Coronavirus

[grunt]

Yesterday 379 UK deaths

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Largest one day number of deaths in almost a year (Feb 2021).

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

129,587 cases and 398 deaths registered in the UK today.

But yeah, it's mild.

[Radium]

https://twitter.com/ons/status/1481265426080350209?s=21



Stable from the previous week


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sir David Gray]

Weekly NRS update;

In the 7 days up to 9th January 72 deaths were registered where Covid-19 was mentioned on the death certificate - increase of 27 from the previous 7 days.

12 of the deaths were people under 65, 12 were 65-74 and 48 were 75+.

The total number of deaths registered from all causes in the week up to 9th January was 13% below average. The number of deaths registered in week 1 can fluctuate due to the number of public holidays which fall within that week.

The number of deaths at home or in non-institutional settings were 8% above average, hospitals 21% below average and care homes 20% below average.

62 fewer deaths from circulatory causes, 50 fewer deaths from respiratory causes, 39 fewer deaths from cancer and 23 fewer deaths from dementia/Alzheimer's compared with the average for the time of year.

5 excess deaths from other causes.

[ronaldo7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yesterday 379 UK deaths



But yeah, it's mild.

SDG did a check on deaths in each UK nation the other week. Unfortunately deaths are the last indicator to come through. We in Scotland were doing well in the last check. I'd be interested to see how we all measure up in a week or so, to see how the protections in each country measured up during the festive period.

Public health protections are about trying to save lives after all.

[SChibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Hopefully not Michael Levitt?

I can 100% confirm that the man is a total wackjob. I attended a seminar he was at the last time I was over on campus at Stanford and he's as mad as a box of frogs.

It was Jayanta Bhattacharya on Lex Fridmans podcast. Worth a listen to hear about how himself and other scientists were censored regarding the effectiveness of lockdowns in America.

[Sir David Gray]

Nightclub owners have criticised the slow rollout of financial support for their businesses, which have been closed again under Covid restrictions.

Clubs have been closed since 27 December with Nicola Sturgeon announcing the shutdown will remain in place until at least 24 January.

But trade groups said Scottish government funding promised before Christmas has not yet materialised.

Deputy First Minister John Swinney said the grants will be paid "very soon".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-59964548

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I hope he gets put in jail to be honest



Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

According to the Guardian he could be (though I highly doubt it):

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...covid-positive

I note also that the French journalist who interviewed Djokovic for L'Equipe after he'd tested positive has confirmed that he was not informed that the player had Covid and also instructed not to ask about vaccinations because it was 'very sensitive for Novak'.

[CropleyWasGod]

Now they tell us 😆

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ajherrington/2022/01/11/study-finds-cannabis-compounds-prevent-infection-by-covid-19-virus/?sh=c05644017537

[Sir David Gray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Cheers - hard to argue with much of what you say. However, do you not think we're getting relatively close to moving from pandemic to endemic, the situation where you wouldn't support penalising the unvaccinated? And, I just find it hard to see that the introduction of fines would allow the rest of us to return to normality quickly. I'm against the idea on a point of principle, but also just don't get the purpose behind such a proposal (other than simply punishing the unvaxxed for their decision; I really can't imagine sufficient numbers suddenly deciding to take the vaccine to make a difference).

I think we are getting close to the end stage of the pandemic, at least in this country, but we're not there yet. Hospital numbers in Scotland are at their highest level in nearly a year and are currently increasing by about 4% every day and we're hearing constantly about health boards cancelling procedures and the knock on effect that's happening on the NHS in general.

All of that would be much less severe if we didn't have around 8% of the eligible population completely unvaccinated.

You're possibly correct about the kind of impact such measures would have but I just think we need to try something. It's unacceptable to me that we'll possibly have the threat of restrictions hanging over us when so many people over the age of 18 in Scotland have been boostered and it feels like we're being held back by a few hundred thousand people who aren't willing to listen to science.

I think for the time being we should be introducing measures to really get tough with the unvaccinated otherwise this is just going to keep getting prolonged.

