Coronavirus Mega Thread (Deep Freeze Edition)

[lsa]

This has been going on all year, and all around the world. A few people have become sick from bird-contracted flu, but theres been no on going transmission. Its just one of the consequences of highly intensive chicken farming. At least there is close surveillance of it.

Yeah the way we seem to treat animals.
I think it was 27K chickens in Sweden that will be put down.
As I read it no people have become sick. But its still one hell of a year.

 

[lsa]

I don’t think the sarcasm came through too well.

Oh it did.
But I did what I did. And we both have to live with it

 

[MIKOM]

I love the smell of fear mongering in the morning!

Good for you, Biff.

 

[TheWobbler]

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...mitted-for-authorisation-within-days-12135473

The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has now proved 95% effective in preventing coronavirus and has met the safety criteria needed for emergency authorisation, the firms have said.

Pfizer and BioNTech say they plan to submit the COVID-19 vaccine to the US regulator for emergency use approval "within days" after "no serious safety concerns" were reported.


The UK regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), is also poised to fast-track authorisation of the vaccine after the government ordered enough for 20 million people.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock has said that, pending authorisation, the NHS will be ready to roll them out to the most vulnerable from 1 December.

Great news

 

[The_Renaissance]

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...mitted-for-authorisation-within-days-12135473

The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has now proved 95% effective in preventing coronavirus and has met the safety criteria needed for emergency authorisation, the firms have said.

Pfizer and BioNTech say they plan to submit the COVID-19 vaccine to the US regulator for emergency use approval "within days" after "no serious safety concerns" were reported.


The UK regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), is also poised to fast-track authorisation of the vaccine after the government ordered enough for 20 million people.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock has said that, pending authorisation, the NHS will be ready to roll them out to the most vulnerable from 1 December.

Great news

This would be great news approaching christmas.

 

[Medulla Omoplata]

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19...mitted-for-authorisation-within-days-12135473

The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has now proved 95% effective in preventing coronavirus and has met the safety criteria needed for emergency authorisation, the firms have said.

Pfizer and BioNTech say they plan to submit the COVID-19 vaccine to the US regulator for emergency use approval "within days" after "no serious safety concerns" were reported.


The UK regulator, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), is also poised to fast-track authorisation of the vaccine after the government ordered enough for 20 million people.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock has said that, pending authorisation, the NHS will be ready to roll them out to the most vulnerable from 1 December.

Great news

That is great news and I'm 100% science but I'm a little apprehensive about a fast-tracked vaccine

 

[Medulla Omoplata]

Yeah the way we seem to treat animals.
I think it was 27K chickens in Sweden that will be put down.
As I read it no people have become sick. But its still one hell of a year.

This is all because of you meat eaters, unclean.

 

[LEWIS540]

Dr Rick Bright who used to be on Trump’s COVID team till he quit in October but is now on Biden’s said that 66% of Americans are wearing masks. What the fuck are the other 44% people doing? Fucking pricks.

Where'd you get your maths degree from?

 

[Deleted member 506663]

Good for you, Biff.

I'd be disappointedly confused if you didn't add the name calling, ha!

 

[fingercuffs]

Where'd you get your maths degree from?

Clearly a typo.

 

[LEWIS540]

Clearly a typo.

Sure.

 

[minute bull]

Sure.

Lewisssssssssssssssssss.

 

[fingercuffs]

To play Devil's Advocate, where are they getting these stats from? Who are they surveying? Because to get an accurate picture they'd need to survey the majority of people in every single state, really. That's highly doubtful. Where are they getting this estimate from?

During the peak in the UK, certain websites would have these supposed 'surveys' pop up where they'd say things like "an overwhelming 77% of people in the UK want lockdown to continue".

Who? Who have you asked? Provide details of the demographics you've been interviewing to obtain such a result.

• How big of a portion of this sample size were over 60?
• How many were working from home / on furlough?
• How many worked in health care?
• How many were under 40?

Just tossing a number out there with no details or follow-up information does not make it a trustworthy source. The problem is, a lot of fence-sitting types might see that and think "hmmm, that's made up my mind for me then - I guess I also want lockdown to continue".

There's a lot of those types of people around - unsure, worried and not particularly clued up on either side of the coin. A vague 'survey' like that can go a long way to convincing that person to side with the government/lockdown.

Yeah I know. He's the guy who jumped ship from Trump's taskforce in October and is now on Biden's. He's a massive advocate for wearing masks. You only have to read here though, there are a LOT of people not bothering to wear them.

If it encourages more people to wear them and not be a tossbag infecting other people then I don't care where he gets his info from really. It's a flimsy bit of material that has turned people into babies.

 

[fingercuffs]

Sure.

I'm fucking TERRIBLE at maths, but I could even work that one out.

 

[aerius]

Clearly a typo.

 

[The_Renaissance]

Yeah I know. He's the guy who jumped ship from Trump's taskforce in October and is now on Biden's. He's a massive advocate for wearing masks. You only have to read here though, there are a LOT of people not bothering to wear them.

If it encourages more people to wear them and not be a tossbag infecting other people then I don't care where he gets his info from really. It's a flimsy bit of material that has turned people into babies.

Did he say where he had got that figure from, though? What study / survey etc. Or has he just blurted out a percentage that nobody has any way of checking in any way?

 

[fingercuffs]

Did he say where he had got that figure from, though? What study / survey etc. Or has he just blurted out a percentage that nobody has any way of checking in any way?

It was on his Twitter.
We can't dispute that they help though.

 

[Fluffernutter]

Yay, Corona virus

@Oeshon, American football is quite popular in Europe, Canada and new Zealand amongst other places. There are professional leagues in some countries even.

In the UK it was the fastest growing sport a couple years ago.

I have former students that now coach in Russia and Finland.

Plus, don't forget, Eric Mangini got his start coaching in Australia. That got his foot in the door to being a gofer with the Patriots.

 

[Renard]

Did he say where he had got that figure from, though? What study / survey etc. Or has he just blurted out a percentage that nobody has any way of checking in any way?

I remember what they're referring to. It was modelling from the IHME, made the rounds in mainstream media. Personally I don't really believe it because the assumption about masks (40% transmission reduction) they plugged into the model come from three studies conducted in 2020. Two of those were meta-analyses, but those meta-analyses didn't differentiate between N95s and cloth masks. Chucking in N95s, which genuinely are effective, raises the average. They also didn't distinguish between causation and correlation. For example hospitals are extremely clean places that use HEPA air filtration systems and strict protocols. Of course transmission is lower, and that's not automatically caused by the staff wearing masks. But when you chuck in such studies in the meta-analysis, you're not making that distinction. It's also strange to me that pre-2020 studies found cloth masks to be ineffective, but 2020 is the suddenly the year we "discover" they're tremendously effective? Doesn't make sense. A 40% reduction in transmission is also a huge number - life-changing. That's very unrealistic, we're not seeing that kind of powerful effect. Cloth masks seem to help a little, but not to this extent.

 

[aerius]

It was on his Twitter.
We can't dispute that they help though.

Actually, we can. The Danes just released the results of a randomized controlled trial into whether masks actually work.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

Excerpt:
Our results suggest that the recommendation to wear a surgical mask when outside the home among others did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in mask wearers in a setting where social distancing and other public health measures were in effect, mask recommendations were not among those measures, and community use of masks was uncommon. Yet, the findings were inconclusive and cannot definitively exclude a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection of mask wearers in such a setting. It is important to emphasize that this trial did not address the effects of masks as source control or as protection in settings where social distancing and other public health measures are not in effect.