# New UK variant of COVID



## sags (May 15, 2010)

A new strain of COVID has been discovered. It is spreading rapidly and is said to be 70% more contagious and becoming the dominant strain.

The UK has locked down because of it, and Scotland just joined them in a lockdown.

Canada should lock down all foreign travel immediately. We don't want to make the same mistakes again.









U.K. Says New Strain of Coronavirus Is More Transmissible Than Earlier Variant


The U.K. imposed a fresh lockdown across London and surrounding areas of England to combat a new strain of coronavirus that appears to be significantly more contagious than earlier variants of the pathogen. Scientists say the new variant might be as much as 70% more transmissible than more establis




www.wsj.com













New, faster-spreading strain of COVID-19 confirmed in Britain


British Prime Minister Boris Johnson discussed with his senior ministers on Saturday what urgent action to take after it was confirmed that a new strain of the COVID-19 virus could spread more quickly and lead to a surge in cases.




www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

sags said:


> A new strain of COVID has been discovered. It is spreading rapidly and is said to be 70% more contagious and becoming the dominant strain.


lol ... so you never looked up if that was true or not ...


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

If what is true ? Every major news source is covering the story now.

You think UK and Scotland are locking down based on a rumor ?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

This new strain is far more dangerous than the one we already have. It will spread much faster and overwhelm our hospitals in no time.

The Canadian government needs to be proactive now......before the virus lands here.

Shut down all foreign travel immediately.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

sags said:


> What is true ? Every major news source is covering the story now.
> 
> You think UK and Scotland are locking down based on a rumor ?


Yes, all media sources are spreading the "shocking headline" to get readers ... first time that's ever happened. 

They are locking down due to an increase in the number of cases, just like we're doing in Canada.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

sags said:


> This new strain is far more dangerous than the one we already have. It will spread much faster and overwhelm our hospitals in no time.


No it's not. 

Edit:
_Matt Hancock said the new variant of coronavirus "may be associated" with the faster spread in the south-east of England.
This is not the same as saying it "is causing" the rise and Mr Hancock did not say this virus has evolved to spread from person-to-person more readily._


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Wales announced they are shutting down immediately.

_Alert Level 4 restrictions will be brought forward to apply across Wales from midnight, First Minister Mark Drakeford said this afternoon.

In a statement, *Mr Drakeford said the latest evidence suggested that the new strain is present "throughout Wales" and said this required an "immediate response".

"The situation is incredibly serious. I cannot overstate this*," Mr Drakeford said.

"We have therefore reached the difficult decision to bring forward the Alert Level 4 restrictions for Wales, in line with the action being taken in London and the south-east of England.

*"These new restrictions will come into effect from midnight tonight instead of during the Christmas period."*_


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

CBC has some info:



https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/britain-uk-coronavirus-mutation-strain-spread-covid-19-1.5848800



The information from BBC (obviously very reputable) is more concerning, though.









Covid: Boris Johnson 'to tighten rules' in London and south-east England


London and the South East are to be put in a new tier four of restrictions, cabinet sources tell the BBC.



www.bbc.com













New Covid strain: How worried should we be?


Scientists will keep a close eye on this variant to see if it is a better spreader than others.



www.bbc.com





From what I read here, I'd say that scientists are not certain but this should not be dismissed. This really could turn out to be a problem.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

James...........they ain't locking down the UK, Wales and Scotland because of some rumor or unconfirmed reports. This is real and Canada better get on it.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The most recent information is this BBC article from 7 hours ago. Yes I agree this is a concern... not catastrophic, but it's bad news.

There is a new strain that spreads faster. However, it's not more deadly.

I do agree that Canada should lock down the national borders hard. We should use the Australian model, where all incoming people (including citizens) have to go to quarantine hotels, _at their own expense_, and monitored by guards. We've got to put a stop to snowbirds flying to the US and bringing this back to Canada.

Quotes from BBC:



> Chief medical officer Prof Chris Whitty said government advisers "consider the new strain can spread more quickly".





> Welsh ministers are meeting to discuss "serious concerns", while Northern Ireland First Minister Arlene Foster tweeted that the new variant of coronavirus prevalent in south-east England was "very concerning".





> "There is no current evidence to suggest the new strain causes a higher mortality rate or that it affects vaccines and treatments although urgent work is under way to confirm this," Prof Whitty added.


And perhaps the most important part that captures the main message



> *There is nothing to suggest this one causes more serious illness or would impact the ability of the vaccines to work. But preliminary investigation suggests it is leading to faster transmission, according to the UK's chief medical adviser.*


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

That is what they are saying publicly.

What would the experts have said to the UK PM Boris Johnson to prompt him to immediately close down a city of 9 million people, like London....a major international city and business centre ?

People were scrambling to get the last trains out of London to go home before the lock down started.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> That is what they are saying publicly.
> 
> What would the experts have said to the UK PM to prompt him to immediately close down a city of 9 million people, like London....a major international city and business centre ?


I think you might be jumping to conclusions and speculating. The holiday break itself is an extremely dangerous event and you don't know which factors went into that decision. Maybe just due to the holidays, they would have decided on stricter measures anyway and the strain might have just been one consideration.

Europeans love to travel around, they are spread this thing like wildfire. Within the UK, London is a train hub but there's also Christmas travel between other European countries. It's really going to amp up the disease spread, same in Canada.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

I see a lot of chatter about “closing the border”. i think we’ve all come to learn that means different things to different people. 

ex. Close the border to all non-citizens?
close the border to citizens?
allow citizens to enter and self quarantine?
allow citizens to enter and quarantine in govt facility?
close non-essential outgoing travel?
close border to truckers and medical personnel?
close all air travel?
close travel to Alaska through Canada?
close provincial or regional borders?

I believe the official fed govt stance is that the border is already closed.

it would be helpful if commenters would describe what they mean when they mention “the border is closed”. I think we could have a more fruitful discussion if we’re all on the same page, and possibly how such actions could be enforced.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

james4beach said:


> I think you might be jumping to conclusions and speculating. The holiday break itself is an extremely dangerous event and you don't know which factors went into that decision. Maybe just due to the holidays, they would have decided on stricter measures anyway and the strain might have just been one consideration.
> 
> Europeans love to travel around, they are spread this thing like wildfire. Within the UK, London is a train hub but there's also Christmas travel between other European countries. It's really going to amp up the disease spread, same in Canada.


I doubt PM Johnson would have caused this scenario with a sudden notice without a very compelling reason ?

If he did, he can kiss his political career goodbye.









Queues at train stations as Londoners flee the capital ahead of Tier 4


On Saturday afternoon, Prime Minister Boris Johnson revealed that a third of England - including London - will be thrust into Tier 4, leading to people scrambling to get out of the capital.




www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Money172375 said:


> I believe the official fed govt stance is that the border is already closed.
> 
> it would be helpful if commenters would describe what they mean when they mention “the border is closed”. I think we could have a more fruitful discussion if we’re all on the same page, and possibly how such actions could be enforced.


IMO the border isn't closed at all. Today, if you want to, you can fly to the US and then fly back in. You just have to promise to self isolate at your own home. Some people will comply, but others won't. Even if they comply, they can still spread the virus to family members they live with.

Canadian citizens can enter Canada, and can go straight to their own homes.

Foreign, non citizens who have family members in Canada can also fly into Canada. Even extended family can enter! How is that border closed?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I mean close the borders to all but essential workers, such as truck drivers bringing food and essential supplies, or aircraft bringing essential supplies.

Canadians must return before a certain date and enter mandatory guarded quarantine or remain outside the country for the duration of the pandemic.

No travel to Alaska by Americans to Alaska. They already made a joke of that exemption and the US isn't allowing Canadians to drive through the US.

A case by case exemption may be made by the government but enforced quarantine still applies.

Any holes in the border closures render the restrictions meaningless.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

sags said:


> James...........they ain't locking down the UK, Wales and Scotland because of some rumor or unconfirmed reports. This is real and Canada better get on it.


I can't believe that some here are trying discredit the news you posted. What are you guys thinking?????? Why not check out Sag's news for yourselves before being critical???

It seems pretty clear that the virus has mutated. If it turns out that the vaccines are not effective against it and that it is, as some experts in UK suspect, more contagious that the present virus, we are in even more trouble than we thought.

By the way, the reports said that this new version of the virus is not limited to the UK. It has been detected in several other countries too.

While UK is in lockdown, I am sure there are teams of scientists working feverishly to learn more about this new version of the virus. Hopefully we will know more soon.

This report is intended for health professionals. But read it anyway if you don't believe this could be serious: Covid-19: New coronavirus variant is identified in UK


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> I mean close the borders to all but essential workers, such as truck drivers bringing food and essential supplies, or aircraft bringing essential supplies.
> 
> Canadians must return before a certain date and enter mandatory guarded quarantine or remain outside the country for the duration of the pandemic.
> 
> ...


I've been calling for this since March.
Trudeau MUST close the border to all non-essential travel.
He must also enforce the quarantine for citizens returning from non-essential travel.