[SideBurns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think we are getting close to the end stage of the pandemic, at least in this country, but we're not there yet. Hospital numbers in Scotland are at their highest level in nearly a year and are currently increasing by about 4% every day and we're hearing constantly about health boards cancelling procedures and the knock on effect that's happening on the NHS in general.

All of that would be much less severe if we didn't have around 8% of the eligible population completely unvaccinated.

You're possibly correct about the kind of impact such measures would have but I just think we need to try something. It's unacceptable to me that we'll possibly have the threat of restrictions hanging over us when so many people over the age of 18 in Scotland have been boostered and it feels like we're being held back by a few hundred thousand people who aren't willing to listen to science.

I think for the time being we should be introducing measures to really get tough with the unvaccinated otherwise this is just going to keep getting prolonged.

Fair enough - I certainly wouldn't attempt to argue with your grasp of statistics, given you're the one who has been dutifully keeping us informed for the duration of this bloody thing!

I'm hoping the rise in hospital cases is the inevitable lag between infections & hospitalisation, and they will start to reduce soon as we get over the peak of this. Then, hopefully shortly thereafter, we can all begin the journey to putting the pandemic behind us - regardless of how many jabs in the arm we've had.

[Sir David Gray]

Breakdown of today's cases by council area;

Glasgow - 1,027
Edinburgh - 792
Fife - 580
North Lanarkshire - 515
South Lanarkshire - 502
Aberdeen - 316
Aberdeenshire - 276
Renfrewshire - 267
Highland - 254
Falkirk - 244
Dundee - 222
West Lothian - 220
Dumfries and Galloway - 210
Perth and Kinross - 190
North Ayrshire - 183
East Ayrshire - 160
Angus - 160
East Lothian - 151
Stirling - 144
East Dunbartonshire - 144
Midlothian - 140
West Dunbartonshire - 132
South Ayrshire - 129
East Renfrewshire - 123
Scottish Borders - 111
Moray - 97
Inverclyde - 94
Argyll and Bute - 94
Clackmannanshire - 75
Na-h Eileanan Siar - 19
Orkney - 16
Shetland - 6

[He's here!]

Djokovic to have visa withdrawn by Australian immigration minister according to media reports.

[007]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Djokovic to have visa withdrawn by Australian immigration minister according to media reports.

That's good to hear.

Here's one of the reports.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/tenn...lia-Alex-Hawke

Just watched the press conference with his parents and brother from a couple of days ago. You've got to laugh at the trophies they brought along to it, not to mention the bust of his head.

Maybe Lewy's missing a trick and should wear both his cup winner's medal to any pre-match pressers he does.

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And who would tell us if it wasn't Big Pharma? I doubt it very much.

I know a doctor at Sick Kids. He still says he wouldn't let his daughter get the vaccine as they have no idea how this will affect the reproductive system in the future.

It's still a trial vaccine until 2023 for a reason.

He's an idiot, you're should send him the article and please read it too

[Stairway 2 7]

Mike Bird

@Birdyword

·

Jan 12

Big study of ~70k Covid cases showing Omicron's far lower severity of outcomes vs Delta Symptomatic hospitalisation -53% Median hospital stay length -70% ICU admission -74% Mortality -91% Major effects among both vaccinated and unvaccinated patients. https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/...045v1.full.pdf

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's good to hear.

Here's one of the reports.

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/tenn...lia-Alex-Hawke

Just watched the press conference with his parents and brother from a couple of days ago. You've got to laugh at the trophies they brought along to it, not to mention the bust of his head.

Maybe Lewy's missing a trick and should wear both his cup winner's medal to any pre-match pressers he does.

I’m still hoping that Chris Mueller cuts about with an owl on his wrist the whole time and that it wasn’t just a one off photo opportunity.

That would be a decent and worthwhile accessory.

