had both jabs. I think the risk from returning MHer's is very small.

Maybe maybe not, there are variants popping up all over the place plus even if vaccinated you could become a carrier. If the advice for now and possibly later this year is not to travel abroad the advice is probably for a good reason.

 

[MITHRANDIR]

I agree with you

However the scientists, in the main, disagree with both of us. I have virologists at work, who in the main, agree with us more than they differ, but they also acknowledge the other side of the coin.

I think our thought processes make more sense. But if they didnt I wouldnt agree with you !

Agreed, of course there is always the other side of the coin, the more i read about statistics/figures/death rate/prevalence etc the more i doubt the accuracy though.

 

[Coolcats]

The issue is not the figures here in England but the apparent third wave that seems to be getting reported in Europe. The government are obviously concerned that holiday makers are returning from countries with high rates and possibly different mutations.

And that is in part how it started last year with people returning from ski resorts......

 

[MITHRANDIR]

Maybe maybe not, there are variants popping up all over the place plus even if vaccinated you could become a carrier. If the advice for now and possibly later this year is not to travel abroad the advice is probably for a good reason.

True, but then that same rationale could be used for stopping domestic travel, which we aren't.

 

[bigtwin]

Over 100 million recovered and less than 3 million related deaths . It shows clearly that the vast majority survive.

Those data reflect the various mitigations in place; folks seem continuously to forget that fact. The number if deaths would be significantly higher had those mitigations not been in place.

My point was only viruses change anywhere/anytime/constantly, just because the prevalence rate is low doesn't mean no mutations.

Interesting points made in your response so thanks for that.

However, please note that I didn’t suggest that there would be no mutations, I said that the likelihood of mutations that were Strains of Concern would be lower.

Ian

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[busby]

What stopped the Spanish flu back in 1918 or was that something completely different,,? BUSBY.

 

[bigtwin]

Very clever things, viruses.

I’m curious about this. Does this suggest that viruses are thinking/intelligent entities either individually, or collectively? If so, how does that work?

I’d always assumed that mutations were, effectively, random in nature hence the view that the greater the number of viruses the greater the likelihood of mutations.

Anyone able to enlighten me?

Ian

 

[MITHRANDIR]

What stopped the Spanish flu back in 1918 or was that something completely different,,? BUSBY.

See Post 182, they talked about spanish flu and said that traces of it could still be found today, they thought that genetic changes made it much less virulent and largely died away.
Food for thought perhaps.

 

[pandas]

True, but then that same rationale could be used for stopping domestic travel, which we aren't.

But you can see the issue with a diatribe with some on this forum concerned about not being able to have their freedom, that they should be able to travel as they can do so entirely within their own motorhome bubble (?). Unfortunately it very much sounds like a third wave hitting these shores after the Easter and therefore more restrictions.

 

[ADJF]

But you can see the issue with a diatribe with some on this forum concerned about not being able to have their freedom, that they should be able to travel as they can do so entirely within their own motorhome bubble (?). Unfortunately it very much sounds like a third wave hitting these shores after the Easter and therefore more restrictions.

More potential UK Govt scaremongering fear propaganda. Maybe if this so called 3rd wave does occur perhaps do something different this time other than shutting down the country...perhaps open everything and show that lockdowns don't really do much other than trashing the economy....just a thought as they haven't been particularly successful so far have they?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[MITHRANDIR]

I’m curious about this. Does this suggest that viruses are thinking/intelligent entities either individually, or collectively? If so, how does that work?

I’d always assumed that mutations were, effectively, random in nature hence the view that the greater the number of viruses the greater the likelihood of mutations.

Anyone able to enlighten me?

Ian

I am no expert, far from it, i don't think they have "intelligence" per se, but have an ability to change themselves quickly to get around problems that stops them doing their natural function, what i have learned is that mutations can be random, and deliberate, while it is true to say that more prevalence = more chance of mutation, it is also true that more suppression = stimulation to mutate, because there's a reason to do so.
Viruses have an inbuilt ability to survive, developed over millions and millions of years, they really are quite remarkable, Humans on the other hand have only been around for a fraction of the time.
But then i don't qualify my remarks, it's just what i have read over the months since covid, some of it enlightening, what's for certain it all makes sobering reading.

