Forum menu
Just decided to take my temp to get a baseline for future reference….35.7!
That can’t be right can it? Unless I’m a lizard?
Mine (and my daughters) are usually 35.6, so I just take that as a reference point - so anything above 36 I'd count as feverish for her. Oddly didn't seem to matter whether it was an ear one or under the tongue
But whats the end game to this?
Every time the government puts off the action required, it increases the eventual action that will be required. A more drastic “end game” is avoidable by early pre-emptive action. Act late, act harder, for longer.
I have no idea what the government sees as the end game. React and wait? Wait and react?
Temperature / fever. 36.9 is the average normal temperature. You can only get an accurate reading with an internal thermometer 🙂 ( as ear thermometers are often badly used and skin thermometers innacurate in that your skin can be cooler than your core)
Here we do not consider anything below 38 as a fever as people can run slightly warmer or cooler and you also get slight variations depending on things like ambient temperature or if you have been exercising
Personally anything below 38 I would not be concerned unless you have other symptoms
Normal* isnt going to come back for at least 18 months.
6 Months to have a vaccine
6 months to manufacture and vaccinate
6 months to see if its worked
I think that's a bit pessimistic.
I get a little insight as my Wife will be part of the mass vaccination team when it's ready, it's currently gearing up .
I'm sure when it starts the papers will complain, sell the unusual and tragic as the norm and lots and lots of people will cry they're being left to fend for themselves because they won't be getting it in the first, second, third or even forth phase - but the speed of deployment (relative to the scale of the job) will be jaw-dropping.
P-Jay, I hang on to your information these days, always good to hear.
As Patrick Vallance dryly stated a while back "got to have a vaccine first". I hope the AZ one works. I'm not expecting sterile immunity, but evidence of a solid antibody response and some protection would be a start. Plenty of others coming too. But I do believe that 18mo is a reasonable timeframe.
Will widespread vaccination stop Covid altogether? What will the world look like ‘post jab’?
I'll take our NHS staff not be knocked out by the virus as the medium term win... the "big" picture for vaccines can come later.
No. In a worst-case scenario I expect it will boost protective immunity leading to a reduced severity of infection. In a best case scenario, sterile protective immunity from infection but probably waning over time. Protection for the immunocompromised (who can't be vaccinated easily) will come from antibodies and perhaps herd immunity if a sterile vaccine is produced with high protection for others. Frequency of vaccination is of course unknown. Annual would be my guess, given together with influenza. It won't be eradicated as per the other four seasonal coronaviruses, but the young will grow old and carry some degree of past exposure with them. I'm optimistic, especially given the efforts and resource thrown at this. The timescale is breathtaking.
Anagallis posted this two days ago.
anagallis_arvensis
Free Member150 deaths today, 80 a week ago!
Today's numbers (modulo random Excel bugs in PHE's reporting) are 80, and 67 yesterday (weekends always low though). 7 day moving average has been flat the last day or two.
https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/details/deaths
Of course, it's entirely possible that it will pick up again.
Will widespread vaccination stop Covid altogether? What will the world look like ‘post jab’?
I don't think any experts have made too many promises about it.
As I understand it, there are already multiple variations of Covid19, but so far the vaccines have been effective on all of them.
In theory if we're able to vaccinate 70% or so of the population we can achieve heard immunity and it will be eradicated in time. They would really love to achieve this in the UK by Sept 21 to avoid another winter surge.
This is all a best case though. The vaccine may not provide life-long protection, in fact it probably won't, so people may need boosters, that may be in the form of an annual mass vaccination like flu, or a travel vaccine depending on how it's handled globally.
Human nature being what it is, a lot of the goodwill talk of March is largely gone, I suspect nations will use their trade might to hoard vaccines, especially if Trump is re-elected, although pfizer has said they won't be applying for emergency approval of their vaccine before the 3rd week in November... interesting timing... they've also already produces hundreds of thousands of doses in preparation, claiming they could produce as many as 100m doses by the end of the year and 1.3bn next year.
If we vaccinate the world it may be totally eradicated, but is there more money in letting it spread throughout the developing world so you can keep selling an annual vaccine?
Good mapping site from ICL
[url= https://i.ibb.co/wCQ8Q4k/ICL-covid-map.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/wCQ8Q4k/ICL-covid-map.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
Today’s numbers (modulo random Excel bugs in PHE’s reporting) are 80, and 67 yesterday (weekends always low though). 7 day moving average has been flat the last day or two.
https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/details/deaths
Of course, it’s entirely possible that it will pick up again.
There is a repeatable daily pattern in the numbers due to reporting logistics.
Monday is always low.
Last Monday was 50 deaths so we have a 60% increase at 80 this Monday.
If that 60% increase follows through to tomorrow’s deaths where we had 143 last Tuesday (Tuesday is always high), We could sadly pass the 200 deaths in a day milestone. (229 tomorrow based on a 60% increase)
You can’t really infer much looking at day to day trends.
I like it when TiRed says he’s optimistic. Gives me real hope for the future. Had my ‘ordinary’ flu jab last week at a ‘drive through’ jab clinic! took 3 mins from the time I drove in, to driving out. Brilliant set up.
