Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Virus |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. " Yeah just seen it on channel 4 ....they reckon 1 in every 100 over 60 year olds would die. I'd better top up on the peter pan pills  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. " Yes I've just seen this story. Worrying times indeed. I'm very far from a virologist but I believe I saw stories that the Asian variant is milder than the UK old variant. Would it not be possible to introduce the weaker variant into the UK so that it would not be as dangerous across the population? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. Yes I've just seen this story. Worrying times indeed. I'm very far from a virologist but I believe I saw stories that the Asian variant is milder than the UK old variant. Would it not be possible to introduce the weaker variant into the UK so that it would not be as dangerous across the population? " Or is that as ridiculous as Donald's can we somehow get uv light inside the body? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. Yes I've just seen this story. Worrying times indeed. I'm very far from a virologist but I believe I saw stories that the Asian variant is milder than the UK old variant. Would it not be possible to introduce the weaker variant into the UK so that it would not be as dangerous across the population? Or is that as ridiculous as Donald's can we somehow get uv light inside the body? " Did you just answer your own question with another question. Lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. Yes I've just seen this story. Worrying times indeed. I'm very far from a virologist but I believe I saw stories that the Asian variant is milder than the UK old variant. Would it not be possible to introduce the weaker variant into the UK so that it would not be as dangerous across the population? " I'm no expert either but in Thailand the original one had died out more or less..they are having a second hit but it's more from allow some tourists back in. So if that's the case around Asian countries that had a milder version back in last spring I think it may well have altered? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. Yes I've just seen this story. Worrying times indeed. I'm very far from a virologist but I believe I saw stories that the Asian variant is milder than the UK old variant. Would it not be possible to introduce the weaker variant into the UK so that it would not be as dangerous across the population? Or is that as ridiculous as Donald's can we somehow get uv light inside the body? Did you just answer your own question with another question. Lol" I can't delete it now either... Doh | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And yet whilst this has come to light, more contagious and with a higher mortality rate than last March we are in far less stringent a lock down?" Exactly  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And yet whilst this has come to light, more contagious and with a higher mortality rate than last March we are in far less stringent a lock down? Exactly "One might think now would be a good time to try and do what's needed to get on top of this yet it seems they're stuck in the mantra of 'weve done more vaccinations than ...' | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And yet whilst this has come to light, more contagious and with a higher mortality rate than last March we are in far less stringent a lock down?" It doesn't make sense does it ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And yet whilst this has come to light, more contagious and with a higher mortality rate than last March we are in far less stringent a lock down? Exactly
One might think now would be a good time to try and do what's needed to get on top of this yet it seems they're stuck in the mantra of 'weve done more vaccinations than ...'"But always with a hint of we may need to tighten up. Do we have to wait for nicola again eh | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Unfortunately because in general our country is unfit and un healthy compaired to others, we will always take the biggest hit, that's how life is" Hang on...its a new strain of a virus that is effecting the lower age. Are you suggesting it's only the fat lower aged? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And yet whilst this has come to light, more contagious and with a higher mortality rate than last March we are in far less stringent a lock down? Exactly
One might think now would be a good time to try and do what's needed to get on top of this yet it seems they're stuck in the mantra of 'weve done more vaccinations than ...'
But always with a hint of we may need to tighten up. Do we have to wait for nicola again eh"Yep, looks like we have to wait for Nicola to set the pace.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%!" I'm no professor...but I just watched one explaining it. Must have been lying? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And yet whilst this has come to light, more contagious and with a higher mortality rate than last March we are in far less stringent a lock down? Exactly
One might think now would be a good time to try and do what's needed to get on top of this yet it seems they're stuck in the mantra of 'weve done more vaccinations than ...'