 

[suavecarve]

More potential UK Govt scaremongering fear propaganda. Maybe if this so called 3rd wave does occur perhaps do something different this time other than shutting down the country...perhaps open everything and show that lockdowns don't really do much other than trashing the economy....just a thought as they haven't been particularly successful so far have they?

Sweden, no lockdowns but have employed some more stringent rules and advice like asking politely for people to wear a mask on public transport, and lowering meet up numbers from 50 down to 8.

I wonder how they got on this winter ?

Average of 5,000 ish infections per day for a country 1/7th the size of us.
Deaths currently averaging about 8 per day and yet somehow, without a lockdown, they have managed to descend that from 98 a day.
Its sort of like they have gone up and down, just like every other country and no lockdown implemented. They have done it twice as well.

Pubs restaurants open (last time i checked) and if they dont abide by the rules they dont fine them. They just close them for a week. It gets compliance without getting heavy handed and peeing people off.
Watch the pubs behave if the local Inspector can shut them down for a week.

But others will just say "How did they do in comparison to Norway and Finland (2 of the best performing nations)

Sweden, 14th largest country in Europe and 21st in the deaths per capita. No lockdowns.

There are several/numerous other factors to consider but they have done a service to other countries by trying something different to look at in far more depth than I do to determine if there is some feasibility in their response. I know I would have preferred to live there during this pandemic.

 

[Northernraider]

Those data reflect the various mitigations in place; folks seem continuously to forget that fact. The number if deaths would be significantly higher had those mitigations not been in place.



Interesting points made in your response so thanks for that.

However, please note that I didn’t suggest that there would be no mutations, I said that the likelihood of mutations that were Strains of Concern would be lower.

Ian

As would the number of people recovered ...it would still be the same percentage of deaths versus recoveries

 

[MITHRANDIR]

But you can see the issue with a diatribe with some on this forum concerned about not being able to have their freedom, that they should be able to travel as they can do so entirely within their own motorhome bubble (?). Unfortunately it very much sounds like a third wave hitting these shores after the Easter and therefore more restrictions.

Agreed, However i am not sure that just banning overseas travel, is anything like the right way to fight this virus
I am not convinced that it is wholly justified either.
If the virus likes close contact to be able to spread as we are told then, surely avoiding close contact at all costs is the way forward?
But then that is at odds with our way of life, but not impossible surely?

 

[Janine]

Sweden, no lockdowns but have employed some more stringent rules and advice like asking politely for people to wear a mask on public transport, and lowering meet up numbers from 50 down to 8.

I wonder how they got on this winter ?

Average of 5,000 ish infections per day for a country 1/7th the size of us.
Deaths currently averaging about 8 per day and yet somehow, without a lockdown, they have managed to descend that from 98 a day.
Its sort of like they have gone up and down, just like every other country and no lockdown implemented. They have done it twice as well.

Pubs restaurants open (last time i checked) and if they dont abide by the rules they dont fine them. They just close them for a week. It gets compliance without getting heavy handed and peeing people off.
Watch the pubs behave if the local Inspector can shut them down for a week.

But others will just say "How did they do in comparison to Norway and Finland (2 of the best performing nations)

Sweden, 14th largest country in Europe and 21st in the deaths per capita. No lockdowns.

There are several/numerous other factors to consider but they have done a service to other countries by trying something different to look at in far more depth than I do to determine if there is some feasibility in their response. I know I would have preferred to live there during this pandemic.

I wonder whether genetics is a big factor? We know that BAME suffer more symptoms.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[suavecarve]

I wonder whether genetics is a big factor? We know that BAME suffer more symptoms.

I think there are several factors, Sweden has/had a higher population of mahoosive care homes for (i think) the population with the highest expected life expectancy which has probably inflated their death figures. They also had issues with non swedish/english speaking care home workers who didnt understand "wash your hands, keep your distance and try not to work in different care homes"

But that has to be tempered with Sweden's population density in comparison to the larger countries and jim pointing out there are more people go on the tube in rush hour than live in Stockholm.

There are pros and cons for the manner in which their Government treated their citizens and the way their citizens behave. It would just suit my outlook on life more than what we, and the rest of Europe have done.
They just more or less said, "Virus on its way, take care"

 

[Reallyretired]

And wellies

To be fair, last year we had better weather here than in Spain where it rained on us.