Ireland gone back into almost full lock down, Level 5 in their system (the worst), all non essential retail to close, people only allowed 5km from home but schools to remain open.
This is a good read:
https://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2020/10/why-do-some-find-economicshealth-trade.html
Not citing it as “evidence” for anything, but it uses a good analogy for people who normally have more interest in economics that epidemics.
It's getting heavy here in Spain too, although new cases/100k pop are similar to UK and France, countrywide.
Thought it was interesting how direct contact is handled differently in UK & Spain.
On Fri. I was in direct contact with a positive case. T&T rang me Sunday, sent me for a test, negative.
Same day, receptionist in Sis' work was also in contact with a negative. Will be tested tomorrow.
Difference is, even though I'm negative I need to self isolate for 10 days from day of contact, and then will need a 2nd negative test and a GP appt. who will then sign me off.
Sis' colleague can go back on Tuesday if she tests -ve.
I’ll take our NHS staff not be knocked out by the virus as the medium term win… the “big” picture for vaccines can come later.
This has to be the first goal. If we can keep the NHS from falling over then anyone who does get ill from contracting the virus has a good chance of surviving and any complications afterwards can be dealt with. If not then deaths are going to go through the roof.
I thought new cases and admissions were coming down in Spain now Bob? Still high, but falling?
Edit: just looked, new cases still rising, but rising more slowly, far from ideal
There is a repeatable daily pattern in the numbers due to reporting logistics.
Monday is always low.
Last Monday was 50 deaths so we have a 60% increase at 80 this Monday
This, and hosputal admission just shy of 1000
I like it when TiRed says he’s optimistic
So do I, though his optimistic outcome is still several painful months away, and will not be the same as pre Covid normality. I appreciate his honesty as much as his brilliant information on here. He should get an award....
Do we have a viable vaccine? Just been talking to friends who are part of the planning for mass vaccination centres, with very short timescales involved and unbelievable scales. Would have thought this was a bit early unless we are actually making informed planning about something during this mess.
I thought new cases and admissions were coming down in Spain now Bob? Still high, but falling?
@kelvin yep, down in Madrid (-30% over 14 days) but some communities rising (here in País Vasco +120%).
Do we have a viable vaccine? Just been talking to friends who are part of the planning for mass vaccination centres, with very short timescales involved and unbelievable scales. Would have thought this was a bit early unless we are actually making informed planning about something during this mess.
Hopefully they are ahead on this part but I have a lingering doubt that they will get the system up and ready only for it to sit unused while they wait for a vaccine to be approved for mass use. They'll then start to disband it a week before it's needed and then it'll have to be hastily rebuilt, all the time lining some Tory donor's pockets. I hope to God I'm wrong and this is the one thing they get right though!
With regards to the vaccines, there are about 20 viable candidates in trials. The runners and riders range from traditional methods such as deactivated whole virus, spike protein with an adjuvent to jazz up the response (GSK/Sanofi, Merck), through to untested novel genetically modified chimp viruses (Oxford/AZ) that express the same spiky coat and neat RNA (Pfizer/Moderna) straight into cells. The most novel (last two) are ahead in the clinical testing game, but unprecedented in delivering products. The proven technologies will be along mid 2021. Whether ANY can deliver immunity to this pathogen (sterile protection), or raise antibodies that render a future infection relatively benign is unknown. They'll certainly do something, but we don't know what - nor how long protection lasts.
Sadly when it comes to safety and efficacy, there is no substitute for large long trials. Those are the rules of the game. Also there won't really be rich pickings. GSK reported they'll sell it at cost plus a few percent to cover further research (as per the malaria vaccine). I imagine everyone will fall into line eventually.
[tl:dr] plenty of vaccine shots on goal, many established. they will all raise antibodies. Whether this is protective remains to be seen. At least one will do something is my prediction - just don't expect measles mass immunity.
Edit: not just my opinion, either.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/19/covid-vaccine-will-not-be-available-in-uk-until-spring-says-vallance?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
thanks for the list of key players in the vaccine race, does anyone know who/what is behind the mass rollout planning side?
-80c freezer makers. The two novel technologies require Lower temperature cold chain compared with normal vaccines.
I stand by my view expressed several times up there ^^^ that a vaccine, if one is developed, is at least two years away.
Nothing posted here by the few posters who are expert causes me to change my view; lots of speculation but the informed view is cautious optimism - at best.
I live my life accordingly and assume that everyone else behaves like a dick - nothing personal.
Just discovered that one of the nurses on my mum' ward thinks that it's a big fuss over nothing and no worse than the flu. We learned this because she was having a loud conversation about it in the middle of the ward, so that all the old ladies with half-functioning brains could hear. I'd quite like to murder her tbh. I mean, my mum's literally in that ward right now because they closed and cleared out her previous one for covid overflow.
There are some nice stats on the NHS test and trace service:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/nhs-test-and-trace-statistics-england-weekly-reports
(Or is that Serco, it's hard to keep track).
