Surreal is how I describe the coronavirus outbreak. I hope everyone I met online and offline is healthy and alive.
Yes I remember. You asked if it could be the background for this. (A 'family approach'). Their target is inhibition of PLpro an essential viral enzyme at reproduction (could work at other corona viruses as well)... The BMJ source I have posted is about T cells, though. The interesting part is that those have obviously learned by dealing with former corona viruses (if they had the opportunity to).... It would be great if there can be evidence why those 70-80% do not get sick. And if we can make use of that for the remaining percents... Anti-viral immune response is a complex matter.... But it seems when a cell is infected by the SARSCoV2 virus and it starts to produce now virus by itself there is also produced some 'waste'.... The T-cell's 'memory' recognizes that waste! Stop! I know this already.....and kills that cell and by that the virus factory. It is killing by reminding of a special waste a healthy cell would never produce. This is unfortunately a big con against a vaccine approach! Cells could produce that very same waste as well if encountered with designed mRNA.... The t-cells memory reminds of it and kills that cell without to kill a virus factory! Side effect could be autoimmune disorder. It would be simply great we could have a test that clearly indicates if one belongs to those who have dealt with former corona viruses already...and so they have got t-cells which can remind. A vaccination then would be obsolete for those...even unreasonable since the risk / benefit ratio is bad only.. I try to get more info about those t-cells and immune memory...
Have you seen a new antigen test? The other day I wrote about a firm here, in the UK, which made a blood test, around 15 mins test, showing positive, negative or antibodies present, I think. They were totally ignored by the UK gov. A fraction of the cost of other testes, much more precise (current ones are at max 70% accuracy) and completely in line with what the gov wanted, to get the economy moving again, whereby one could know in the morning if one is able to go mingle, work, go to a restaurant or a show at West End.... But oh no... BoJo has other ideas (see "donors" whose coffers must be repaid, most probably).... Here are some more: https://www.abingdonhealth.com/uk-covid-19-rapid-antibody-tests-approved-for-professional-use/ - not sure if this is the UK one I heard about... https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-09-cheaper-faster-covid-buffer-formations.html
No, but I have seen a new RT-PCR (COVIDNudge, Imperial College London) test which takes only 90 minutes. I read somewhere the govt. (GB) has ordered 5.8 million. https://scitechdaily.com/covidnudge-rapid-90-minute-covid-19-test-shown-to-be-highly-accurate/ https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30121-X/fulltext AFAIK they want to add Flu-A, Flu-B, and RSV as well so they all can be tested simultaneously. Blood-antibody tests are even faster, but they have 2 major disadvantages. There are antibodies after 1-2 weeks of infection and they are not that selective. (More false positives). There are even tests with an separate IgG and IgM stripe. (IgM an earlier state of antibodies and detectable during infection, IgG detectable after infection and months after). IgG positive = person has HAD the virus. The PCR test has one disadvantage. It's too sensitive and does not correlate to virulence and it takes a long time until you get a result. Current methods: 1. Direct detection : PCR and RT-PCR 2. antibody Immune defense (generally): 1. antibody 2. t-cells
In pakistan , really nobody is giving s**t about the covid-19 everything is coming back to normal and school are also opened so what can i say may be it's good we are out of that creepy situation. Thanks have a nice day.
AstraZeneca Halts Oxford Vaccine Trial After a Report of Adverse Effects https://science.thewire.in/the-scie...-clinical-trials-stop-severe-adverse-effects/ I have read the original Lancet article. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31604-4/fulltext They had already side effects at PHASE I/II which they suppressed with a very high dose of paracetamol........it seems they had ignored some troubles.... That's not good...
https://www.democracynow.org/2020/9...0MsOcW9daZmgfGT_K28hTGIcviPeVDLGO_Ujxl2cAzVwI Indian Health Officials Claim 60 Million Coronavirus Infections Nationwide SEP 30, 2020 India reported more than 80,000 new coronavirus cases over the last 24 hours, with the official death toll rapidly approaching 100,000. India’s lead pandemic agency said Tuesday an antibody study suggests more than 60 million people nationwide have already been infected with the coronavirus — 10 times the official count, but still a small fraction of India’s population of 1.3 billion. India is second to the United States as the country with the most reported cases of COVID-19. This comes as the World Bank warned the pandemic has led to a rise in poverty in East Asian and Pacific nations for the first time in two decades, with as many as 38 million additional people set to fall below the poverty line this year.