But always with a hint of we may need to tighten up. Do we have to wait for nicola again eh
Yep, looks like we have to wait for Nicola to set the pace. "Yeah he was talking about tougher border restrictions tonight. We all know that that will be hotel quarantine...but they are still looking into it. Just bloody do it ffs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%!" Regardless of how you spin it, the new variant is causing more people to fall sick, more to be hospitalised, and more deaths - that’s the bottom line. Also note that the stats this time comes from a survey of 60 year olds, - which is a lower age group than the 80 year olds who some people think don’t matter. ‘Probably’ an indication the new variant is killing more younger people than the original. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. Yes I've just seen this story. Worrying times indeed. I'm very far from a virologist but I believe I saw stories that the Asian variant is milder than the UK old variant. Would it not be possible to introduce the weaker variant into the UK so that it would not be as dangerous across the population? " If we introduced another variant here, we'd then have 2 of them infecting people. The most infectious could become dominant, like has happened with the Kent 1, over the former 1 here. It's often expected that as a virus gets more infectious, it may become less deadly but this doesn't appear to be the case in this instance. I don't think there are peer-reviewed studies yet on this variant and how deadly it may be, so we should be cautious | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. Yes I've just seen this story. Worrying times indeed. I'm very far from a virologist but I believe I saw stories that the Asian variant is milder than the UK old variant. Would it not be possible to introduce the weaker variant into the UK so that it would not be as dangerous across the population? If we introduced another variant here, we'd then have 2 of them infecting people. The most infectious could become dominant, like has happened with the Kent 1, over the former 1 here. It's often expected that as a virus gets more infectious, it may become less deadly but this doesn't appear to be the case in this instance. I don't think there are peer-reviewed studies yet on this variant and how deadly it may be, so we should be cautious " It's certainly a good reason to continue distancing and protecting each other while the scientists figure it out | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Bullshit. Viruses mutate and become less dangerous but more infectious. It's been like that for thousands of years. The virus wants to survive. Look at ebola. It's nearly wiped out. Not because of vaccines. Because it was to deadly (up to 50 percent mortality) killed everyone before it could mutate. Please don't believe everything the government tells you. X" Could be higher with ebola, which is thankful... but every military lab has it stuck away | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Boris, said it may be a more deadly variant then straight after the BBC main headline on the news, was, "new variant of covid more deadly" talk about creating mass panic . Well done the Beeb " Boris said would you honestly buy a car off any of these liars ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Boris, said it may be a more deadly variant then straight after the BBC main headline on the news, was, "new variant of covid more deadly" talk about creating mass panic . Well done the Beeb Boris said would you honestly buy a car off any of these liars ? " Would not trust Boris as far as could throw him, everything that he comes out of his mouth and promises is a lie. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Bullshit. Viruses mutate and become less dangerous but more infectious. It's been like that for thousands of years. The virus wants to survive. Look at ebola. It's nearly wiped out. Not because of vaccines. Because it was to deadly (up to 50 percent mortality) killed everyone before it could mutate. Please don't believe everything the government tells you. X" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And yet whilst this has come to light, more contagious and with a higher mortality rate than last March we are in far less stringent a lock down? Exactly
One might think now would be a good time to try and do what's needed to get on top of this yet it seems they're stuck in the mantra of 'weve done more vaccinations than ...'
But always with a hint of we may need to tighten up. Do we have to wait for nicola again eh
Yep, looks like we have to wait for Nicola to set the pace.
Yeah he was talking about tougher border restrictions tonight. We all know that that will be hotel quarantine...but they are still looking into it.
Just bloody do it ffs"Absolutely! You'd think 9 months after the first lockdown they would have been ready to finally implement proper hotel quarantine for incoming travellers. Seriously. Im sure the majority of the hospitality sector would jump at having something to do (and an income to boot!) so what's the excuse for dilly dallying now? I don't know why they hadn't implemented this last year anyway. Travelers should have had to bear the cost. But it seems BoJo prioritised letting ppl with itchy feet go on holidays rather than doing what was necessary to avoid the current situation we are in! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%!" I think you'll find it is 30-40% ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%! I think you'll find it is 30-40% ! " No it's not. He was half right. It's 0.3% / 0.4% 30% or 40% of 1,000 is 300 or 400. We are talking about 100 (for old variant, so 10%), now increasing to 103 or 104 per 1,000. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Keep the fear going"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just watching newsnight and apparently there is a new strain been found in liverpool. " Oh dear. Hopefully restrictions and compliance will be enough while details are figured out | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just watching newsnight and apparently there is a new strain been found in liverpool. " Not exactly. It's a strain containing a known spike protein mutation (E484K). Among other mutations, that is one of the mutations found in the South African variant that has been labelled cause for concern. From the CDC website: B.1.351 lineage (a.k.a. 20H/501Y.V2) This variant has multiple mutations in the spike protein, including K417T, E484K, N501Y. Unlike the B.1.1.7 lineage detected in the UK this variant does not contain the deletion at 69/70. This variant was first identified in Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa, in samples dating back to the beginning of October 2020, and cases have since been detected outside of South Africa. The variant also was identified in Zambia in late December 2020, at which time it appeared to be the predominant variant in the country. Currently there is no evidence to suggest that this variant has any impact on disease severity. There is some evidence to indicate that one of the spike protein mutations, E484K, may affect neutralization by some polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. The N501Y mutation is the same mutation found in the Kent variant that arose in the UK in September..... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pictures today of 100s coming in through Heathrow Thank God we have got control of our borders now" Lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pictures today of 100s coming in through Heathrow Thank God we have got control of our borders now" It's fucking shameful. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pictures today of 100s coming in through Heathrow Thank God we have got control of our borders now" What about the Kent coast | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just watching newsnight and apparently there is a new strain been found in liverpool. Not exactly. It's a strain containing a known spike protein mutation (E484K). Among other mutations, that is one of the mutations found in the South African variant that has been labelled cause for concern. From the CDC website: B.1.351 lineage (a.k.a. 20H/501Y.V2) This variant has multiple mutations in the spike protein, including K417T, E484K, N501Y. Unlike the B.1.1.7 lineage detected in the UK this variant does not contain the deletion at 69/70. This variant was first identified in Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa, in samples dating back to the beginning of October 2020, and cases have since been detected outside of South Africa. The variant also was identified in Zambia in late December 2020, at which time it appeared to be the predominant variant in the country. Currently there is no evidence to suggest that this variant has any impact on disease severity. There is some evidence to indicate that one of the spike protein mutations, E484K, may affect neutralization by some polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. The N501Y mutation is the same mutation found in the Kent variant that arose in the UK in September....." Right I'm no scientist...but most of what you said about Brazil and Africa were correct as it resembles them. But while it resembles them they say it has definitely come from liverpool and not come from Africa and Brazil. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pictures today of 100s coming in through Heathrow Thank God we have got control of our borders now" Do you know how stringent airlines are about PCR tests before you are allowed to fly? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pictures today of 100s coming in through Heathrow Thank God we have got control of our borders now What about the Kent coast " Island mentality? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%! I think you'll find it is 30-40% ! No it's not. He was half right. It's 0.3% / 0.4% 30% or 40% of 1,000 is 300 or 400. We are talking about 100 (for old variant, so 10%), now increasing to 103 or 104 per 1,000." The overall chance of someone in that age group dying has increased from 1% to between 1.3% and 1.4% which is an increase of between 0.3% and 0.4%. However, the deaths per 1,000 has increased by between 30% and 40% because the deaths per 1,000 was 10 and is now between 13 and 14...which clearly is an increase of between 30% and 40%. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%! I think you'll find it is 30-40% ! No it's not. He was half right. It's 0.3% / 0.4% 30% or 40% of 1,000 is 300 or 400. We are talking about 100 (for old variant, so 10%), now increasing to 103 or 104 per 1,000. The overall chance of someone in that age group dying has increased from 1% to between 1.3% and 1.4% which is an increase of between 0.3% and 0.4%. However, the deaths per 1,000 has increased by between 30% and 40% because the deaths per 1,000 was 10 and is now between 13 and 14...which clearly is an increase of between 30% and 40%. " Are these figures based on 1000 infected or 1000 infected with the new variant? The daily increase figure must include people with the original variant, i'm a little confused at to increase overall | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%! I think you'll find it is 30-40% ! No it's not. He was half right. It's 0.3% / 0.4% 30% or 40% of 1,000 is 300 or 400. We are talking about 100 (for old variant, so 10%), now increasing to 103 or 104 per 1,000. The overall chance of someone in that age group dying has increased from 1% to between 1.3% and 1.4% which is an increase of between 0.3% and 0.4%. However, the deaths per 1,000 has increased by between 30% and 40% because the deaths per 1,000 was 10 and is now between 13 and 14...which clearly is an increase of between 30% and 40%. Are these figures based on 1000 infected or 1000 infected with the new variant? The daily increase figure must include people with the original variant, i'm a little confused at to increase overall " I am guessing that they test which variant people have had and then come up with the figures : 10 in 1000 with the old variant(s) 13/14 in 1000 with the new variant. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The age group was men 60 years and above and is now 13 - 14 deaths per 1000 as opposed to 10 per 1000. Why this particular age group are mentioned i have not seen and that would be helpful as its easy to speculate without knowledge." It was on the press conference last night. A repeat of it will be on YouTube. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The age group was men 60 years and above and is now 13 - 14 deaths per 1000 as opposed to 10 per 1000. Why this particular age group are mentioned i have not seen and that would be helpful as its easy to speculate without knowledge." It was "a man in his 60s". It was also mentioned that this trend was seen across all age groups. Perhaps there is some variance between age groups but this age group was in line with the average. Maybe this age/gender group is a problem group because those in it are reasonably high risk but have a wait for the vaccine so best to scare them a bit. They will also have sufficient data for this age group unlike the under 45s were there has been hardly any deaths. The over 75 age group would just get the "they are old anyway" reaction from the younger generation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doctor from Warwick University on BBC breakfast says they haven't the data to back it up ... Surprised?" Does he have access to the same data that the government scientists are basing the claim on? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turn the BBC and Sky News off you lot. Lol" And your source is? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doctor from Warwick University on BBC breakfast says they haven't the data to back it up ... Surprised? Does he have access to the same data that the government scientists are basing the claim on?" He probably refers to quantity of data and I would completely agree. Even if they knew the variant of every death the limited data gives a reasonable margin of error. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doctor from Warwick University on BBC breakfast says they haven't the data to back it up ... Surprised? Does he have access to the same data that the government scientists are basing the claim on?" sane as the public health england i would guess ... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9178851/PHE-chief-admits-not-absolutely-clear-Kent-strain-deadly.html | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pictures today of 100s coming in through Heathrow Thank God we have got control of our borders now What about the Kent coast " What's happening on the Kent coast? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Pictures today of 100s coming in through Heathrow Thank God we have got control of our borders now Do you know how stringent airlines are about PCR tests before you are allowed to fly?" Go and look at the pics of Heathrow today | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%!" No it isn’t. Previously 10 in every 1000 were likely to die . A 1% risk. Now between 13 and 14 in every 1000 and likely to die . A 1.3 to 1.4 % risk so the risk of dying has increased by 30 to 40%. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The risk quoted was an extra 3 or 4 deaths per 1000 infections in 60 year olds....that's an extra risk of dying of 0.03% to 0.04% if you get infected...not 30 to 40%! No it isn’t. Previously 10 in every 1000 were likely to die . A 1% risk. Now between 13 and 14 in every 1000 and likely to die . A 1.3 to 1.4 % risk so the risk of dying has increased by 30 to 40%." That's the trouble with homeschooling maths... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just watching newsnight and apparently there is a new strain been found in liverpool. Not exactly. It's a strain containing a known spike protein mutation (E484K). Among other mutations, that is one of the mutations found in the South African variant that has been labelled cause for concern. From the CDC website: B.1.351 lineage (a.k.a. 20H/501Y.V2) This variant has multiple mutations in the spike protein, including K417T, E484K, N501Y. Unlike the B.1.1.7 lineage detected in the UK this variant does not contain the deletion at 69/70. This variant was first identified in Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa, in samples dating back to the beginning of October 2020, and cases have since been detected outside of South Africa. The variant also was identified in Zambia in late December 2020, at which time it appeared to be the predominant variant in the country. Currently there is no evidence to suggest that this variant has any impact on disease severity. There is some evidence to indicate that one of the spike protein mutations, E484K, may affect neutralization by some polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. The N501Y mutation is the same mutation found in the Kent variant that arose in the UK in September..... Right I'm no scientist...but most of what you said about Brazil and Africa were correct as it resembles them. But while it resembles them they say it has definitely come from liverpool and not come from Africa and Brazil." Quote: "Public Health England said the E484K mutation located in the Liverpool cluster is a mutation that has been previously detected in 'variants of concern. The health body said this is not a new variant of the virus and there is currently no evidence that this mutation alone causes more severe illness or is more transmissible." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just watching newsnight and apparently there is a new strain been found in liverpool. Not exactly. It's a strain containing a known spike protein mutation (E484K). Among other mutations, that is one of the mutations found in the South African variant that has been labelled cause for concern. From the CDC website: B.1.351 lineage (a.k.a. 20H/501Y.V2) This variant has multiple mutations in the spike protein, including K417T, E484K, N501Y. Unlike the B.1.1.7 lineage detected in the UK this variant does not contain the deletion at 69/70. This variant was first identified in Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa, in samples dating back to the beginning of October 2020, and cases have since been detected outside of South Africa. The variant also was identified in Zambia in late December 2020, at which time it appeared to be the predominant variant in the country. Currently there is no evidence to suggest that this variant has any impact on disease severity. There is some evidence to indicate that one of the spike protein mutations, E484K, may affect neutralization by some polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. The N501Y mutation is the same mutation found in the Kent variant that arose in the UK in September..... Right I'm no scientist...but most of what you said about Brazil and Africa were correct as it resembles them. But while it resembles them they say it has definitely come from liverpool and not come from Africa and Brazil. Quote: "Public Health England said the E484K mutation located in the Liverpool cluster is a mutation that has been previously detected in 'variants of concern. The health body said this is not a new variant of the virus and there is currently no evidence that this mutation alone causes more severe illness or is more transmissible."" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just watching newsnight and apparently there is a new strain been found in liverpool. Not exactly. It's a strain containing a known spike protein mutation (E484K). Among other mutations, that is one of the mutations found in the South African variant that has been labelled cause for concern. From the CDC website: B.1.351 lineage (a.k.a. 20H/501Y.V2) This variant has multiple mutations in the spike protein, including K417T, E484K, N501Y. Unlike the B.1.1.7 lineage detected in the UK this variant does not contain the deletion at 69/70. This variant was first identified in Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa, in samples dating back to the beginning of October 2020, and cases have since been detected outside of South Africa. The variant also was identified in Zambia in late December 2020, at which time it appeared to be the predominant variant in the country. Currently there is no evidence to suggest that this variant has any impact on disease severity. There is some evidence to indicate that one of the spike protein mutations, E484K, may affect neutralization by some polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. The N501Y mutation is the same mutation found in the Kent variant that arose in the UK in September..... Right I'm no scientist...but most of what you said about Brazil and Africa were correct as it resembles them. But while it resembles them they say it has definitely come from liverpool and not come from Africa and Brazil. Quote: "Public Health England said the E484K mutation located in the Liverpool cluster is a mutation that has been previously detected in 'variants of concern. The health body said this is not a new variant of the virus and there is currently no evidence that this mutation alone causes more severe illness or is more transmissible."" Devils advocate here... But what were phe saying a year ago when we should have been locking down, closing airports, emergency measures? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Doctor from Warwick University on BBC breakfast says they haven't the data to back it up ... Surprised? Does he have access to the same data that the government scientists are basing the claim on? He probably refers to quantity of data and I would completely agree. Even if they knew the variant of every death the limited data gives a reasonable margin of error." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just watching newsnight and apparently there is a new strain been found in liverpool. Not exactly. It's a strain containing a known spike protein mutation (E484K). Among other mutations, that is one of the mutations found in the South African variant that has been labelled cause for concern. From the CDC website: B.1.351 lineage (a.k.a. 20H/501Y.V2) This variant has multiple mutations in the spike protein, including K417T, E484K, N501Y. Unlike the B.1.1.7 lineage detected in the UK this variant does not contain the deletion at 69/70. This variant was first identified in Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa, in samples dating back to the beginning of October 2020, and cases have since been detected outside of South Africa. The variant also was identified in Zambia in late December 2020, at which time it appeared to be the predominant variant in the country. Currently there is no evidence to suggest that this variant has any impact on disease severity. There is some evidence to indicate that one of the spike protein mutations, E484K, may affect neutralization by some polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. The N501Y mutation is the same mutation found in the Kent variant that arose in the UK in September..... Right I'm no scientist...but most of what you said about Brazil and Africa were correct as it resembles them. But while it resembles them they say it has definitely come from liverpool and not come from Africa and Brazil. Quote: "Public Health England said the E484K mutation located in the Liverpool cluster is a mutation that has been previously detected in 'variants of concern. The health body said this is not a new variant of the virus and there is currently no evidence that this mutation alone causes more severe illness or is more transmissible." Devils advocate here... But what were phe saying a year ago when we should have been locking down, closing airports, emergency measures? " Im sure they said, lets let it run wild until we have herd immunity. then bojo visited as many Covid patients as possible, shaking there hands until he 'caught' it. still dubious about that as a fact, can Never trust a Tory, espeically that buffoon. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Just watching newsnight and apparently there is a new strain been found in liverpool. Not exactly. It's a strain containing a known spike protein mutation (E484K). Among other mutations, that is one of the mutations found in the South African variant that has been labelled cause for concern. From the CDC website: B.1.351 lineage (a.k.a. 20H/501Y.V2) This variant has multiple mutations in the spike protein, including K417T, E484K, N501Y. Unlike the B.1.1.7 lineage detected in the UK this variant does not contain the deletion at 69/70. This variant was first identified in Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa, in samples dating back to the beginning of October 2020, and cases have since been detected outside of South Africa. The variant also was identified in Zambia in late December 2020, at which time it appeared to be the predominant variant in the country. Currently there is no evidence to suggest that this variant has any impact on disease severity. There is some evidence to indicate that one of the spike protein mutations, E484K, may affect neutralization by some polyclonal and monoclonal antibodies. The N501Y mutation is the same mutation found in the Kent variant that arose in the UK in September..... Right I'm no scientist...but most of what you said about Brazil and Africa were correct as it resembles them. But while it resembles them they say it has definitely come from liverpool and not come from Africa and Brazil. Quote: "Public Health England said the E484K mutation located in the Liverpool cluster is a mutation that has been previously detected in 'variants of concern. The health body said this is not a new variant of the virus and there is currently no evidence that this mutation alone causes more severe illness or is more transmissible." Devils advocate here... But what were phe saying a year ago when we should have been locking down, closing airports, emergency measures? " Public Health England's job is to monitor disease outbreaks and co-ordinate suitable public health responses. Last year, it had nowhere near the resource it needed to respond to a pandemic disease (resource decided by Government). Its remit does not include advising Government on travel restrictions etc. It's also clear that the Government WAS advised by its advisers to implement travel restrictions, but it chose not to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scientists are openly questioning it now." No, they're saying there's only very limited data and a trend can only be confirmed after much more data is analysed. They're pissed that the PM has talked about preliminary data like it's the final, concrete answer. It makes it seem like scientists don't know what they're doing/changing their minds, when in fact they're waiting to actually draw a conclusion. Boris is too impatient to wait. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scientists are openly questioning it now. No, they're saying there's only very limited data and a trend can only be confirmed after much more data is analysed. They're pissed that the PM has talked about preliminary data like it's the final, concrete answer. It makes it seem like scientists don't know what they're doing/changing their minds, when in fact they're waiting to actually draw a conclusion. Boris is too impatient to wait."
We should only be using valid research results that are large enough to be meaningful.
The 'leadership' though is happy to use anything that even remotely helps it to become accepted that worse results are absolutely nothing to do with them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scientists are openly questioning it now. No, they're saying there's only very limited data and a trend can only be confirmed after much more data is analysed. They're pissed that the PM has talked about preliminary data like it's the final, concrete answer. It makes it seem like scientists don't know what they're doing/changing their minds, when in fact they're waiting to actually draw a conclusion. Boris is too impatient to wait.
We should only be using valid research results that are large enough to be meaningful.
The 'leadership' though is happy to use anything that even remotely helps it to become accepted that worse results are absolutely nothing to do with them. "Yup | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scientists are openly questioning it now. No, they're saying there's only very limited data and a trend can only be confirmed after much more data is analysed. They're pissed that the PM has talked about preliminary data like it's the final, concrete answer. It makes it seem like scientists don't know what they're doing/changing their minds, when in fact they're waiting to actually draw a conclusion. Boris is too impatient to wait.
We should only be using valid research results that are large enough to be meaningful.
The 'leadership' though is happy to use anything that even remotely helps it to become accepted that worse results are absolutely nothing to do with them. "I think that a scientist has basically said..what the fuck are you doing?.to the pm is quite telling. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Scientists are openly questioning it now. No, they're saying there's only very limited data and a trend can only be confirmed after much more data is analysed. They're pissed that the PM has talked about preliminary data like it's the final, concrete answer. It makes it seem like scientists don't know what they're doing/changing their minds, when in fact they're waiting to actually draw a conclusion. Boris is too impatient to wait.
We should only be using valid research results that are large enough to be meaningful.
The 'leadership' though is happy to use anything that even remotely helps it to become accepted that worse results are absolutely nothing to do with them.
I think that a scientist has basically said..what the fuck are you doing?.to the pm is quite telling."This has been happening all along. Boris gets a private briefing about some preliminary data or possible findings and he goes and blabs it to everyone. He's like a child who can't keep a secret. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"can Never trust a Tory, espeically that buffoon." Yep, the only Tory you can trust is a Lavatory! Barrom... tish... I'll get me coat... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The new Kent variant may be more deadly, as well as more infectious. Johnson and co have released this shocking news today. More people getting this strain are likely to die, compared with had they caught the old 1. Perhaps 30-40% more deadly. Yeah just seen it on channel 4 ....they reckon 1 in every 100 over 60 year olds would die. I'd better top up on the peter pan pills "Old variant 10 in 1000. New variant 13 in 1000. I think it’s bullshit. Viruses mutate. This 0.3 % is neither here nor there. Just out to control us further and scare us more x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