One thing they list as coming in Autumn, but sadly missing at present, is just how many of the contacts of people testing +ve do themselves then also test +ve. If nothing else, that would be a good way to know if contact tracing is useful or not.
The other thing they don't report is where people actually pick up their infections. Maybe that's reported elsewhere, but it seems like an obvious thing to collect, which they ought to know, or at least have some rough indication of for some proportion of cases.
If I take a taxi home from the pub which should of those three should I worry about more?
oldnpastit
Full MemberThe other thing they don’t report is where people actually pick up their infections.
When we were still playing Travel Ban Shuffle, the scottish government got a lot of criticism because they based part of their decisions on contact tracing. Literally "we're putting Greece on the travel restrictions list because most of the overseas cases in Scotland came from Greece" Westminster didn't even really seem to understand that this is a thing. Like, what exactly is your tracing for, if not stuff like that?
The TTI isn’t useful because it wasn’t designed to be useful and isn’t intended to be useful. It’s primary purpose is to satisfy headline-writers with slogans about the numbers of tests, and also to funnel healthcare funding into the private sector under the guise of the NHS label.
Once you realise that, it all makes sense.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54598728
Morning Guys,
Not posted on this thread before but followed it daily and found it very informative. Hadn't seen anyone post the stats mentioned in the link below about the extra 26,000 deaths that have happened at home. I'm not a a sceptic of Covid and know it is real but i do struggle a bit with what is happening to all the other people that go undiagnosed etc. I live in the southwest and the virus hasn't affected me personally but know people who were being treated for other diseases which just stopped and are now not going to make it long term etc. My brother was diagnosed with cancer in march but luckily his treatment continued. I think a balance has to be struck between shielding and continuing daily life, I am just not sure what that balance is.
Does anyone have any thoughts on why that ICL map shows the probability of the Sheffield area reaching over 200 cases per 100,000 dropping over time - whilst the surrounding area and pretty much the rest of the country are increasing in probability? The wirral is doing the same. Areas around both the Wirral and Sheffield also start increasing in probability for the 500 cases category.
Well what choice do we have? If we don't lock down we'd rapidly be overwhelmed.
People are looking at the numbers going 'well it's not such a big deal the numbers aren't that big' but those are the numbers that we saw WITH the lockdown.
Of course, we should have the spare capacity in the health service. This is what happens when you have Tories in power who strip everything to the bone.
Of course, we should have the spare capacity in the health service. This is what happens when you have Tories in power who strip everything to the bone.
Probably not intended to be part of the original thread, but this meant that we started much further behind the curve than countries who have had better outcomes so far, and as others have said, their ideology prevents them making appropriate decisions to address the resulting problems.
Hadn’t seen anyone post the stats mentioned in the link below about the extra 26,000 deaths that have happened at home
Of course the problem with statistics is interpretation, especially when taken in isolation. What the article only hints at is the number of fewer deaths in hospital - most likely a similar amount.
What we do know is up to the current week of reporting, 66,000 more people have died this year compared with the previous 10 years. One can think of many reasons why this may be the case. The single largest difference is the emergence of a novel pathogen with high morbidity and mortality in the elderly.
I agree that balancing the economy and mortality is a huge challenge. I don't know where that balance lies and don't have to make the decision (thank goodness). It is, however, relatively straightforward to predict the consequences of actions, however unpalatable, both intended and unintended. IF maintaining a functional healthcare system and open education are the objective, then there are no options that do not involve pretty aggressive social distancing measures. IF maintaining open economic activity and "back to normal", then so be it. But the public should understand the grave consequences of such an action, including overwhelmed healthcare services (no operations without functioning HDU/ITU capacity), unknown future morbidity, and reduced life expectancy for the elderly - who we as a country singularly fail to protect from seasonal respiratory diseases.
Those are the rules of the game. We have no options but to play. There are no good choices.
Great post TiRed, as usual I might add.
Needs cutting and pasting into all the Coronavirus related threads.
Thanks TiRed. Like you, I'm glad I'm not making the the choices at the moment.
Needs putting into national newspapers and in front of politicians if you ask me
Needs putting into national newspapers and in front of politicians if you ask me
And apparently today is World Statistics Day. What are the odds?
IGMC
I'm with TiRed on not having the policy answers but on presenting the likely outcomes of choices. For example:
*IF* the aim is to suppress the outbreak via some sort of lockdown, then there is no benefit, and in fact a huge cost, to delaying taking this action. It's a simple calculation based on exponential growth, it cost us grievously back in March and is doing so again now (albeit to a less dramatic effect).
*IF* indefinite lockdown is not sustainable then in the absence of a vaccine we can only suppress in the longer term via alternative control measures which appears to require a functional TTI system. No-one has any other ideas, let alone better ideas. It's hard to do well but can certainly help to maintain a suppressed state, allowing greater social and economic activity while keeping the infection under control.
If all the above is impossible or unworkable in practice given the state of govt, then attempting to protect vulnerable people could be of some benefit but given the numbers of them (over 10 million) and the multiplicity of their various necessary contacts with the rest of society, it won't be terribly effective. As we already saw.
The "scientists" / sage outline the possible course of action and the effects of those. the politicians decide what course of action we take