Coronavirus: General discussion (see opening post for rules)

[Ditto]

Omicron is going to be a nervous watch. Is it even more infectious, is it much less severe, will it evade current vaccines? As a complete side note, this isn't the first time Omicron has been brought up on Edugeek! See http://www.edugeek.net/forums/general-chat/127753-david-ickes-internet-tv-station-live.html#post1091915! A David Icke link - who'd have thought hey?!

[FN-GM]

Some international border restrictions have been lifted. I can now renter Australia should I want / need to leave.

 

I don’t have any great desire to go anywhere but it does make me feel better than I have the choice.

 

The restrictions were due to he lifted on 1st December. Now due to the new variant this is no longer the case.

 

Extremely disappointed.

[Andrew_C]

is it much less severe,

You wish...

A widely-shared quote from a South African doctor, saying Omicron causes only mild symptoms, is being taken out of context. She was referring to a small group of young, healthy people and warned of severe disease in other groups https://telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/south-african-doctor-raised-alarm-omicron-variant-says-symptoms/

[Ditto]

You wish...

 

I do! I think the perception that this virus will evolve in to a much less severe variant over time, because others have historically, is crediting the virus with a near human-like cognition. It's purely following the life replication process and Darwin's laws. The world (as far as we know) has never been the world it has been today, both in terms of population size, international travel and indeed scientific ability. So, a virus has never evolved in quite this set of conditions, so past models may not prove to be accurate. Or even if accurate, the time frames may be completely different.

[Rob_D]

I do! I think the perception that this virus will evolve in to a much less severe variant over time, because others have historically, is crediting the virus with a near human-like cognition. It's purely following the life replication process and Darwin's laws. The world (as far as we know) has never been the world it has been today, both in terms of population size, international travel and indeed scientific ability. So, a virus has never evolved in quite this set of conditions, so past models may not prove to be accurate. Or even if accurate, the time frames may be completely different.

True.

But theoretically (under Darwin's laws), the virus should still undergo a form of natural selection. It's just down to the right selection pressure being applied. If people who showed severe symptoms were able to be adequately isolated quickly enough to stop spread, it would create an environmental pressure that selects for asymptomatic variants. And TBH, a dominant, 99% asymptomatic variant would probably be considered a win by most people.

Of course this is all theory, and subject to being able to apply the right environmental pressure (which I think is where it's falling down right now).

[Ditto]

Agreed. There is one thing that makes this virus particularly challenging - the ability to spread from the pre-symptomatic and the asymptomatic carriers. There's an interesting paper here. It's over a decade old and relates to influenza, but reading it, you could believe much of it relates to Covid-19.

[LeMarchand]

I recently read a suggestion that the emergence of the Omicron variant in Africa may be because there has been so little vaccination being done there that it has had a better chance of mutating. Unfortunately calls for the Pharma Corps to make things easier/cheaper for poorer nations have met with derision.

[Garacesh]

I recently read a suggestion that the emergence of the Omicron variant in Africa may be because there has been so little vaccination being done there that it has had a better chance of mutating. Unfortunately calls for the Pharma Corps to make things easier/cheaper for poorer nations have met with derision.

 

Ha. Get out of here with your 'the greater good' lark. Humanitarianism isn't profitable!

[enbiggen]

If you talk to actual virologists they will tell you unless its a medical grade masks its useless and merely a comfort blanket.

 

Admittedly this is one of the first links I discovered in a quick search for actual virologists, but this is Dr Cheryl Walter, back in July 2020: https://www.hull.ac.uk/work-with-us/more/media-centre/news/2020/university-of-hull-virologist-answers-biggest-questions-on-covid-19-face-masks

How do masks help prevent the spread of Coronavirus?

Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) causes a respiratory infection that has been termed COVID-19. Like most respiratory infections, it can be spread from person to person in droplets and/or aerosols. Masks help to catch the droplets that we breath out and breath in.

 

How do you feel about masks personally? Do you wear one and, if so, wear and when?

I think they are literally lifesavers. They are not 100% effective but they do help a lot, along with social distancing and handwashing, in preventing transmission of COVID-19. I wear one whenever I go out the shops.

 

There are many other examples I've read over the last year and a bit that confirm my view that masks pose a positive benefit. It is, in no way, a deprivation of my civil liberties. It's barely an inconvenience.

[Dan2025]

There was a pretty good video of the difference between someone coughing/sneezing/talking without a mask and with a mask, the difference was pretty considerable.

 

If I sneeze with a mask vs without, it's the difference between particles going inches from my face to metres.

Edited November 29, 2021 by Danwinchelsea

[JATSO]

So, I came into work this morning after listening to some politician on the radio saying that we are not requiring masks in schools because they are sat mostly at their desks and not moving around.

Must be great for the staff in that school that everyone stays at their desks.

[6Foot2]

...Must be great for the staff in that school that everyone stays at their desks.

Before I left my last place of work and when (some) students and staff were returning after lockdown, classes were re-timetabled to minimize student movement in the corridors, with staff making the change for lessons (still following the original timetable)

 

A one way route around school was established (except where corridors led to dead ends, there had to be two-way traffic in those areas) Watching on CCTV I could see that the requirement to wear a face covering and to use the one way system was resolutely ignored by students and, at times, by staff too.

 

Sometimes I despair for our species!

 

[elsiegee40]

This thread has suddenly turned somewhat political. I refer EduGeeks the rules as set out by Dos_Box in the opening post.

 

Posts have been deleted and we are in the process of reading back so more may be deleted.

 

Please report rather than fan the flames.