Americans driving to Alaska should be shut down.
However I think that the isolated US cities that are COVID free should be allowed access to Canada. 

As far as the "official position", Trudeau has been lying since March.

Certain people, such as Chris Sky, are the losers that caused voluntary quarantines to fail.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/chris-saccoccia-1.5752441



At this point, there is no reason for leniency on people re-entering the country, they've had more than enough notice.


----------



## Flugzeug (Aug 15, 2018)

The Canadian border is not closed, in my opinion. It’s just restricted in certain ways that make it more inconvenient to travel.

I’m an essential worker and travelled to the US for a little over a week for work, returned to Canada a couple of days ago. When returning to Canada you have to download an app called ArriveCAN, and fill out personal information as well as answer some COVID related questions. When arriving at Customs, the Customs Agent will give you a code to enter into the app and then you have to show them the results after entering the code. $750 fine if you do not do this.

It was not a full flight by any stretch, but people are still traveling for many different reasons. The guy behind me was on the phone before we departed and he was talking about his connection to Europe.

Just because you are supposed to self isolate after traveling doesn’t mean everyone will, unfortunately, and it’s not like they can track and monitor everyone.

Now, if China would have shutdown when this whole thing first started we would probably be seeing a much different world at the moment.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

I'm wondering what does a "new strain" means as viruses keeps mutating anyways: Nexstrain

It means it has had mutations big enough to be worth mentioning. It can also be a response of the virus against the vaccine tests because the virus develops defences (basic survivor evolution).


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

agent99 said:


> I can't believe that some here are trying discredit the news you posted. What are you guys thinking?????? Why not check out Sag's news for yourselves before being critical???
> 
> It seems pretty clear that the virus has mutated. If it turns out that the vaccines are not effective against it and that it is, as some experts in UK suspect, more contagious that the present virus, we are in even more trouble than we thought.
> 
> ...


Not sure what you can't believe ... yes, a mutation happened ... it happens all the time with covid.

Until they can determine that "in fact" this mutation causes, faster spreading, more serious illness or some other bad effect it's really not a big deal. 

Could it be bad ... Yes. 
Is there real data to support it's bad ... No. 
Should they take extra precautions ... Maybe.

Let's look at some data from the link you provided.

- Matt Hancock told the House of Commons on 14 December that initial analysis showed that the new variant “may be associated” with the recent rise in cases in southeast England. *However, this is not the same as saying that it is causing the rise *

- COG-UK says that there are currently around 4000 mutations in the spike protein alone. 

- With this variant there is no evidence that it will evade the vaccination or a human immune response. 

So let's just wait and see what comes out of this. Based on the "sky is falling" responses here I'm going to buy more TP tomorrow.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The new variant of virus has been given it's own name......VUI – 202012/01 

The Netherlands have stopped all incoming flights from the UK, after detecting a case involving the new variant of the virus.

Israel is contemplating mandatory testing for the new variant to all Israelis returning from the UK.

The experts know the virus is spreading at a much higher rate than the COVID strain.

_"Patrick Vallance, the British government’s chief scientific adviser, said on Saturday that three types of study—of the virus’s genetic makeup, statistics and in the laboratory—have come together to show that* this variant is significantly more prone to be transmitted among people than earlier strains*." _

The scientists are trying to determine how deadly it will be and if the current vaccines will prevent it.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Currently scheduled flights from London to Toronto include, for Sunday alone:

Air Canada, Heathrow to Pearson, Boeing 777-300 ... 450 capacity x 70% load estimate = 315 people
British Airways, Heathrow to Pearson, Boeing 787-8 ... 255 capacity x 70% load estimate = 178 people

Just direct flights alone are bringing roughly 500 people a day from London to Toronto. On top of that there are many more flights connecting through the US.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

What .....is the government thinking ?

If just one of those passengers has the new strain........it will spread like wildfire in the plane, the airport, cabs, ubers, and all over Toronto.

The UK is getting mass vaccinations starting next week from the Pfizer vaccine. We aren't expecting mass vaccinations until next April.

They are locked down and no flights.......and we are still wide open ?


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

I'm willing to bet it's already here and been spreading undetected for several days.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Apparently the gist of it is.......the new virus has a stickier end to the spike that latches on the cells and digs in with it's chemically coated tips to destroy the protective cell barrier.

They think it might have been created within a patient with chronic levels of infection and the virus mutated in order to get past it.

I mean think about it. This virus invades a guy and runs into an already fully operational immune system that is blocking it, so it thinks up a way around the problem, mutates to what it needs, and then continues on.

What......these things are like deadly little braniacs. How do they know all this strategy stuff, when they don't even have a brain ?

I think the Chinese need to come clean on what exactly it is that they created that escaped from that military lab in Wuhan.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

nathan79 said:


> I'm willing to bet it's already here and been spreading undetected for several days.


Geez........I hope not.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

nathan79 said:


> I'm willing to bet it's already here and been spreading undetected for several days.


Likely more than several days as they did state this ...

_Health officials believe the new variant first appeared in mid-September in London or Kent. _

So how many flights were there from the UK to Canada since mid-September?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> What......these things are like deadly little braniacs. How do they know all this strategy stuff, when they don't even have a brain ?


It's the magical process of evolution and natural selection. Just like with evolution in other animals, these are changes which happen accidentally -- not deliberately.

Mutations happen randomly in the RNA genetic code (the virus's RNA is like DNA). Mutations occur all the time, but which mutations stick around comes down to "survival of the fittest" (meaning survival of the virus).

If a random mutation results in a better/more successful virus, that mutation is adopted ... just by survival. On the other hand if the mutation gives the virus a disadvantage, then it dies, and that mutation doesn't stick around


----------



## Covariance (Oct 20, 2020)

Studies have suggested something similar occured back near the beginning when the 614G strain overtook the so called ancestral strain around the world. You can search for insights but the bottom line is it spread more easily (20%), and through compounding rapidly became the more prevalent strain observed.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

cainvest said:


> So let's just wait and see what comes out of this. Based on the "sky is falling" responses here I'm going to buy more TP tomorrow.


In post #2 you laughed at Sags and suggested he should have checked his facts before posting. 

But in replying that way, you did exactly that. Now it has been proved Sags was correct, you are trying to wiggle your way out of your unacceptable post.

Your actions are such that you should not be a moderator here let alone a super moderator. Please resign. A moderator needs to have respect.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

agent99 said:


> In post #2 you laughed at Sags and suggested he should have checked his facts before posting.
> 
> But in replying that way, you did exactly that. Now it has been proved Sags was correct, you are trying to wiggle your way out of your unacceptable post.


Yes, the "lol" as from anoher thread where I asked sags if he would read deeper into the articles, not just the scary headlines and news tags. 

I didn't prove sags correct, I posted above in #21 and #28 some information and there is more out there if one does choose to look. Often news headlines and even some their stories paint a very doom and gloom picture when the actual quotes from the science community are far less conclusive. 



agent99 said:


> Your actions are such that you should not be a moderator here let alone a super moderator. Please resign. A moderator needs to have respect.


So moderators can't share their opinions or data they find related to the topic? 

I gather posting the science related info behind the headlines somehow shows a lack of respect in you eyes?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

james4beach said:


> It's the magical process of evolution and natural selection. Just like with evolution in other animals, these are changes which happen accidentally -- not deliberately.


Exactly, the difference is a virus has a very fast evolution time scale when compared to high order mammals. 

These mutations have been going on since the start of the pandemic and will continue. Although an older article here is a deeper dive into the covid genome.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0238344


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Thanks for the support Agent99, I appreciate it.

I enjoy the debates and other opinions and respect Cainvest as a CMFer who posts quality information all the time, as do you and others.

If another poster does get snarky......meh, who cares. Maybe they are having a bad day or something. Live and let live is my motto.

PS. I feel a little snarky myself from time to time. This COVID is starting to get to me. At our age every lost visit from our son or grandson hurts.

We have a 6 month old grand daughter.........gorgeous girl that we have only seen a couple of times, and they live a half block away.

Maybe we all have a right to be a little crabby sometimes.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

sags said:


> I enjoy the debates and other opinions and respect Cainvest as a CMFer who posts quality information all the time, as do you and others.


I know you often report the current headlines and there is nothing wrong with that. Generally you seem to favor the negative side of things and all I'm trying to do is balance it out a little. I do wish you'd take a short moment to research the articles to show a more balanced output but maybe that's not your thing.  

Most people are constantly bombarded by news outlets with shocking and depressing headlines that can lead to panic or maybe just a shortage in TP ... bad news travels much faster than good news right?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

We can agree to disagree on the lack of research on posts, as I do research them before posting. 

I agree much of the news is negative these days, but that seems to be the way of the world. There isn't a whole lot of positive news to report these days.

Now maybe if I had bought 1000 bitcoins at 20 cents each.......I would be a more chipper fella


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

sags said:


> We can agree to disagree on the lack of research on posts, as I do research them before posting.


Maybe we're just seeing "research" as something different ... let's examine it bit.