[Coco Bryce]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's an idiot, you're should send him the article and please read it too

He really isn't. Clearly he has his own medical opinion which he is clearly entitled to. I'll tell him though that a guy on a football forum thinks he's an idiot though.

[Stairway 2 7]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He really isn't. Clearly he has his own medical opinion which he is clearly entitled to. I'll tell him though that a guy on a football forum thinks he's an idiot though.

Andrew crowxford is seen as one of the world's leading immunologists says his opinion is wrong, so do almost all other immunologists and vaccine experts. It's not just big pharma as you say, it's the leading experts in the field who have nothing to gain

[HibsGW]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He really isn't. Clearly he has his own medical opinion which he is clearly entitled to. I'll tell him though that a guy on a football forum thinks he's an idiot though.

Thinking that the vaccine is unsafe despite the massive overwhelming evidence it isn’t is not “having your own medical opinion”. It’s being duped by nonsense.

[Onceinawhile]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thinking that the vaccine is unsafe despite the massive overwhelming evidence it isn’t is not “having your own medical opinion”. It’s being duped by nonsense.

Well tbf, there's no long term evidence of the vaccine and how it will effect people in 4,5 or even 10 years time.

I tend to think it won't at all, but that doesn't mean there's evidence it won't.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well tbf, there's no long term evidence of the vaccine and how it will effect people in 4,5 or even 10 years time.

I tend to think it won't at all, but that doesn't mean there's evidence it won't.

The majority of medical opinion suggests that any effects from vaccines are seen within the first few weeks of application.

I'm yet to hear of any vaccine being trialled for 4, 5 or 10 years before being made available.

[vincipernoi]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well tbf, there's no long term evidence of the vaccine and how it will effect people in 4,5 or even 10 years time.

I tend to think it won't at all, but that doesn't mean there's evidence it won't.

The problem with balancing risks and benefits of the vaccine in children is that most children have a mild illness with vovid so any risk of a vaccine at all is disproportionately amplified.
The post covid inflammatory condition PIMMS TS, does however cause critical illness in children
I think your friend is offering a personal view rather than it having the scientific kudos of his workplace behind it.

[Kato]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well tbf, there's no long term evidence of the vaccine and how it will effect people in 4,5 or even 10 years time.

I tend to think it won't at all, but that doesn't mean there's evidence it won't.

All effects of vaccines will kick in very soon after the jab. 4 or 5 years down the line the only effect is going to be on your immune system.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Keyser Sauzee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

All effects of vaccines will kick in very soon after the jab. 4 or 5 years down the line the only effect is going to be on your immune system.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

What do you mean it may effect your immune system down the line? Not meaning to be argumentative just looking to understand

[HibsGW]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The majority of medical opinion suggests that any effects from vaccines are seen within the first few weeks of application.

I'm yet to hear of any vaccine being trialled for 4, 5 or 10 years before being made available.

Exactly. Once a vaccine is tested for 10 years, we don’t know what it does in 20 years. Test it for 20 years we don’t know what happens in 30 years. All indications are that vaccine side effects show up very quickly.

[Stairway 2 7]

Andrew L. Croxford
@andrew_croxford
Thread: Of the arguments put forward for turning down a jab, the most difficult to challenge is ‘there isn’t any long term safety data’. It’s used by anti-vaxxers, but also strikes me as a valid concern for vaccine hesitant people caught up in the Covid-19 info grinder.

It’s painful to argue over and over (so I don’t in general) because there is an inevitable retreat into ‘well you can’t prove it and nobody knows for sure….. so there.”… which is to immunologists what this image is to hiding spots. Cute, but.... well.... room for improvement

It’s kind of a non sequitur, which makes labouring the point frivolous. They argue: 1) All vaccines need long term safety data (of unspecified time). 2) COVID vaccines do not have long term safety data (of unspecified time). 3) Therefore, COVID vaccines are not safe.

People making this argument miss something very important: the time you need to wait to generate confidence in safety varies substantially with the ‘type’ of new therapy in question. Small molecules are different to biologics are different to vaccines are different to whatever

Remember also that trials are divided into multiple endpoints that finish over the course of a few years. The estimated study completion date of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is Feb 2023. But safety endpoints are already completed, and I will try to explain.