 

[Pausim]

I’m curious about this. Does this suggest that viruses are thinking/intelligent entities either individually, or collectively? If so, how does that work?

I’d always assumed that mutations were, effectively, random in nature hence the view that the greater the number of viruses the greater the likelihood of mutations.

Anyone able to enlighten me?

Ian

My understanding is there is no intelligence involved. The virus replicates itself by cells dividing. Some times the DNA in the replicated cell is not copied correctly and a mutant variation is created. If by chance the mutant has new properties that make it more successful than the original, for example it might be more contagious, then it will thrive and eventually become dominant.

 

[Dilbert]

Just online now trying to push tunnel booking on another 2 months but don’t honestly think we’ll be going anywhere this year. Feeling despondent about motorhoming in general might sell the old bus and say ****it but I suppose a lot of people are feeling the same.

 

[MITHRANDIR]

I know this is not going to make me popular, but........ In the world of covid, if we stand a cat in hells chance of competing, and fighting it then some of our habits are going to have to change.
holidays/vacations/jollys, for example, aren't the problem, it's the manner in which these are conducted that is the problem, coach tours/flights/cruises/trains/hotels/crowded beaches, or any activity that promotes close contact etc are the problem in the world of covid, in my view.
Just locking people away has a positive effect on the disease, but only while that status quo continues, hardly practical over the long term.
There has to be a better way than lockdowns, banning travel etc, it's a short term fix but not a viable solution in the long term and in my humble opinion, narrow minded and short sighted.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Coolcats]

More potential UK Govt scaremongering fear propaganda. Maybe if this so called 3rd wave does occur perhaps do something different this time other than shutting down the country...perhaps open everything and show that lockdowns don't really do much other than trashing the economy....just a thought as they haven't been particularly successful so far have they?

The economy is a construct it’s not a ‘real’ thing by locking down and applying safety measures lives will have been saved it’s bad enough that so many have died which could have been avoided. Yes lockdowns do work in helping to reduce infection and death. Some companies have benefitted such as B&Q and the building trade has been very busy and other sectors have suffered but rather that than loosing loved ones.

 

[Grumpyfrog]

We have deferred our motorhome purchase until such time we are confident that we can actually use it.

 

[Backdraft]

My understanding is there is no intelligence involved. The virus replicates itself by cells dividing. Some times the DNA in the replicated cell is not copied correctly and a mutant variation is created. If by chance the mutant has new properties that make it more successful than the original, for example it might be more contagious, then it will thrive and eventually become dominant.

Well done I have been trying to read all the posts before I commented, but they are being added almost as fast as I can read.
You get your Science GCSE, anyone who sugested that a virus, is smart, cunning or clever gets a red mark.
Viruses do not adapt, they evolve if an evolutionary pressure is applied, if as you say a chance mutation gives an advantage.
The more virus in existence the more chance of mutation, reducing the numer of infected hosts by what ever means will reduce the viral population and hence the rate of mutation.

 

[bigtwin]

My understanding is there is no intelligence involved. The virus replicates itself by cells dividing. Some times the DNA in the replicated cell is not copied correctly and a mutant variation is created. If by chance the mutant has new properties that make it more successful than the original, for example it might be more contagious, then it will thrive and eventually become dominant.

That supports my original statement that mutations are random and that the higher the prevalence, the greater likelihood that a SoC will occur.

Well done I have been trying to read all the posts before I commented, but they are being added almost as fast as I can read.
You get your Science GCSE, anyone who sugested that a virus, is smart, cunning or clever gets a red mark.
Viruses do not adapt, they evolve if an evolutionary pressure is applied, if as you say a chance mutation gives an advantage.
The more virus in existence the more chance of mutation, reducing the numer of infected hosts by what ever means will reduce the viral population and hence the rate of mutation.

Makes sense to me.

Ian

 

[MITHRANDIR]

That supports my original statement that mutations are random and that the higher the prevalence, the greater likelihood that a SoC will occur.



Makes sense to me.

Ian

I think you are misquoting, there,adaptations is just another way of saying randomly mutate, outside pressures can force them to change randomly or not, if they don't they die, if they do change they generally survive.
"Clever" is just a phrase nothing more.
They have survived for millions upon millions of years, shows just how "adaptable" they are.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}