Your post ..
_A new strain of COVID has been discovered. It is spreading rapidly and is said to be 70% more contagious and becoming the dominant strain. _

My opinion (when I read it ... which may be right or wrong)

_. A new strain of COVID has been discovered. *Yes*
. It is spreading rapidly ... *Yes *
. and is said to be 70% more contagious -* *Is it really or a misleading headline?*
. and becoming the dominant strain. *Yes*_

* This is the part that is misleading to me given the actual info below,

_- Matt Hancock told the House of Commons on 14 December that initial analysis showed that the new variant “may be associated” with the recent rise in cases in southeast England. However, this is not the same as saying that it is causing the rise _

See what I mean about the difference in research ... suggesting the new strain is 70% more contagious when in fact they have not determined that. 

There are other "expert" opinions on this as well but you have to vet them yourself, such as,

_Prof Alan McNally, an expert at the University of Birmingham, told the BBC: "Let's not be hysterical. It doesn't mean it's more transmissible or more infectious or dangerous. It is something to keep an eye on. Huge efforts are ongoing at characterising the variant and understanding its emergence. It is important to keep a calm and rational perspective on the strain as this is normal virus evolution and we expect new variants to come and go and emerge over time." _

and 

Prof Jonathan Ball, Professor of Molecular Virology at Nottingham University, said:
_"Even though a new genetic variant of the virus has emerged and is spreading in many parts of the UK and across the world, this can happen purely by chance.
"Therefore, it is important that we study any genetic changes as they occur, to work out if they are affecting how the virus behaves, and until we have done that important work it is premature to make any claims about the potential impacts of virus mutation."_

And the list goes on when one digs a little deeper.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Sags is right, and we should stop flights from the UK immediately for a period of X days while health officials evaluate the situation. We should have learned from the initial outbreak; the lesson is that governments have to act FAST to these events.

Several countries have now banned flights from the UK due to the mutated virus

Netherlands
Belgium
Italy
Ireland
Germany

Articles at: BBC, and Deutsche Welle



> "Tomorrow we plan to restrict all travel to GB (Great Britain) & South Africa with a government order in light of the reports over a mutation of the virus," Spahn tweeted.
> 
> Berlin was taking this step due to "the reported mutation of the coronavirus," according to government spokeswoman Martina Fietz.
> . . .
> ...


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The German response convinced me. I just sent the following letter to my Member of Parliament. I'm also going to leave a paper copy of the letter under their door this afternoon.
​Subject: Request for more travel restrictions​​Dear [MP or staff],​​I'm a resident of [constituency].​​Although Canada's handling of covid has been quite good overall, I​think we learned a lesson from the initial outbreak: the situation​changes very fast, and when faced with important new changes to the​global situation, governments need to act very fast. The proper policy​action is to act rapidly, and cautiously, with travel restrictions.​​I am requesting that the federal government take a very close look at​the new developing situation in Europe. Don't make the same mistake​again. The BBC is reporting that a growing list of countries have​halted all flights from the UK: Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Ireland,​Germany.​​I ask that the federal government strongly consider acting fast to​restrict travel, and halt flights, from the UK and Europe.​​


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Here is another related quote from WHO, 
_
Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO's technical lead on COVID-19, told reporters after receiving notification from England this week that the United Nations health agency had "no evidence this variant behaves differently" and that it was similar to a variant initially reported among mink in Europe. She said scientists would study the virus strain to see if there might be any difference in how it prompts an immune response in people. _

Do a google search on "covid mink strain" for info on a previous mutation that jumped from human to mink in November.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

All these countries are shutting down access to the UK and locking down regions suddenly and without a lot of notice or debate.

UK PM Boris Johnson suddenly reversed decisions rendered only days earlier regarding the Christmas period restrictions.

Something hit his radar and it meant closing down everything now......not in a few days or later......now.

This indicates to me that they know the variant has mutated to become much more dangerous due to the increase rate of spread.

They even know what is causing it.......a change in the "tips" of the "spikes" that make it stick better to the cells of the body, making it more difficult for the immune system to repel it.

They don't know yet if the virus is more deadly or if it impacts the vaccine options.....one way or the other.

These countries all have their own experts and are acting in a panic mode. That is all I need to know that this variant is very dangerous.

These countries aren't waiting around for the WHO or UN to "investigate" this time. They learned from the past history of their competence.

Maybe all these leaders are implementing these measures for no reason, but I doubt it.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The reason they're doing it sags is that, according to the PM, the new strain is 70% more infectious. It's not more deadly, but it spreads more easily from human to human.

I would like to see our government act quickly and restrict travel, and not make the same mistake they did at the start of the pandemic (waiting around for the WHO to give guidance).


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Good on you for sending the letter James. I hope the MP asks some questions about the Canadian government's response.

We have to do everything possible to keep this new strain out of Canada. We need to buy time to get to mass vaccinations.

An increase of 70% in an already highly contagious virus would be catastrophic to our health care systems and economy.

We would have to implement total lock downs and the government would spend another trillion dollars supporting Canadians.

We have already stocked up in the event of a total lock down. I would suggest others do the same. Better safe than sorry.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The UK government was advised of the new variant on Friday and locked down everything on Saturday. Now we know why.......

_New variant much more infectious_
_Susan Hopkins, from Public Health England, said they alerted the government on Friday that the new variant - first identified in the middle of October from a sample taken in September - was spreading faster than other viruses circulating.

Dr Hopkins told the BBC's Andrew Marr programme that there was evidence that people with the new strain had "higher viral loads" - which meant they were more infectious.

She also said findings had shown the new variant was up to 70% more transmissible based on modelling the rate of increase in the new strain compared to others in circulation._


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

What a difference a day makes......UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock is now saying the new variant is "out of control".









Canada the latest country to halt travel from UK over new Covid-19 variant concerns


The new strain of Covid-19, which prompted the UK government to impose a renewed Tier 4 lockdown in London and southeastern England over the festive period, is "out of control," Health Secretary Matt Hancock said on Sunday.




www.cnn.com


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

cainvest said:


> I gather posting the science related info behind the headlines somehow shows a lack of respect in you eyes?


Science?? Until I posted the link to the bmj site in post #17, you posted nothing other than criticisms. Anyone can go back and look at your posts #1, 2, 5, 6. Any science in those??? 

Yes, you have lost my respect. Those posts show why I feel you are not suitable to stay as a moderator. Too bad a moderator can't be put on ignore.

*Role of moderator*


> A discussion *moderator* or debate *moderator* is a person whose *role* is to act as a neutral participant in a debate or discussion, holds participants to time limits and tries to keep them from straying off the topic of the questions being raised in the debate.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> The UK government was advised of the new variant on Friday and locked down everything on Saturday. Now we know why.......
> 
> _New variant much more infectious_
> _Susan Hopkins, from Public Health England, said they alerted the government on Friday that the new variant - first identified in the middle of October from a sample taken in September - was spreading faster than other viruses circulating.
> ...


This is exactly the reason why the whole idea of seeking herd immunity or being blase about letting the virus spread through less-risked populations. More infections means more viral particles in existence in the world means more opportunities for mutation. Most mutations are dead ends, but some more the virus more successful and potentially more dangerous. A disaster would be a mutation that makes the virus resistant to the vaccines that have been developed (though this is unlikely). There is no reason to be cavalier about coronavirus. SARS and MERS had staggering fatality rates, but thankfully did not have asymptomatic transmission.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

james4beach said:


> The reason they're doing it sags is that, according to the PM, the new strain is 70% more infectious. It's not more deadly, but it spreads more easily from human to human.
> 
> I would like to see our government act quickly and restrict travel, and not make the same mistake they did at the start of the pandemic (waiting around for the WHO to give guidance).


70% more infectious is a big deal. It means that more people need to be vaccinated or stricter distancing measures are required to keep the number of active infections stable or declining.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Yes, I read that the government of Finland and the King of Sweden (often pointed to as successful herd immunity countries) have apologized publicly to their citizens for their failed herd immunity policies.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

agent99 said:


> Science?? Until I posted the link to the bmj site in post #17, you posted nothing other than criticisms. Anyone can go back and look at your posts #1, 2, 5, 6. Any science in those???
> 
> Yes, you have lost my respect. Those posts show why I feel you are not suitable to stay as a moderator. Too bad a moderator can't be put on ignore.


Not that you likely will but if you go back to where this started so vaccines....? you'll see I asked if he could find anything "fake or misleading".

Also post #6 is where I started to show the science related info, thought just maybe sags would dig a little deeper.

Sorry you feel so strongly against my posts, just my opinion, like everyone elses.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

sags said:


> Yes, I read that the government of Finland and the King of Sweden (often pointed to as successful herd immunity countries) have apologized publicly to their citizens for their failed herd immunity policies.


Why on earth would the king of Sweden apologize? He doesn't set policy.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

sags said:


> Thanks for the support Agent99, I appreciate it.


Thanks. I am sorry but I get upset when I see seriously valid news being dismissed out of turn.



sags said:


> We have a 6 month old grand daughter.........gorgeous girl that we have only seen a couple of times, and they live a half block away.
> Maybe we all have a right to be a little crabby sometimes.


