Does anybody think a 2nd spike is likely

[ajohn]

I haven't read it yet, but my first skim of the first paragraph seems reasonable.
Wasn't it the Chinese doctors who first reported "viral pneumonia", which is what the rest of the world's doctors were priming themselves for? And then the virus hit, and the confusing and apparently disparate range of issues manifested themselves......

The thick blood has been mentioned several times and clots. Latest idea is lack of certain types of T cells.

The Chinese just as the UK monitor diseases like these. That's how they are picked up. Then comes science such as is there human to human transmission, genetics. Flu is similar in that it can kill lots so new ones are of interest as are some of the known ones. No real action is taken until they know a number of things. We have some sort of tracking system in place but clearly it couldn't cope and probably wasn't detailed enough. Flu can turn to pneumonia. CV19 is a lot more lung direct and as easy to catch as a common cold. This was obvious before it really got out of China. They calculated R from what happened there and China hasn't been short on providing information.

Our plan is a flu plan. It may have been modified a bit but has evolved as things have progressed. Bad source but this sort of sums things up
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...in-failed-prepare-mers-sars-ebola-coronavirus

A lot more notice should have been taken of SARS. Some did. The answer is to clamp down hard and not get many people infected in the first place. Not easy to do. Extremely effective tracking helps. Testing too. We seemed to start with some one doing it manually in an extraction hood - or media taking the mickey. Machines can do loads at a time. I'm not going to mention testing aspects in the SAGE minutes. They are on the web. Read them starting with the oldest CV19 related.

Herd immunity is reduced if fewer get infected. That does have an impact on passing the infection on providing people who have it can not pass it on. I wonder how long it takes their immunity to kick fully in again. They may wonder as well but also how long it lasts. Coronavirus long term immunity doesn't always happen.

So we have a proportion of people with herd immunity and a proportion of people carrying the virus. R ceases to be off much interest if low and probability of transmission kicks in. The lock down relaxation is a bit political really as social distancing is still required. That gives a low chance of human to human transmission other than contaminated objects that people touch. Spikes, waves? Well it depends on how well they are handled. A lot depends on people. If lock down had been completely effective the virus would have disappeared in 40 odd days. Didn't one country have to get people to remain in their "houses" most seems to be in apartments on TV. Desperate measures to improve lock down as we know it.

Some are now suggesting no need to worry about death. Fine but survival may not leave people as well as they think. Ventilation is bad news in that respect. Best hope you don't need it.

 

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

...

Herd immunity is reduced if fewer get infected. That does have an impact on passing the infection on providing people who have it can not pass it on. I wonder how long it takes their immunity to kick fully in again. They may wonder as well but also how long it lasts. Coronavirus long term immunity doesn't always happen.

So we have a proportion of people with herd immunity and a proportion of people carrying the virus. R ceases to be off much interest if low and probability of transmission kicks in. The lock down relaxation is a bit political really as social distancing is still required. That gives a low chance of human to human transmission other than contaminated objects that people touch. Spikes, waves? Well it depends on how well they are handled. A lot depends on people. If lock down had been completely effective the virus would have disappeared in 40 odd days. Didn't one country have to get people to remain in their "houses" most seems to be in apartments on TV. Desperate measures to improve lock down as we know it.

Some are now suggesting no need to worry about death. Fine but survival may not leave people as well as they think. Ventilation is bad news in that respect. Best hope you don't need it.

I think you are brilliant, ajohn. I've haven't laughed so much for a while.
I especially liked your last paragraph.
It has been suggested to me that I shouldn't worry about death. I'm sure survival will leave me in better health than death.
I've got the windows wide open today, for some ventilation, but it's not bad news. I didn't really need it, but why not while the weather is so nice.

 

[Deleted2797112]

So we have a proportion of people with herd immunity

No, we don't. You clearly don't understand herd immunity. Nor do you understand the current state of the science on individual immunity.

 

[ajohn]

I'm sure survival will leave me in better health than death.

Perhaps you need further explanation. The best option is not having to be treated in hospital. Once there there are a whole series of possible results. Last one is death. Recovery from the virus can leave a whole range of conditions.

Other comment is silly as that person often is. Current state of play is they think depending on the area of the country 5 to 17% do have immunity via testing samples of people. Just to make that clear they have the correct antibodies. They don't know how long they last so are continuing to monitor..

 

[Deleted2797112]

Other comment is silly as that person often is. Current state of play is they think depending on the area of the country 5 to 17% do have immunity via testing samples of people. Just to make that clear they have the correct antibodies. They don't know how long they last so are continuing to monitor..

You just proved my comment right.

 

[Brigadier]

Whenever I (try to) read the nonsense, I just keep thinking of that Stanley Unwin video

 

[ajohn]

You just proved my comment right.