 

This thread will be locked if necessary

[jmak]

We now have 15% of our Year 7s and 6% of our Year 8s out. Year 7 make up 50% of all our cases as of today.

 

None of the other year groups are above 2% and we had about a 72% uptake of jabs when they came to visit. Which shows the power of even a single jab, really. The youngest year groups with zero (due to the law) and the smallest uptake have got considerably higher numbers out.

I would love to see that analysis nationally. It'd make very interesting input for decisions on the societal benefits of vaccinating those who are unlikely to become severely unwell.

[Ditto]

I'd like to see that too. So far, what I have tracked is at the following location - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports

 

If you look at the PDF for week 47, track down table 8. The figures for under 18 are so dramatic, I'm wondering if I'm missing something. I'd appreciate a second pair of eyes looking at this. It would be far more interesting to see the under 18's separated to a finer level too.

[elsiegee40]

Mr gee40 and I had our booster jabs today (Moderna)

 

My arm’s a little achey but otherwise OK

 

Tonight my arm’s getting better.

 

Mr gee40 is feeling very cold, his arm hurts and he’s feeling a bit achey elsewhere.

 

I reacted to AZ and he didn’t so it’s only fair

[6Foot2]

Tonight my arm’s getting better.

 

Mr gee40 is feeling very cold, his arm hurts and he’s feeling a bit achey elsewhere.

 

I reacted to AZ and he didn’t so it’s only fair

I reacted to my first AstraZeneca vaccination quite badly, while with 5Foot2, you'd barely notice that she'd been vaccinated. We will have our booster injections in just over a week. I will let you know how it goes.

[jmak]

I'd like to see that too. So far, what I have tracked is at the following location - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports

 

If you look at the PDF for week 47, track down table 8. The figures for under 18 are so dramatic, I'm wondering if I'm missing something. I'd appreciate a second pair of eyes looking at this. It would be far more interesting to see the under 18's separated to a finer level too.

 

The only thing I can see is that all of the other age groups are a range of 10 years vs 18 so it's a bigger population. It is still significantly more prevalent in that age group (I haven't added up exact population numbers, and birth numbers are down a bit, but not that much).

 

The age groups don't really work in terms of exposure opportunities to try and understand the impact of vaccinating.

[Ditto]

They way I read it for under 18's, is out of a total of 300,318 cases, 243,722 were not vaccinated. There are some cautionary notes including advice to read pages 5 - 10 for vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection. Unfortunately pages 5 - 10 give no insight by age groups. The notes do comment on higher risk groups and high vaccination levels, but that is not so relevant with the under 18 group. An additional challenge is if the vaccine is highly effective, and leads to asymptomatic infection whereas otherwise it might have been symptomatic infection, there are likely to be a sizeable number of cases in the vaccinated that just aren't picked up.

 

I did see in the week 36 report that it stated "Estimates of vaccine effectiveness range from around 55 to 70% after 1 dose, with little evidence of variation by vaccine or age group", so that's probably the best conclusion at present, unless anyone can find other resources that shines more light on the topic.

[mavhc]

There are many other examples I've read over the last year and a bit that confirm my view that masks pose a positive benefit. It is, in no way, a deprivation of my civil liberties. It's barely an inconvenience.

 

Make sure that wearing masks are tight

[jthompson]

There are many other examples I've read over the last year and a bit that confirm my view that masks pose a positive benefit.

 

Yes, I think of them as a kind of attenuator. They won't necessarily prevent you from infecting someone or getting infected yourself, but they will reduce the viral load when that does happen, compared to not wearing a mask.

 

It's the same with handwashing. It won't necessarily prevent you from rubbing virus particles into your own eyeballs, but if/when you do, it'll be less for your body to deal with.

[Rob_D]

Yes, I think of them as a kind of attenuator. They won't necessarily prevent you from infecting someone or getting infected yourself, but they will reduce the viral load when that does happen, compared to not wearing a mask.

It's the same with handwashing. It won't necessarily prevent you from rubbing virus particles into your own eyeballs, but if/when you do, it'll be less for your body to deal with.

 

I had this discussion with a doctor friend who said that your theory holds more for bacterial infection than viral infection because bacteria do require a higher load to gain a foothold, but due to viruses having a much higher growth/replication rate once a virus gets inside you you're just as likely to become infected and show symptoms with 1-2 "virus particles" as with 100+.

What masking/handwashing/distancing is really doing reducing the % chance of those viruses getting to part of your body where they can survive and replicate.

TBH he is known for talking out his a$$, but it kind of makes sense.

[hardtailstar]

Went to the shop before work this morning and a lady was standing outside making sure everyone was wearing masks.

 

One old lady customer arrived at the same time as me and she said that she hadnt heard the news that people now had to wear masks in shops etc. But she had a mask on her.

 

Tbh I only heard as someone was talking about it yesterday, So I am sure there is many others that may not have heard this.

 

Makes no difference to me as I wear a mask everywhere.

[jthompson]

I had this discussion with a doctor friend who said that your theory holds more for bacterial infection than viral infection because bacteria do require a higher load to gain a foothold, but due to viruses having a much higher growth/replication rate once a virus gets inside you you're just as likely to become infected and show symptoms with 1-2 "virus particles" as with 100+.

What masking/handwashing/distancing is really doing reducing the % chance of those viruses getting to part of your body where they can survive and replicate.

TBH he is known for talking out his a$$, but it kind of makes sense.

 

So this whole time, I've been washing my hands for NO REASON?!!

 

\s

[mavhc]

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20201105/dose-of-coronavirus-timing-matters-for-infection#1