True. We have only seen our grandkids once twice this year and that when we could all be outdoors. They live in different cities.

News in last few minutes in Ontario, is that we will be going into a 28 day full lockdown ala March 2020, starting Christmas eve (14 days north of Sudbury). (more details tomorrow)


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Canada is suspending all flights from the UK for 72 hours.....effective Monday at midnight.









Canada to suspend all flights from U.K. for 72 hours as new coronavirus variant spreads - National | Globalnews.ca


The move comes after members of the federal government met to discuss the new variant of the novel coronavirus that has been spreading quickly across the United Kingdom.




globalnews.ca


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> Canada is suspending all flights from the UK for 72 hours.....effective Monday at midnight.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Great news. Saves me a trip to the local MP office.

From CBC article: "The decision to restrict U.K. flights followed an afternoon meeting of the Incident Response Group (IRG), a group of cabinet members and senior government officials."


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-flights-uk-coronavirus-1.5849598



I didn't realize that other politicians were pushing the government to act fast on this. This is very nice to see... I like seeing our politicians working hard to protect us, even over the weekend.

The Bloc and NDP leaders both called for the government to follow Europe's lead and stop flights, to be on the safe side. Then the Incident Response Group (Garneau, Blair, Trudeau, Hajdu, ...) met Sunday and made the decision. Nice.


----------



## MrBlackhill (Jun 10, 2020)

agent99 said:


> Science?? Until I posted the link to the bmj site in post #17, you posted nothing other than criticisms. Anyone can go back and look at your posts #1, 2, 5, 6. Any science in those???
> 
> Yes, you have lost my respect. Those posts show why I feel you are not suitable to stay as a moderator. Too bad a moderator can't be put on ignore.


I must admit it felt wrong to me too.



cainvest said:


> lol ... so you never looked up if that was true or not ...


The reply starts with a laugh, ridiculing the initial post, which feels not respectful. A moderator should use a neutral tone when asking for more information.



cainvest said:


> Yes, all media sources are spreading the "shocking headline" to get readers ... first time that's ever happened.


The tone feels mockering.



cainvest said:


> No it's not.


This is a false statement. At that time, maybe there's not enough studies and information to state for a fact that it's more dangerous or spreading faster, but the opposite is also true, as there's not enough studies and information to state for a for a fact that it's *not* more dangerous or *not* spreading faster, so you can't state "no, it's not" either.



cainvest said:


> Sorry you feel so strongly against my posts, just my opinion, like everyone elses


As every human and member of the CMF, you sure can have your own opinion, but as a moderator you cannot reply with disrespectful, mockering and non-neutral tone in this context, as you cannot reply with strong negation when the opposite is not proven either.

Those replies don't bring any informative or moderating value.

Your role entitles you to be much more cautious in the way you participate to debates and arguments. When there's place for a different interpretation than what it may have been intended, it means it's not a neutral tone.

I've seen your past interventions and had nothing to say about them, but those replies on this thread feel wrong.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Well, I look at it all this way. At one point in time, long, long ago, during our evolution, a man stood up on two legs in the Serengeti. For my analogy, lets assume he was a he, and he was black. To be honest, I have no idea. These black people reproduced and we know they started wandering. At some point in time, due to an evolutionary quirk this black man turned into an Asian man. Eventually a caucasian (white) man came about, etc. etc.

Now lets go back to the first generation of this event. Obviously if black people had a few thousand years of head start, to get white people to the numbers they eventually achieved, one would look around at that time and with no new information they would conclude that white people must hook up more frequently then black people. They must be more transmissive. Or, they must have some level of survivability higher then black people. We know none of that is the case. For some reason, the number of white people seemed to have caught up with black people, as did asian people.

I believe they are using the fact that more and more infected people in the UK, seem to have this new virus as opposed to the older version. I am not sure that proves a "higher infectiveness". It just proves that this virus seems to be taking over where the old virus has left off. That a new generation of virus has come about. Other then that we know very little.

At the end of the day, the advice to deal with this virus is quite simple:

Stay 6 feet away from everyone and don't gather indoors. Wear a mask when that distance cannot be maintained. Keep those events as short as possible. Get vaccinated.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

MrBlackhill said:


> As every human and member of the CMF, you sure can have your own opinion, but as a moderator you cannot reply with disrespectful, mockering and non-neutral tone in this context, as you cannot reply with strong negation when the opposite is not proven either.


I'll just have to say sorry to sags and others if my posts were taken with such a serious tone. It was not my intention, more of just a playful ribbing but I seems it didn't come across that way.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

OptsyEagle said:


> Stay 6 feet away from everyone and don't gather indoors. Wear a mask when that distance cannot be maintained. Keep those events as short as possible. *Get vaccinated*.


We can't choose to get vaccinated just yet. Even us 80+ yr olds! But when we can, will the current vaccines be effective against the new strains? That will take some time to determine if proper clinical trials have to be conducted. And by then, the virus may have further mutated.

This is what seems to happen with flu viruses. By the time we get our flu shot, the vaccine may not be totally effective. Our current flu shots are apparently designed to protect against 3 or 4 different strains. Perhaps in time Covid vaccines will have to be similarly designed to protect against a wider range of strains?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

agent99 said:


> We can't choose to get vaccinated just yet. Even us 80+ yr olds! But when we can, will the current vaccines be effective against the new strains? That will take some time to determine if proper clinical trials have to be conducted. And by then, the virus may have further mutated.
> 
> This is what seems to happen with flu viruses. By the time we get our flu shot, the vaccine may not be totally effective. Our current flu shots are apparently designed to protect against 3 or 4 different strains. Perhaps in time Covid vaccines will have to be similarly designed to protect against a wider range of strains?


Sure. If that is the case we will fight each new virus strain as it comes along.

I do know that, although black people, white people and asian people have many differences, a bullet tends to kill them all. I imagine vaccines tend to work closer to that then the opposite, even though we have a few more examples of the opposite with viruses.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The new variant (its genetic sequence) has already been found throughout several European countries, and even in Australia.

So far, it has not been detected in Canada. However we can't really test these things in real time, and flights from the UK were bringing thousands of people to Canada in recent days, as recently as yesterday. My guess is that if it's in Australia, it's in Canada too.

Unfortunately this could mean we will see an acceleration in the spread of the infection in the coming few months.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

If it's in Europe, it will be here before you know it. We should try to slow it down so that it doesn't exacerbate the current wave.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

A presentation by Prof David Robertson, from the University of Glasgow on Friday, concluded: "The virus will probably be able to generate vaccine escape mutants."


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> If it's in Europe, it will be here before you know it. We should try to slow it down so that it doesn't exacerbate the current wave.


Well it's good the government acted fast to stop the UK flights. I still wish we would have far more serious quarantine rules for entry to Canada (isolation in designated hotels).

There's no question we'll have the strain soon, but tighter border measures would buy us a lot of time.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

I wonder who do we read into ... the Feds or Ford with this piece of news?

Feds say border controls are sufficient despite criticism from Ford

And why are apples and bananas being compared here? Exempted cross border travellers (eg. truckers) versus inflight travellers? 



> ... _*Federal Health Minister Patty Hajdu said that even if everyone was tested at the border, some cases could still get through.*
> 
> “If you don't test people at the right time in their illness, in fact, the test can be negative,” she said. *“That's why we've maintained the 14-day quarantine with such a degree of rigour.”*
> 
> ...


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I think Hajdu's comment is inaccurate, and only refers to the land border.

Or am I misunderstanding the border situation? She is saying the "border remains closed to discretionary or optional travel".

But I am pretty sure a Canadian can fly to Florida for a vacation, and then fly back to Toronto. There is no requirement that _outgoing_ travel is necessary. And citizens can always re-enter, required to self isolate at home (but an "on your honour" system).

This kind of discretionary travel is very easy to do. So how is the border closed?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I think the time for kindly asking people to isolate for 14 days has passed. There are plenty of empty hotels near airports for 14 day quarantine.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

It is reported the new strain may be more easily transmitted to children, due to the scientific makeup of the mutated strain.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

sags said:


> It is reported the new strain may be more easily transmitted to children, due to the scientific makeup of the mutated strain.


Don't worry. As long as they don't run around, jump on people, yell, scream, laugh or cry, we should all be OK. lol


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Now it is reported there is another mutation originating from South Africa that is spreading rapidly there.

It affects young people more than the previous COVID viral strains. The SAVIRUS is now detected in the UK.

I read a report from scientists who said this virus is mutating at a much faster rate than they normally expect.

We will see if this story goes anywhere......like the last one from the UK.

_Matt Hancock said: 'This new variant is highly concerning, because it is yet more transmissible, and it appears to have mutated further than the new variant has been discovered in the UK.' 

Britain, Germany, Switzerland, Turkey, Israel and Mauritius have banned flights from South Africa in an effort to stop the spread of the mutant which is thought to be giving young people more acute symptoms than other variants. _

Why are we only hearing of these new strains from UK and European news sources ?