Drugs that are administered for chronic conditions accumulate safety data as time goes on. Carcinogenicity/teratogenicity/genotoxicity studies accompany development to de-risk. Toxicologists can wreck your fave project but are like goalkeepers stopping you conceding.

This is paramount for molecules that can have diverse off-target activities with negative outcomes. MANY drugs with favourable drug-like properties will fail, as the the future of a company can depend on not screwing up - and more importantly, patients may suffer.

These points above are for drugs administered over many years, perhaps daily, twice daily, weekly, monthly and so on. This is *very* different for a vaccine. It’s a one-and-done kind of intervention/regimen, split over one or more doses (potentially with boosters to follow).

What is a good amount of time to be sure that a vaccine won’t result in something nasty? There are only two major areas to look at: 1) Components of the vaccine itself that can cause long term effects? 2) Consequences of immunisation, that can result in long term effects?

What’s in an mRNA vaccine? Lipids & polyethylene glycol (widely used laxative and excipient). The rest are substances that can be found in milk products, soft drinks, fruits, or that disgusting stuff you use to make vodka jelly .… and of course some mRNA. https://fda.gov/media/144414/download#page=2

We know these substances and their properties. We obliviously ingest them daily. PEG can be a problem, and anyone with history of allergy is informed pre-jab. This is also why you sit 15 minutes after vaccination, incidentally. They’re looking for anaphylaxis armed with EpiPens

So.. we are left with the immunisation. To understand where the risks lie, you need to understand what’s happening in your body. For the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, primary safety endpoints for serious adverse events conclude after 6 months. Why? https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04

The immune response elicited by COVID vaccines varies between products. In all cases, T cells are primed and move out of the lymph nodes looking for a fight. Antibody titers elevate. This begins around a week after, and continues for a number of months.

This is where risk of vaccine-related severe adverse events is highest (like Guillan-Barré, ITP, VITT, myocarditis). These are identified and documented, and we have observed this system in operation. With vaccines, this will happen in the first weeks/months after the jab.

Then the immune response settles, effector cells decrease in frequency, memory cells are established, humoral immunity plateaus before its slow decline. The risk of immunisation-related severe complications doesn’t further increase after this. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[Kato]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What do you mean it may effect your immune system down the line? Not meaning to be argumentative just looking to understand

It effects it as in you will retain some measure of immunity. Some vaccines will last for ever, some will need boosted. There are no effects from a vaccine which will kick in years later, or even months later.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Covid Fact Check UK

@fact_covid
34m

As of 11 January, in London, 3,227 total acute hospital beds were occupied by confirmed COVID-19 patients. However just 1,576 (49%) were being treated primarily for COVID. A month ago it was 80% - so the huge increase in infections has led to many more “incidental” admissions

England as a whole is 55%

[Keyser Sauzee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It effects it as in you will retain some measure of immunity. Some vaccines will last for ever, some will need boosted. There are no effects from a vaccine which will kick in years later, or even months later.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

Thanks

[SChibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Andrew crowxford is seen as one of the world's leading immunologists says his opinion is wrong, so do almost all other immunologists and vaccine experts. It's not just big pharma as you say, it's the leading experts in the field who have nothing to gain

Your last sentence may not be true. It's quite common for scientists to go support the current narrative in order to retain their funding. It happens in many fields such as Egyptology, go speak against the mainstream and your funding is withdrawn and you no longer have a job.

I'm not saying this is definitely what is happening regarding Covid vaccines but it's a distinct possibility. There are scientists and medical professionals that do speak up but they tend to be ridiculed unfairly in the media or censored so what they are trying to say doesn't even reach the majority of the population. Leaked emails have recently been released where Fauci and another government official are discussing how they are going to stamp down a paper against lockdowns, signed by hundreds of doctors, virologist and scientists.