1 : the Roman goddess of agriculture — compare demeter. 2 : a dwarf planet that orbits within the asteroid belt with a mean distance from the sun of 2.7 astronomical units (260 million miles) and a diameter of 590 miles (950 kilometers) Ceres.

That's about where you are - in outer space.

 

[Deleted2797112]

1 : the Roman goddess of agriculture — compare demeter. 2 : a dwarf planet that orbits within the asteroid belt with a mean distance from the sun of 2.7 astronomical units (260 million miles) and a diameter of 590 miles (950 kilometers) Ceres.

That's about where you are - in outer space.

OK. I'll spell it out for you.

You - "Current state of play is they think depending on the area of the country 5 to 17% do have immunity via testing samples of people."

5 to 17% do not have immunity. 5 to 17% have had a positive antibody test. It is currently unknown whether the presence of antibodies confers lifetime immunity, short-term immunity or no immunity at all.

"So we have a proportion of people with herd immunity...….."

Herd immunity occurs when a sufficiently high proportion (disease specific) of a population has immunity either through exposure or through vaccination. The effect is to protect those that are not immune. Either the threshold for herd immunity is met or it is not. Your statement is therefore meaningless.

Thank you for looking me up. I'm definitely a celestial body. But I tell you what, my feet are far more firmly planted on the ground than yours, celestial body or not.

 

[Vinty]

If the presence of antibodies don't confer immunity what is the point of trying to find a vaccine.

Isn't the antibody created by your immune system to destroy the virus.
Once the virus is destroyed by the antibodies you recover, however you still have antigens in your body which can identify the virus should it return, the antigens then trigger an immune response which produces antibodies which destroy the virus before it can make you ill again.

Aren't most vaccines based on this principle.

 

[Deleted2797112]

If the presence of antibodies don't confer immunity what is the point of trying to find a vaccine.

Isn't the antibody created by your immune system to destroy the virus.
Once the virus is destroyed by the antibodies you recover, however you still have antigens in your body which can identify the virus should it return, the antigens then trigger an immune response which produces antibodies which destroy the virus before it can make you ill again.

Aren't most vaccines based on this principle.

I didn't say that the presence of antibodies doesn't confer immunity. I said that the degree to which immunity might or might not be conferred is currently unknown. Not all antibodies are created equal. The important ones for immunity are neutralising antibodies. This is a novel virus, only 150 days old and there's much that isn't yet known. The scientists around the world who are working on vaccine development are taking a punt that they will be able to produce a vaccine that's safe and effective because it will be a game changer if they can. But there are no guarantees. They've been working on a vaccine for HIV for nearly thirty years and current estimates suggest another 10 years of work in progress.

 

[Notch7]

You just proved my comment right.

why are post responses to ajohn so confrontational? -ajohn is being polite you are being blunt and rude, I dont see the need.

 

[Notch7]

OK. I'll spell it out for you.

You - "Current state of play is they think depending on the area of the country 5 to 17% do have immunity via testing samples of people."

5 to 17% do not have immunity. 5 to 17% have had a positive antibody test. It is currently unknown whether the presence of antibodies confers lifetime immunity, short-term immunity or no immunity at all.

youve taken ajohns post out of context, I appreciate positive antibody result does not automatically mean immunity or for how long, but ajohn also went onto to say "They don't know how long they last"

current thinking is that it is likely there is some of immunity:
"But so far, scientists say, it looks like SARS-CoV-2 probably induces immunity like other coronaviruses. That means that the human body will probably retain a memory of the virus for at least a few years and should be protected from reinfection, at least in the short-term."

Which rather makes your combative answer misleading because your use of the word 'unknown' should have have said 'some immunity is likely, but unproven'.

 

[fillyboy]

ajohn is being polite you are being blunt and rude, I dont see the need.

To be fair Notch, you can be a little blunt at times.

 

[ellal]

If the presence of antibodies don't confer immunity what is the point of trying to find a vaccine.

Isn't the antibody created by your immune system to destroy the virus.
Once the virus is destroyed by the antibodies you recover, however you still have antigens in your body which can identify the virus should it return, the antigens then trigger an immune response which produces antibodies which destroy the virus before it can make you ill again.

Aren't most vaccines based on this principle.

They are indeed.

However the diseases vaccines that have been developed tackle essentially remain constant, and don't mutate or come back in a different form.

Is there a vaccine for the 'common cold' or 'flu' yet?

 

[IT Minion]

They are indeed.

However the diseases vaccines that have been developed tackle essentially remain constant, and don't mutate or come back in a different form.

Is there a vaccine for the 'common cold' or 'flu' yet?

Yes, roughly 200 of them for the common cold. The main problem there is that there's so many sub-types and the antibodies from one don't work on another.

Which is one of the reasons that antibodies might not help for Covid-19, if there are different enough strains that mean your antibodies aren't effective. The other big area of concern is the speed at which antibodies deteriorate.