The WHO says they are "looking into it", just as they said about the UK mutation. They are a totally useless organization.

We need to close our borders to ALL International travel to all air, land and sea borders ASAP.









Why is South Africa's new variant so scary? UK bans travel to SA


The mutant, called 501.V2, was announced in Cape Town last Friday and is believed to behave similarly to Britain's new Covid strain which is already rife throughout the southeast of England.




www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

sags said:


> We will see if this story goes anywhere......like the last one from the UK.


LOL - You may accused of not checking your sources 

Actually these new strains do seem scary. Even the experts are now admitting that current vaccines may only be partially effective or perhaps completely ineffective against ever changing Covid strains. Much like the flu vaccines. More positive comment I heard, was that the mRNA vaccines can be more easily tailored to combat the changing viruses.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

uK flights are stopped til Jan 6


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> I think the time for kindly asking people to isolate for 14 days has passed. There are plenty of empty hotels near airports for 14 day quarantine.


Absolutely agree. The hotels are available. There should be organized isolation at facilities ... same as what Australia does.

This is one issue where I agree with Doug Ford. It's true that the stats are showing few cases attributable to international travel but I doubt those statistics are accurate, since people are violating their quarantines. If Joe violates his quarantine and then spreads his *asymptomatic* covid at a Toronto No Frills, this will obviously get binned as "community spread".

The contact tracing people can only tell that it spread at No Frills (if even that!). And by some miracle if they actually trace Joe as an asymptomatic case, and ask where he's been, he will say he's been at home and didn't go anywhere.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

Governments officials will have to be if needed dishonest to prevent people from panicking. For instance this is a very diplomatic statement. 
We have no evidence at the moment that the vaccine will not work, so actually what that means in fact is that there's strong evidence that it will work, because the vaccine produces a strong immune response and it's broad and acts against lots of variation in the virus," Susan Hopkins from Public Health England said.








Mutated coronavirus variant from South Africa found in U.K., health minister says


A new, potentially more infectious variant of the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 has been found in Britain in cases linked to South Africa, British Health Secretary Matt Hancock said on Wednesday.




www.ctvnews.ca


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I agree that it is possible to reach a situation where the government withholds information to reduce panic, but one would hope they would at least lock everyone in their homes and provide food delivery and essential services if that kind of scenario should ever happen.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

When someone tells me that a virus affects young people more then regular Covid-19, I tend to want to see the body bags for proof of that. Body bags are the more conclusive observation of this. Are more people dying or less and are they also saying that young people are dying yet older people are not? If it still effects older people more then younger people, then to have a more severe effect on younger people with covid-19, would mean a higher death rate for older people. 

Lastly, when one sees more of a particular strain of virus then another growing in a population, intuitively it seems like that must mean it has a higher rate of transmissivity, which is where I believe these claims originate. Unfortuneately, transmissivity cannot be properly measured by looking at what strain a person has when they are infected and comparing it to the strains in the overall population and making an overall count over time. It's needs specific testing to prove that.

Lastly, viruses are mutating all the time. They are mutating while you are infected. The last virus your immune system neutralizes probably will not be the exact same virus it neutralized first, a week earlier. Of course that does not mean the last virus is not more lethal then the first, but it does illustrate how easy it is to let these normal observations sound very scary. I believe the 2nd wave of the Spanish flu mutated into a more violent virus then the first, but within a couple years that pandemic was still eliminated...and they had no vaccine.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> When someone tells me that a virus affects young people more then regular Covid-19, *I tend to want to see the body bags for proof of that. *Body bags are the more conclusive observation of this.


 ... are you serious about this? I don't know where or need to get the stats of deaths of "younger" people (which age bands are you referring to btw?) but a quick read from the news (my daily source) state about half of the deaths (if not a greater percentage) are NOT from nursing/retirement homes (old people) so I presumed there are "younger" people deaths in there (news stats).



> Are more people dying or less and are they also saying that young people are dying yet older people are not?


 ... just a matter of time that more people are going to die. Otherwise, why bother with a vaccine or even an ICU unit for covid patients? Your 2nd question is irrelevant (or makes no sense).


> If it still effects older people more then younger people, then to have a more severe effect on younger people with covid-19, would mean a higher death rate for older people.


 ... what are you getting at here?



> Lastly, when one sees more of a particular strain of virus then another growing in a population, intuitively it seems like that must mean it has a higher rate of transmissivity, which is where I believe these claims originate.


 .. it has already been determined in the labs ... in the UK.



> Unfortuneately, transmissivity cannot be properly measured by looking at what strain a person has when they are infected and comparing it to the strains in the overall population and making an overall count over time. It's needs specific testing to prove that.


 ... your first statement I don't disagree with but your 2nd is ???? How much "testing (swabs/saliva) do you need to determine how much "transmissivity" when it has already been determined to be 70% more as published results in the UK? Unless you don't trust what the UK is telling the rest of the world. It'll be a matter of time that the 2nd highly transmissible variant of covid will show up in North America if we don't do anything to slow (let alone stop) down the transmission. Eg. tighten if not close the air/land borders. It's only logical when travel is very globally in this time and age or we (the world) is having a "pandemic".



> Lastly, viruses are mutating all the time. They are mutating while you are infected. The last virus your immune system neutralizes probably will not be the exact same virus it neutralized first, a week earlier. Of course that does not mean the last virus is not more lethal then the first, but it does illustrate how easy it is to let these normal observations sound very scary. * I believe the 2nd wave of the Spanish flu mutated into a more violent virus then the first, but within a couple years that pandemic was still eliminated...and they had no vaccine.*


 ... it's obvious you're spewing what you are reading from your first few sentences but your logic defies my mind in the last couple (bolded) which contradicts.

Question: were you there (or know someone) who survived the Spanish flu or how about telling the dead people from that era that the 2nd virus wasn't as deadly as the first? It sounds like you're a time-traveller ... which is really interesting.

*Note:* Just pray that the vaccines DO work to protect us on the 2nd variant before the 3rd comes out o/w we need a model for lock-downs livings / a new world.

*Added:* Just as I finished this post, here's emergent of a 3rd variant:
Separate new strain of coronavirus detected in Nigeria: African CDC


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Lab results in one lab in the UK are back tested in labs all over the world, from government labs to university labs to large biopharma company labs.

They have all conclusively verified the new mutant strains of the virus spread more rapidly.

Hospitalizations and deaths from young people are rising. Kids are getting very sick and dying. COVID is no longer considered an "old folks" disease.

I heard one expert explain that masks don't offer protection inside enclosed spaces with other people.

The only protection we have right now is avoidance. Avoid contact with other people who "could" be infected.

We don't know yet if the current vaccines will prevent the new strains from infecting us. The virus is mutating at a much faster rate than normal.

We have a long ways to go before the danger will pass. I fear that people are sticking with the "it won't happen to me" mode.

Many old people have taken steps to protect themselves but the viral spread is increasing in the population. That means younger people are getting sick.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... are you serious about this? I don't know where or need to get the stats of deaths of "younger" people (which age bands are you referring to btw?) but a quick read from the news (my daily source) state about half of the deaths (if not a greater percentage) are NOT from nursing/retirement homes (old people) so I presumed there are "younger" people deaths in there (news stats).
> 
> ... just a matter of time that more people are going to die. Otherwise, why bother with a vaccine or even an ICU unit for covid patients? Your 2nd question is irrelevant (or makes no sense). ... what are you getting at here?
> 
> ...


Beav. If you didn't understand my points when first given I doubt you will understand them if said another way. I usually lead with my best explanations.

Luckily I imagine, most got my point. If they didn't, I can't help them much either.

It's all a mute point anyway, because if we know one thing about the future, it is that anything can happen no matter how improbable it may be. So with this new strain, we will need to watch it more. I was just trying to help people calm down by explaining that it is unlikely they have the proper data to make the claims they are making (more transmittable).


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Does anyone else other then me think that it is interesting that all these new mutations are all coming to light in the same week or two?

As I said before, mutations are normal and very frequent and would have been with us since the time the pandemic began. Seeing them should not be alarming upon the discovery itself. I wonder if perhaps it is more deeper then that.

Think about this:
If your pandemic was getting out of control and you wanted to stop travel to slow infections down a little. Which do you think would be more effective? Stopping travel and listening to all the dissenting opinions on it, both foreign and from within...or...creating some reason why no one would ever want to come to your country and no other country would ever want your citizens to travel to.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^^ Sorry as good as your intentions are, I don't think you're helping calming people down (aka allaying fear) with your "explanation(s)" (long one at that too) at all. Particularly, everyone got your point(s) already as you stated.

Just by your last sentence in the above post, 1. how do you expect these "people" (non experts, fear mongering in your eyes) to have the data (let alone, proper data) to make their claims, and 2. even they have the data as such (which the experts have already, stating the variant is more transmissible or estimated by 70%), what do you expect them to do other than knowing it or to "watch it more" (agree)? Isn't this part of being scared or now "hyper-scared"? Because if we aren't, we would be lying to ourselves ... including the experts (with a few exceptions of course).