Professor Sunetra Gupta Theoretical epidemiologist at Oxford University Interesting interview. (I presume that herd immunity will be reached before the first vaccine that is really safe will be available at all. The rate is IMHO higher than we think, I do agree. Most happens silently without to attract attention by symptoms and many are immune due to former encounters). https://reaction.life/we-may-already-have-herd-immunity-an-interview-with-professor-sunetra-gupta/
I listened to her on the radio, clash with another "eminent professor" and we seem to have another "no clear criteria" judgement.... Serious charges tantamount to "Libertarian agenda" or "serious charges without real data" were flying about and I know what they were talking about.... Brigid Lowe Retweeted Debby Bogaert Replying to @DebbyBogaert There is honestly no economic argument for ‘herd immunity’ either: “Letting the virus spread, is bad for economy AND bad for health” Below chart speaks for itself (more deaths = more economic damage)
Btw, she is trying to bring in other differentiations: https://www.thearticle.com/fighting-covid-19-is-a-theoretical-as-well-as-a-practical-battle It is worth pointing out, however, that in her interview, Gupta distances herself from unwelcome libertarian allies among the lockdown sceptics: “I think it is unfortunate that those of us who feel we should think differently about lockdown have had our voices added to that libertarian harangue.” Her critique is quite different. It is egalitarian rather than libertarian: “Lockdown is a luxury, and it’s a luxury that the middle classes are enjoying and higher income countries are enjoying at the expense of the poor, the vulnerable and less developed countries.” So, as opposed to Koch's and their networks, she is trying to argue in favour of the have-nots, which is commendable... It's just that I think she is doing it the wrong way round....
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-020-0402-6#Sec8 "Letting the virus spread, is bad for economy AND bad for health". This has actually nothing to do with herd immunity! We are constantly and naturally following this goal (slower of faster dependent on measures) and there is immunity already, otherwise COVID-19 would have hit us much harder... Herd immunity is the REASON that we haven't got more pandemics at all so far. Her perfect explanation:
Reality check, @Yen! It is spreading in crazy numbers! And it is getting worse! Huge numbers yet again. When is it enough for you, before you would do whatever is necessary to stop so many people getting infected, some not so gravely ill but some, even young, fit people getting really sick, some long term (long Covid) and some even dying? When is it enough for a "scientist" to see PEOPLE past the numbers? And don't start with all the other perfectly legitimate Qs. Let's first talk about this issue! Then, we can see which strategies to deploy to make sure the weak and the vulnerable are not disproportionally mistreated.... And let's clear the notions properly: "Maria Van Kerkhove, the World Health Organization's technical lead for coronavirus response, said during a media briefing in Geneva last week that "herd immunity" is typically discussed in the context of vaccinations -- not as a response to a pandemic. "Normally when we talk about herd immunity, we talk about how much of the population needs to be vaccinated to have immunity to the virus, to the pathogen, so that transmission can no longer take place or it's very difficult for a virus or a pathogen to transmit between people," Van Kerkhove said. "If we think about herd immunity in the natural sense of just letting a virus run, it's very dangerous," she said. "That means that many people are infected, many people will need hospitalizations and many people will die." I put it to you once again: scientists, sadly, are frequently NOT properly trained in either Logic or Public Health Policy, many are almost autistic, if not sociopathic and can't see Human Beings past the numbers for love or money. They are frequently the most dangerous people, with such tunnel vision!!!
