beardy

Last time i was in the UK (2019), i thought the coffee was rubbish. Watery pish, badly made. Just crap. Coffee is ubiquitous in Australia, and the standard is far higher and better than the UK. The Starbucks here is still absolutely fvxking awful.

I would suggest the biggest issue is not the Ro rather the number of ICU cases. There are about 15% of UK ICU beds taken up with covid. That is fvcked. To have that many occupied due to a single infectious agent is ridiculous. It's unmanageable. When you consider a 'vented' COVID patient spends on average 20 days in ICU (compared to 1-2 for straight forward open heart surgery) this highlights the burden of disease. COVID has essentially burnt out now in the UK however it's lingering effect on healthcare is very concerning.

Semmelweis just called you a dick.

Intramuscular is fine, you just need more drugs.

This, the logistics make it improbable.

I'd imagine standard IV needles 22G or 23G. Anything smaller i reckon would be hard to get and would bend too easily. You need a drug with a high concentration (Midazolam fits the profile for this) Syringe wise a small 3ml syringe would work however I'd assume you'd need to smuggle a few into the club in case you fvck it up. All in all a ridiculous amount if effort, possible but not probable IMHO. However I've seen video clips of people slipping drugs into drinks and TBH a fleeting stabbing pain in a club would easily be dismissed at the time. I read recently of some guys who had developed a nail polish which changes colour if you dip it in a spiked drink. Ideally a Lateral Flow Test that could be administered in a pub/club wpuld ideal. However even contemplating such a safety measure shows how fvcked up it all is. I'd be interested to see what numbers of people who have been charged and what punishments are meted out for possession and use of 'date rape' drugs. Possession shows a rather sinister premeditation.

What are they singing? I can barely make a word out.

You seem.to have misrepresented the data somewhat here. Did you actually read Round 14 of the REACT study?

[emoji3]

https://mobile.twitter.com/MyDoncaster/status/1384090569962524683

A question for the aficionados. Does whisky change in the bottle. I have an A'bunadh 54 which had about a 1/4 left. I hadn't been to the bottle in 6-8 months. Had a glass tonight and it was awesome. Not how i remember it. So does the more air in a bottle change it?

I get that, but if the test is a bit shit then it defeats the purpose. The pregnancy test is a LFT, let's be honest no one would accept a 77% accuracy let alone 58%. Again like PCR it's going to be a test if infections not infectiousness. I suspect the fact that the Government has bought 20 million units will dictate policy.

No need to divert as the Liverpool experiment has shown. Perfect testing grounds for the lateral flow testing. What's with the sudden fascination with LFT. I get that a rapid POC test for COVIS would be ideal but from want I've read the Innova one has a specificity as low as 58% (nearly toss of a coin territory for whether you have COVID) and average about 77%. The high specificity may make it a good tool to rule out Covid bit it has widely been slated.

It's not just COVID, his previous predictions on other pandemics are fvcking rotten. The statement feels political, someone trying to push a narrative.

In fairness Neil Ferguson's track record on predictions is absolutely horrific. I think I'll stick with the actuaries on this.

Good points, in Australia we had a normal flu vaccination program however it was on june/July and the burden of disease in the country was/Is minimal. I guess in the UK, they've assessed the risk and deemed.it low.

The fluvax is generally administered prior to the onset of flu season where the disease burden in society is low. The covid vaccination program will be undertaken likely in the throes of a pandemic (all you casedemic nutters at the back sit down please). This poses a problem of a large number of people who may be actively infectious presenting for the vaccine. The logistics for this will have to be managed. It will definitely be different to flu vaccination program. Apologies if already covered.

I remember a horror type comic called Scream when I was young. I particularly remember because one 'monster' had ventured near Inverness. Google tells me it was a short run of comics.

As for SAGE not acknowledging the possibility. They commented on it on the 3rd of June and even referenced Gifoni at al's paper. I think it is safe to say they are aware of it.

Using the figures in that paper, there is 89% susceptible. Not a million miles from then93% you quote. Dr Rupert Beale commented on the paper 'only a very small proportion of adults (less than 10%, maybe much less than 10%) would be protected by pre-existing T cell immunity' So getting closer to 93% As for Dr Mike Yeadon highlighting this for months I've already stated that the research team have likely been working on this for Seven mo months. If Yeadon had been talking about this 10 weeks after the first case in the UK the fair play to him. Again the paper was a prospective trial (obviously) so was always going to take months for results. I think it is an interesting paper as I've mentioned.

However, wiith this particular nut they didn't overlook it. They submitted a proposal to PHE Ethics Grpup on 21st May. Nearly 7 months ago. I would suspect it would take at least 4 weeks to pit a proposal together and write it. So likely they were contemplating it mid April. Bear in mind that this was a prospective trial. Without looking I'd be surprised if any of the amateur immunologists were discussing the cross reactivity of previous Coronviruses resulting in a component of T Cell mediated immunity. I am however happy to be corrected. The purpose if the paper and side papers are actually of interest. However that is clearly not the discussion here.

The headlines can be a little misleading. Roughly 1 in 9 have some T Cell immunity, and the evidence may point towards a priming from previous Coeonviruses rather than subcliincal SARS Cov2 infection although the latter can't be ruled out. I expect the reason the 'experts' took longer than posters on a football forum to work this out was at least a rigourous approach to science and the last data collected less than five weeks ago. Or these scientists might not be as smart as people on here.

I get that they can test up to 45 cycles but that document states Results where: • the Ct value is ≥ 40 and/or • there is an abnormal assay curve and/or • the clinical context makes the positive result highly unexpected should be considered interim or held until reviewed by a laboratory clinician. Laboratories will undertake the following actions: This says to me that they have a threshold below 40 and double check those above 40.

Is there any proof of this or is it just speculation?

Absolutely. The actuaries have been superb in their analysis. Way back in March they dispelled the 'they would have died anyway' nonsense yet it is still spouted. These are a group who understand very well the stats surrounding death. They're my regular go to when ONS data is released.