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> Does anyone else other then me think that it is interesting that all these new mutations are all coming to light in the same week or two?
> 
> As I said before, mutations are normal and very frequent and would have been with us since the time the pandemic began. Seeing them should not be alarming upon the discovery itself. I wonder if perhaps it is more deeper then that.


 ... it was written that the UK knew about the variant back in September but then I guess they didn't want to cause "alarm" and likely didn't have enough data to determine its behaviour (transmissivity, etc.) so they didn't/couldn't say anything. Now it's the time to do so as the infections are going through the roof for that country ... with very high potential to spread to other countries ... time for the war sirens so to speak.... only louder.



> Think about this:
> If your pandemic was getting out of control and you wanted to stop travel to slow infections down a little. Which do you think would be more effective? Stopping travel and listening to all the dissenting opinions on it, both foreign and from within...or...creating some reason why no one would ever want to come to your country and no other country would ever want your citizens to travel to.


 .. your first option for now as your 2nd option is next to impossible to occur at this time and age with easy global travel. Even people visit Cherynobl these days (and years prior too) despite it has been determined that place is uninhabitable for the next '00/0 years(?).


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)




----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Well, I for one cannot do much about just being another opinion on the internet, hence why I attempt to back up my opinion with the reasons behind them. Since most are based on probabilities of events as opposed to 100% certainty, it is less likely that I will be able to post a study from anyone else to confirm my suggestions. That in itself, however, does not make them more wrong or right.

That said, I am certainly not one for conspiracy theories, but think about this for a few seconds and it will at least make you wonder. We know behaviors to the pandemic changed considerably between the 1st wave and the 2nd wave. I doubt I need to explain the main reason for that. It is not just people losing patience. That is there, but the main reason is that when people are scared they are more cautious then when they become less scared.

Now think about our current situation. Infections are rising everywhere. The larger increases are coming from young people. We are about to enter Christmas where we know the travelling people will drive infections higher and lastly, a leader in charge needs to do something about it. We know the lockdowns won't help much. They know it as well.

In one fell swoop, you announce the existence of a new strain of virus. You tell people there are indications of it being more transmittable and then you add that it may be more severe to younger people. Indications. May be. A new strain, that actually is always there. It's call virology. That is what viruses do.

Nothing in that statement is a lie. Nothing. But look at what it can do. It can reduce travel. It can scare everyone and more importantly it can scare the ones you feel you need to scare the most, the younger generation. 
How perfect is that?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> Does anyone else other then me think that it is interesting that all these new mutations are all coming to light in the same week or two?


I look at it a different way.

Yes, mutations were always happening. But in the summer, numbers were much lower. The situation was looking manageable overall. Today it is NOT. The European numbers are just horrendous and everyone knows that COVID death counts are going to absolutely skyrocket in the weeks following Christmas.

Something that was tolerable (a risk factor = new strains) in the summer is not tolerable today.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

james4beach said:


> The European numbers are just horrendous and everyone knows that COVID death counts are going to absolutely skyrocket in the weeks following Christmas.


I think the gray zone lockdown in Ontario for the next month is a smart move. It may help lower new potential infections from those people that become infected by irresponsible visiting at Christmas. 

If all the stores weren't shut down (as they will now be for the next month) I can just imagine the exponential explosion that would have occurred from all these new super spreaders who enjoyed their large Christmas gatherings (thinking that they were exempt from the virus).

ltr


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

Just talked to a cousin in Italy. They are restricted to 30km of their home. I’d love to see that type of enforcement here for the hot zones. There are police and military are enforcing it.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

The UK variant has been found in Ontario, detected in 2 people.

This means the more virulent strain is now in Ontario, and of course, as everyone flies around for the holidays they will spread it to other provinces.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Ontario’s first two cases of new COVID-19 variant reported in Durham Region

It would not surprised me that there're now cases in other provinces especially this blip in the news link is very questionable. Did the couple generate their own exposure, including that from no-travel? Duh.



> ... _In a news release issued Saturday, the Ministry of Health said the cases are a couple from Durham Region with no known travel history, *exposure,* or high-risk contacts. Both individuals are now in self-isolation.... _


Maybe the word "infectious" needs to be re-defined in a non-medical context.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

All the more reason to keep ourselves safe as possible. This is no time to let down our guard as we approach the finish line.

It is like that Youtube video where the cycle racer is in the home stretch with a lead and starts waving to the crowd, and the second place rider guy passes him and wins the race by a couple of inches.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

In less than 5 hours today, here's a 3rd case of the new variant reported:
Third case of new COVID-19 variant confirmed in Ottawa



> ...
> _On Saturday, the first two cases of the new strain of COVID-19 were identified as a couple from Durham Region. Officials initially said that the two had no known travel history, exposure or high-risk contacts._
> 
> *However, the ministry confirmed on Sunday that the couple had been in contact with someone who travelled from the U.K. – a piece of information that the ministry noted was not provided to officials in the earlier interviews.*
> ...


 ... I think the health officials there (or the head of that section of the Ministry) needs to get a refresher on either their expertise with contact tracing or that of common sense even today is Sunday, the day after Boxing Day, the Xmas holidays.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

So the couple lied to the health authorities. I doubt they can be trusted to self quarantine. They should be wearing gps ankle bracelets.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

sags said:


> So the couple lied to the health authorities. I doubt they can be trusted to self quarantine. They should be wearing gps ankle bracelets.


This is becoming a familiar theme. Those with covid are interviewed and iniItaly they claim to have no contacts, they’ve stayed indoors etc etc. Then the contact tracers ask them to review bank statements or text messages......and then they “remember” that they had a coffee with someone, went to dinner with someone, ordered takeout for 10 people etc etc. The number of contacts people have is making contact tracing almost useless.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

BC's first recorded case:









COVID-19: B.C. records first case of variant strain detected in U.K.


According to a statement issued Sunday by B.C. health officials, the individual returned from the United Kingdom on AC 855 on Dec. 15, 2020 and developed symptoms while in quarantine.




theprovince.com


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

So if the person in BC is in quarantine and is now infected, it means they were infected on the plane and everyone on that flight and around them in the airport and transportation home etc were exposed to the virus. 

Great news for all those people and families I bet.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> So if the person in BC is in quarantine and is now infected, it means they were infected on the plane and everyone on that flight and around them in the airport and transportation home etc were exposed to the virus.
> 
> Great news for all those people and families I bet.


Hopefully they were all wearing masks, which reduces the chance of transmission.

Would have been much better if they didn't fly.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Quebec health minister confirms first case of more contagious COVID-19 variant

First case in PQ as if that province really needs it. Interesting to see this stats reported too:



> ... _Meanwhile, Montreal police said today they received nearly 700 calls from citizens who reported people allegedly breaking health orders during the week of Dec. 21 to Dec. 27, and said they issued 34 tickets_.


According to the above link, currently BC, Alberta (?), ON and Quebec have the variant (aka "S" variant).


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

Beaver101 said:


> Quebec health minister confirms first case of more contagious COVID-19 variant
> 
> First case in PQ as if that province really needs it. Interesting to see this stats reported too:
> 
> ...


 If I understand correctly during the clinical trials vaccinated people and people that received placebo were not exposed to the new variant, therefore no one knows for sure if vaccine will work. We can theorize that it should work, but it is all just a speculation, glass is half full rather than half empty. That’s why vaccines against common cold corona viruses don’t work, because of new mutations, for same reason there are no effective vaccine for avian corona virus- it has numerous variants. 
P.S. Why would people rat their neighbours out? Too many snitches in QB.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Ukrainiandude said:


> If I understand correctly during the clinical trials vaccinated people and people that received placebo were not exposed to the new variant, therefore no one knows for sure if vaccine will work. We can theorize that it should work, but it is all just a speculation, glass is half full rather than half empty. That’s why vaccines against common cold corona viruses don’t work, because of new mutations, for same reason there are no effective vaccine for avian corona virus- it has numerous variants.
> P.S. Why would people rat their neighbours out? Too many snitches in QB.


I believe the UK has been doing some kind of test where they take the culture of this variant and do this and that and a bubba bing bop and somehow they can tell that the vaccine will neutralize it as well as the earlier mutations. The US is currently investigating that as well, but supposedly it can be tested and so far the results are good.

This mutation is all hype. Peoples fear of the boogie man around the corner is all it is. I am going to need a little more info then the fact that it exists (of course it does. so does 100,000 others by now) and someone thinks the look of their spikes will make it more transmittable because they might be able to lock onto ACE2 receptors better. Well, doesn't that also mean it will be more difficult to eject it out of your nose and mouth to infect others as well, if the little buggers are hanging on so well? Anyway, how transmittable a virus is has to be tested. It is not something that can be seen with a microscope. 

Luckily I think the public would be happy to move on from this one if we can get the press to stop bringing it up. At least until they get some real useful information, other then the fact that it exists and people who travel can move it around. Thanks for that.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Ukrainiandude said:


> If I understand correctly during the clinical trials vaccinated people and people that received placebo were not exposed to the new variant, therefore no one knows for sure if vaccine will work. We can theorize that it should work, but it is all just a speculation, glass is half full rather than half empty.


