Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
But as long as a nation can vaccinate and protect it's own citizens then there will be no desire to take responsibility to vaccinate others. Out of sight, out of mind will always prevail.

Just look at the stockpiles of PPE we've not had access to despite SARs, Ebola and years of warnings that a potentially much worse pandemic than Covid-19 was inevitable rather than possible.
I know. I think ultimately, the direction of travel will be a push from the 'lock the borders' crowd to be emboldened in that message for 'public protection' purposes, rather than towards universal vaccination. Sad really.
 
Only for the first night of it, only had a coughing fit a couple of times as well but the breathlessness / nausea was there for most of the week.

I never had one at all I dont think just the cough, headaches, a bit of fatigue and the main symptom for me the short of breath.

God knows what it was/is.
 
They made a SARS vaccine, got it through trials and all that, but the virus was out of circulation by the time it was ready to go. No one mass marketed it because there was no money in it at that point.

Although related, a SARS vaccine would not be effective against SARS CoV 2, the current virus causing COVID 19. I do recall reading that the underlying science used to develop the SARS vaccine was used in to speed the COVID 19 vaccine along.
Yes, that’s what I thought was the case, and you’re right that the research made into the SARS vaccine has speeded up the progress into CoV 2.
However, I guess my fear remains that as SARS vaccine wasn’t then widely used because that virus passed out of circulation, we don’t know how effective it would have really been, especially in the long term.
It’s surprising really that CoV 2 is spreading so much faster and so much further then SARS did. A different beast I guess.
 
Because the lying scumbags are not just happy murdering tens of thousands, they are siphoning off millions in public funds to family and friends whilst doing so.

or syphoning off millions to massive organisations that don't pay any tax and already have our data anyway.
What's the difference?
 
I was reading about this. No real shortness of breath but with O2 saturation in the 60s. The suggestion was for patients initially sent home as not sick enough for admission to monitor O2 levels
Yeah, sounds sensible precaution. Pity pulse oximeters aren’t more common at home so people could compare to a previous, healthy, baseline to identify any variation from normal that they could then discuss with their doctor even prior to going to ER/clinic.
 
Yeah, sounds sensible precaution. Pity pulse oximeters aren’t more common at home so people could compare to a previous, healthy, baseline to identify any variation from normal that they could then discuss with their doctor even prior to going to ER/clinic.

Pretty cheap to get a pulse ox...$30 I’d guess for a decent version
At rest, anything below 90% would be low.
 
While it's possible to single out good individual policies or costly ommisions and errors, comparing death rates across countries makes good easy headlines but is pretty much pointless. There are just too many variables at play, too many known factors with high correlations to death rates differing very widely across compared countries. It's an easy weapon to beat a politician with but really it's just like comparing apples with pears.

For instance possibly the most striking correlation is between population density and deaths

So while Scandinavia has low population densities their death rates are also low in relative terms (except for Sweden) and those of high density you would expect much higher which is largely the pattern.

Its the exceptions rather than the rule where notable successes or failures can be found,...

On the minus side - Sweden, although it's death rate is not comparable to high population density countries, it's massively higher than its low population density neighbours. (Likewise you could also explain why Australia's ridiculously relaxed policies have had such remarkable success, the population density is very low.)

The success stories are notably the ones with relative high population densities but have achieved low death rates despite this

Germany has a population density of 233/km3 and a death rate of 73 per million,

- they have used their incredibly strong economy and industrial base, especially in manufacturing and pharmaceuticals, to swim against the tide, setting up mass testing on a scale unmatched and performing far better than might have been expected,

For comparison other densely populated countries

France 104 people /km3 and 357 deaths/million

Italy 192km3 and 446/m

Spain 92/km3 and 503/m

USA 35 and 172/m

(Sweden 20 and 235)

Comparing absolute deaths is ridiculous too how on earth do you say USA's figures are the worst as Sweden's are clearly worse, USA have the largest number but that's all.

The UK is one of the most densely populated countries, certainly in Europe dwarfing other major large economies having a density of 424/km3 compared to Germany's 233, Italy's 192, France's 104 and Spain's 92 - indeed Spain has a huge inherant advantage over Italy and France on population density but will still possibly have a higher death rate per thousand.

If we further look into extremely populated areas such as London (the most densely populated city in Europe and the largest international hub or New York (accounts for 40% of USA's total) then these skew the figures extremely markedly.
Remove New York for instance and USA's figures compare remarkably favourably with most other countries. I haven't given a UK figure (because the care homes arent counted in ours and are in some countries) but we can and probably should be forecast near the top for actual death numbers given our extremely high population density, but probably that still wouldn't compare to Spain's poor figures given their hugely lower density and smaller population.

There are other factors at play too which may explain the relatively bad performance of Italy, France and especially Spain all with a high level of inter generational mixing between say even great grandparents, grandparents, parents right down to babies.

The only country to really do remarkably badly (and its all relative which really backs my point on simple comparison of numbers) is Sweden which has purposely not taken any but the most lenient measures and allowed life to go on largely unaffected. Despite being very sparsely populated per km3 if has still suffered a substantial death rate.

Sweden 20 people/km3 it has still suffered a death rate of 225 people / million

The whole thing of comparing absolute figures is absolutely ludicrous
Do you mind if I use this, I'm having this exact discussion with a mate on messenger and an American who is convinced they are the worst country in the World! I will of course give credit as not my own research.

It's very well put by the way ( flattery will get me nowhere)
 
They made a SARS vaccine, got it through trials and all that, but the virus was out of circulation by the time it was ready to go. No one mass marketed it because there was no money in it at that point.

Although related, a SARS vaccine would not be effective against SARS CoV 2, the current virus causing COVID 19. I do recall reading that the underlying science used to develop the SARS vaccine was used in to speed the COVID 19 vaccine along.

Yeah I dont think thats correct.

As far as im aware no SARS vaccine was ever made, due to it disappearing and all the research stopped due to nobody caring cos its gone.

Treatment for SARS
There's currently no cure for SARS, but research to find a vaccine is ongoing.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top