I have my reservations about vaccines. Some scientists say they actually work. I don't know I don't trust. Even worse, vaccines are made by big pharma. Hey I'm talking regular vaccines, for the record. If you ask me about new Oxfords "vaccinom" (vaccine + venom. Lol) I got no words, speechless. Spoiler: Damn Peter C. Gotzsche - Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime | Deadly Psychiatry and Organised Denial
Yeah well...scientists give advice and politicians realize. When it comes to the term herd immunity and natural direction we have to consider that herd immunity is a natural goal that is fulfilling on its own. (A young kid when it's going to DCC the first time gets sick a lot of times.....the next year it's already getting better and better, finally reaching an immunity when getting adult....) When you do not expose the kids to such viruses and keep them away all the time they cannot create a natural and healthy immune defense! By doing that once a virus which is a bit more dangerous can result to severe progresses..and maybe what you call long-COVID can be reasoned by lack of interaction with previous corona viruses and therefore lack of immunity, who knows? Furthermore a weak and untrained immune system is in correlation with allergies and autoimmune disorders! And even the Swedish way is not a completely unbraked spreading of infection. They 'follow' the herd immunity approach more than others that's all. And for now they did it good. (After first fatal mistakes). BTW: The Swedish approach on swine flu was very different. High vaccination rate and lots of cases with narcolepsy. Bad experience one time is enough....should be considered! You have to differentiate the vaccines. There is no general statement. By that you have to differentiate the virus / toxin. And you have to consider the fatality rate! Unfortunately you need some medical knowledge to do it reasonably. They work very well at tetanus, diphtheria, rabies, measles...for instance. When you get vaccinated you create special antibodies. But they do not last a long time. The maximum peak is soon declining. BUT at those four named even after 8 years there is still enough antibodies which do protect. Another reason is the load. At those four the load is not heavy, but the virus / toxin themselves are very deadly. The tetanus toxin is that toxic that it can kill without to be detected at all....it would be the poison for a perfect murderer. (If one is not vaccinated, lol). Another thing is influenza and corona viruses.. The flu is mutating very quickly and at corona viruses you usually get a high load. When there is a high load you need a high amount of antibodies. When antibodies are busy preventing a virus from entering a cell the antibodies are occupied. Since the high level of antibodies one gets by vaccination is quickly declining you soon lose protection.....you have to get vaccinated soon again and again... At flu and corona a vaccination is generally questionable. Another reason for it is that the second instance of defense is actually the major instance (t-cells and their memory)... But the major reason is article 5 Infection Protection Act. The approval process at pandemic can be shortened. People can become guinea pigs without the usual precaution. New vaccines can be tested (mRNA). You have no damage claim if something goes wrong. Do not take any vaccine against corona if released anytime soon. Ask your politicians for their own live vaccination on TV first! Be a perfect example for your kids. Do not expose them to a risk of autoimmune disorders (or narcolepsy as the vaccine Pandemrix caused at swine flu). Think about a vaccine in 6-8 years....when it can be safe at all. Think about if you want to use a mRNA vaccine at all (based on genetic engineering)....
lol. every year i get an invitation by the doc to take an anti-flu vaccination. [the last time thati had the flu that i can remember is nearly 50 years ago.] so. i never take it. and i never get the flu.and this so-called immunisation is for 99 % enomically motivated too. and the economic impact/panic causes hurried, unscientific work .very sloppy. i shall be watching the ensuing panic in stalins`old country when [ not if..] it happens. as it will, unfortunately. just my 2 cents, unhindered by any medical or chemical, or philosophica l knowledge.
@Yen: again, very, very flawed logic leads you to very, very wrong way of "ordering facts"... It says something like: "If every country were as "successful" as Sweden in fighting Covid-19, the current number of dead people would have been more than 4.5 million!" Look again: "If we think about herd immunity in the natural sense of just letting a virus run, it's very dangerous," she said. "That means that many people are infected, many people will need hospitalizations and many people will die." What is so obscure in this quote? What is so difficult to understand?
I do understand. That's not the 'prob'. (Although the posted extrapolation to the entire world is vague and solely mathematical). What I wanted to express is (besides of a few other things) that 'herd immunity' is on its way to be reached either way depending on measures. And by measures I do not mean restricting measures alone I also mean successful vaccination. Direction to herd immunity is ongoing. At Sweden probably faster then elsewhere, but at any country with a bit different velocity. Day by day. If Sweden should reach herd immunity before we get a vaccine then 'their' pandemic is over, ours not (yet). A remaining vaccination will be only useful if herd immunity is not reached naturally before. The dilemma: The longer you develop the more probable that we don't need it anymore. The shorter you develop the more unsafe it will be. This time Sweden has decided to go to other way. I guess Sweden assumes that they get herd immunity before a good vaccination is available or even assumes that the time a vaccination will be available its use is not indicated anymore. (That was exactly the case with swine flu. But Sweden vaccinated a lot anyway...Germany had burned all the vaccination doses.)