 ... the developers of the vaccines (Pfizer for sure) has stated "publicly" that they can tweak their vaccines for the new variants so you can't say it's speculation.



> That’s why vaccines against* common cold corona viruses *don’t work, because of new mutations, for same reason there are no effective vaccine for avian corona virus- it has numerous variants.


 ... that's why we have annual flu-shots - a vaccine that has been "updated". For those who has taken the shots, we realize it does not "prevent" you from catching the cold/flu but it can help temper symptoms considerably. Ie. you have protection. As for someone who is immune-compromised or has underlying medical conditions, catching the flu can be deadly. You do realize that one does not catch or generate the flu on his/her own - it's caught/transmitted from someone else. For a start, I don't want to be the person to be passing on my virus to someone else, knowingly it can kill them (e.g. your elderly parents, or your less healthy girlfriend/partner/spouse/family), never mind what your own physician will think when you visit him/her with this Covid event.



> P.S. Why would people rat their neighbours out? Too many snitches in QB.


 ... I wouldn't call 34 fines out of 700 calls/complaints as ratting/snitching on their neighbours, especially we're a year into this pandemic. Obviously, these were clear legal violations otherwise the police has better things to do.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> I believe the UK has been doing some kind of test where they take the culture of this variant and do this and that and a bubba bing bop and somehow they can tell that the vaccine will neutralize it as well as the earlier mutations. The US is currently investigating that as well, but supposedly it can be tested and so far the results are good.
> 
> *This mutation is all hype. Peoples fear of the boogie man around the corner is all it i*s. I am going to need a little more info then the fact that it exists (of course it does. so does 100,000 others by now) and someone thinks the look of their spikes will make it more transmittable because they might be able to lock onto ACE2 receptors better. Well, doesn't that also mean it will be more difficult to eject it out of your nose and mouth to infect others as well, if the little buggers are hanging on so well? Anyway, how transmittable a virus is has to be tested. It is not something that can be seen with a microscope.
> 
> Luckily I think the public would be happy to move on from this one if we can get the press to stop bringing it up. At least until they get some real useful information, other then the fact that it exists and people who travel can move it around. Thanks for that.


 ... are you disputing the reporting by the experts that the S variant is 70% more transmissible? And that more of us should get the Covid and swamp the ICU wards? How about lock-downing a few more months? Would you prefer that instead of the high transmissivity "hype"?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Oh, here comes ON's share of defiants.

Woodstock, Ont., woman charged under Reopening Ontario Act for church service



> _Police say that well over 10 people were inside the place of worship on Sunday, with many not physically distancing or wearing masks_.


 ...

Maybe they can appeal their fines on the notion that they needed to pray (with alot of people too) for an end to the pandemic.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... are you disputing the reporting by the experts that the S variant is 70% more transmissible? And that more of us should get the Covid and swamp the ICU wards? How about lock-downing a few more months? Would you prefer that instead of the high transmissivity "hype"?


What expert? How did they test it? You are mostly regurgitating what someone else regurgitated before you. This is a super example of that and how far it can go when people keep regurgitating over and over again.

I am not disputing anything. I am just trying to tell you that we don't know? At least we did not a week ago and I doubt a lot of work was done over Christmas, but who knows.

By the way, how does locking down stop transmissivity hype? Hype is hype. You actually don't need to do anything but stop hyping to deal with that. Why would anyone want to lock down because of hype?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> This mutation is all hype.


Wrong. It is a big deal if a significantly more infectious variant becomes endemic. It has a direct implication for the proportion of the population that needs to be vaccinated to control the spread of the virus.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

Beaver101 said:


> the developers of the vaccines (Pfizer for sure) has stated "publicly" that they can tweak their vaccines for the new variants


I am sure Pfizer can, but the virus is always going to be one step ahead. Plus it will be very unrealistic to expect majority of population come in for regular shots with updates.


Beaver101 said:


> that's why we have annual flu-shots - a vaccine that has been "updated". For those who has taken the shots, we realize it does not "prevent" you from catching the cold/flu but it can help temper symptoms considerably.


It has not been updated, but rather based on the guessing game and sampling from the environment.
The influenza viruses in the seasonal flu vaccine are selected each year based on surveillance data indicating which viruses are circulating and forecasts about which viruses are the most likely to circulate during the coming season.
Also according to the CDC database flu shots have very low efficacy. I have no reason to believe it’s gonna be different with corona virus ( I don’t believe big pharma and take everything that I hear from corrupt governments with the grain of salt). Only time will tell.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> Wrong. It is a big deal if a significantly more infectious variant becomes endemic. It has a direct implication for the proportion of the population that needs to be vaccinated to control the spread of the virus.


If it was a serious mutation, I would agree. I just doubt they actually know that and the odds are against it. Endemic, that is a whole new one. I imagine the overall covid-19 itself will show to be quite endemic, without any new mutations required. Until I see some kind of clear scientific work on this new strain, I am going to leave the hype with the media and whoever else wants to spice up their day with it.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> What expert? How did they test it? You are mostly regurgitating what someone else regurgitated before you. This is a super example of that and how far it can go when people keep regurgitating over and over again.


 ... I said "are you disputing the* reporting* by the experts" which is plastered all over the news (reliable). Or do you need the actual links from Scientific American or the American Medical Journal or CDC that says so in order to validate the experts? Of course, I'm regurgitating from "someone" else before me. That some one else is the "news". Next thing, you'll be claiming there is no transparency.



> I am not disputing anything. I am just trying to tell you that we don't know? At least we did not a week ago and I doubt a lot of work was done over Christmas, but who knows.


 ... now you're regurgitating what I read and posted as you never posted that this variant was detected some months ago until now that we should be more vigilant on ... instead you claimed it's "*This mutation is all hype. Peoples fear of the boogie man around the corner is all it i*_s. I am going to need a little more info then the fact that it exists (of course it does. so does ... "_



> By the way, how does locking down stop transmissivity hype? Hype is hype. You actually don't need to do anything but stop hyping to deal with that.


 ... you can call and take it as hype want plus chose to ignore it. The fact it has been reported it's 70% (far) more transmissible is good enough to alert me to stay far far far away from the mentality-likes-of-you. I can't stop you from ignoring it and neither can you stop me from "hyping" as you're labelling it.



> Why would anyone want to lock down because of hype?


 ... you tell that to Ford since you're in ON, to the frontline healthcare workers, to the nurses/doctors plus the (non-Covid related) patients waiting for treatment/surgery at the hospitals, to the families (caregivers) of those who caught Covid19 because they thought it was just "hype" or another form of the flu.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Nothing you said Beav has been verified by testing...just hype. That is what I am saying and so far you have not disputed it. I see the news. I see how it gets to this level and I am just giving you a heads up warning that for people who don't understand how often viruses mutate it can look like something serious. Usually it is not.

At the end of the day, if it becomes a real issue, we can talk about it then. Right now they don't know, but have nicely offered you some guesses. Enjoy them.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Ukrainiandude said:


> I am sure Pfizer can, but the virus is always going to be one step ahead. Plus it will be very unrealistic to expect majority of population come in for regular shots with updates.
> 
> It has not been updated, but rather based on the guessing game and sampling from the environment.
> The influenza viruses in the seasonal flu vaccine are selected each year based on surveillance data indicating which viruses are circulating and forecasts about which viruses are the most likely to circulate during the coming season.
> ...


 ... let me sum it up. 

I'm no flu/virologist expert and not going to try to be one. When my GP tells me to get the shot, I'm getting it as much as I hate needles. End of story.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> Nothing you said Beav has been verified by testing...just hype. That is what I am saying and so far you have not disputed it. I see the news. I see how it gets to this level and I am just giving you a heads up warning that for people who don't understand how often viruses mutate it can look like something serious. Usually it is not.
> 
> At the end of the day, if it becomes a real issue, we can talk about it then. Right now they don't know, but have nicely offered you some guesses. Enjoy them.


 .. no one on this earth knows with 100% certainty on anything so what's your point?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> .. no one on this earth knows with 100% certainty on anything so what's your point?


Beav. I have given you my point about 3 times now. Every reply you have made just talks about the media and so called experts. That is the point. Smoke and mirrors. Nothing concrete. The only remotely concrete thing was that the UK labs observed spikes that "might" make it more contagious.

That is where the hype started and you and the media just regurgitate it. Since it has now been regurgitated so often people start to believe that this constant talk somehow makes it true. It doesn't. There is a reason why I asked for the proof. There is none. I also observed you did not give me any. That is not a coincidence. That is what I expected and it is my point.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> Beav. I have given you my point about 3 times now. Every reply you have made just talks about the media and so called experts. That is the point. Smoke and mirrors. Nothing concrete. The only remotely concrete thing was that the UK labs observed spikes that "might" make it more contagious.
> 
> That is where the hype started and you and the media just regurgitate it. Since it has now been regurgitated so often people start to believe that this constant talk somehow makes it true. It doesn't. There is a reason why I asked for the proof. There is none. I also observed you did not give me any. That is not a coincidence. That is what I expected and it is my point.


 ... does it make you feel better that the media (for a change) is telling the truth and you just have to believe them?

Or do you still want that "100% proof" from the actual experts (scientists, etc) in order to start "believing" the variant is more infectious "before" allowing our politicians to implement what they think are best protocols (with the public to follow) to prevent further spread of the disease?


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> If it was a serious mutation, I would agree. I just doubt they actually know that and the odds are against it. Endemic, that is a whole new one. I imagine the overall covid-19 itself will show to be quite endemic, without any new mutations required. Until I see some kind of clear scientific work on this new strain, I am going to leave the hype with the media and whoever else wants to spice up their day with it.


You know all the talk about 'herd immunity'? That idea is that a certain percentage of the population needs to be immune/non susceptible (through previous exposure or through vaccination) so that the virus has an R number less than 1 (each case infects less than one additional case) and outbreaks peter out. The math is a function of (infectiousness of virus), (proportion previously exposed + proportion of population immunized * effectiveness of immunization). When a new strain of COVID is nearly twice as infectious as the currently circulating strain, it will tend to outcompete that existing strain and become the dominant strain. Likely we can only slow it down, not contain it. Once that strain becomes dominant, it changes the math of what percentage needs to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. The measles vaccine is 98% effective, but measles is incredible contagious. So, when only 90% of the population is vaccinated, you tend to start getting measles outbreaks. COVID is not nearly as contagious, but the COVID vaccines are not nearly as effective either (low 90-s%). We might have been fine with 70% vaccination rate with the original COVID-19 strain and the current vaccines. Double the infectiousness of COVID and maybe the vaccination rate needs to be 85% to contain outbreaks. And it will be hard to achieve such a high vaccination rate without making it mandatory (which is a non-starter).

So, a more infectious strain of COVID is definitely a bad thing.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> You know all the talk about 'herd immunity'? That idea is that a certain percentage of the population needs to be immune/non susceptible (through previous exposure or through vaccination) so that the virus has an R number less than 1 (each case infects less than one additional case) and outbreaks peter out. The math is a function of (infectiousness of virus), (proportion previously exposed + proportion of population immunized * effectiveness of immunization). When a new strain of COVID is nearly twice as infectious as the currently circulating strain, it will tend to outcompete that existing strain and become the dominant strain. Likely we can only slow it down, not contain it. Once that strain becomes dominant, it changes the math of what percentage needs to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. The measles vaccine is 98% effective, but measles is incredible contagious. So, when only 90% of the population is vaccinated, you tend to start getting measles outbreaks. COVID is not nearly as contagious, but the COVID vaccines are not nearly as effective either (low 90-s%). We might have been fine with 70% vaccination rate with the original COVID-19 strain and the current vaccines. Double the infectiousness of COVID and maybe the vaccination rate needs to be 85% to contain outbreaks. And it will be hard to achieve such a high vaccination rate without making it mandatory (which is a non-starter).
> 
> So, a more infectious strain of COVID is definitely a bad thing.


I do understand all that. I am aware of the ramifications of what "more transmittable" means. What others may not know, however, is the part of your math that is missing when it comes to contagiousness of a virus. One very large component in how contagious a virus is, is how long is the incubation period. In other words, how long from the time a person acquires the virus to when they start to show moderate (not mild) symptoms.

So, in other words, more important then how well a virus can hang onto your breathing track, is how long can it hang onto your breathing track before you start to suspect that it is there. Once you are sure it is there you tend to take your breathing track away from other people, as best one can. So, if a virus that does not hang on well, but hides for 8 days, when compared to one that hangs on better, but is more virulent, and therefore excites moderate symptoms in 4 days, the 1st example will spread to many more people then the 2nd, and that has nothing to do with the physical makeup of the virus.

That also needs to be included in the equation you offered. This, and a few other things are why we need a proper test to determine if a virus mutation is indeed more infectious. Not someone that saw something in a microscope and thought it might be more dangerous. It might be. It might not be. That is all I am saying.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

^ All indications thus far is that there are no differences in symptomology or severity. That whole line of discussion is just idle discussion with no immediate relevance to this new strain. So it is just more contagious. I don't know what 'proper test' you are looking for. It can only come from observational statistical analysis of subsequent spread. No ethics board would approve direct controlled experimentation.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> ^ All indications thus far is that there are no differences in symptomology or severity. That whole line of discussion is just idle discussion with no immediate relevance to this new strain. So it is just more contagious. I don't know what 'proper test' you are looking for. It can only come from observational statistical analysis of subsequent spread. No ethics board would approve direct controlled experimentation.


Actually that is the worst way to test it. I don't know what is the best test but I do know the one you are looking at is not it.

The best example I have is human evolution. As you know, we did not start out with so many different races. At one point in the past one race was known as the homosapien species. For my example I tend to assume they were black because they also believe we started on the serengeti. Neither of those points are important.

Now if all humans were black and with some quirk of the genome a white baby eventually was made, one would think that today, if all else was the same, that black people would still make up a far larger population group, due to their huge head start over white people. When we notice that there seems to be a lot more white people then expected, one would automatically assume that it is due to white people fornicating more often which would be the best equivalent to being more transmissive for a virus. I think we know that is not the case. The right answer is that things are not equal, and over that length of time many, many other events took place that got us to where we are.

With viruses, 1 year to us is like 2,500 years to them. The above, and I image quite a few other things, makes looking at the population percentage of one virus mutation to the other, fairly useless as a guage to explaining why they are there. There is just a lot more to it then that one reason everyone wants to grab onto. More transmissive.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Ukrainiandude said:


> I am sure Pfizer can, but the virus is always going to be one step ahead. Plus it will be very unrealistic to expect majority of population come in for regular shots with updates ...


Depends on risk/reward and whether there is a chance of a major disruption.
People adapt as well.

Cheers


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Look. I don't know whether this mutation is more or less transmissive then some other mutation and there would be thousands of them by now. All I am saying is they most likely do not either. So why the warning from the UK?

In my opinion, assuming they did not do it only to increase fear and consequently better adherence by citizens to the lockdowns, I would say that it is an amateurs way of explaining why the 2nd wave is so much more explosive then the first, when these leaders have been working so hard and taking so much backlash to get the curve down. They are trying to understand why all their efforts are failing.

Who on this board, when they saw the numbers start to rise, did not wonder that perhaps we had a new mutation that was more transmissive then the first one? The answer to the reason why the curve is so high is obviously seasonal but when a scientist is telling you about a new mutation, with different spikes that might hang onto ACE2 receptors better, possibly making it more transmissive, you tend to think that this might be the big reason. In any case, it can't help but instill some fear in people, and that is desperately needed anyway and it is my obligation to inform other countries of things like this and presto...here we are.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

They were warning because a mutated strain was found in thousands of people. Based on their statistical analysis of the spread of that strain (which can be done through contact tracing), they concluded it was more infectious.

This new strain isn't driving the current wave. What's relevant is how this strain will drive future waves.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

For those that may be interested in the genome mutations here is a graphical look at them.
auspice


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> They were warning because a mutated strain was found in thousands of people. Based on their statistical analysis of the spread of that strain (which can be done through contact tracing), they concluded it was more infectious.
> 
> This new strain isn't driving the current wave. What's relevant is how this strain will drive future waves.


But that is a faulty conclusion. Look at the graph Cainvest just put up. A quote from it:



> There are thousands of complete genomes available now and this number increases by hundreds of every day.


Now we know there would be 1000s of mutation by now. With your logic the ones that are more dominant today then they were a few months ago MUST be more transmissive. My point is that is a faulty conclusion. It is not that it is wrong, but more that there are quite a number of reasons why one mutation survives better then another.

Why is this so hard to see? I know you have the media pounding you with what you are regurgitating back but when you listen to the people you know you can trust, you never get those confirmations. Fauci has been asked about the virus many times and the best you get out of him is "this mutation has some physical features that some say might make it more transmittable" Does that really sound like he is confident it is? Do you think if he was sure, as many on this board are, that he might want to make the warning a little more confidently?

As for the other experts. Just people who want to get their time in the spotlight who want to regurgitate the same thing other experts doing the same thing, did. 99.9% of those experts have never seen this virus and probably 50% of them have never seen any virus. Remember how many experts told you masks were of no use to the common citizen? Same thing. Experts regurgitating what some expert regurgitated before them. Nothing more. You don't see many of those same experts saying masks are of no use to citizens anymore, now do you?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

They told my wife they are vaccinating 400 people a day, and told her to encourage people to get the shot.

At the current rate....with a population of 400,000........it is going to take a long time to get the shots into arms.

People are coming from the surrounding areas to this one vaccination site, so the number to be vaccinated is higher than 400,000

Hopefully when we get more vaccines delivered, they can ramp it up significantly.

Governments have 2 main objectives now. Ramp up the vaccinations and provide financial support to people while they wait.

We need to keep restrictions in place and I wouldn't be surprised it becomes necessary to expand them.

As one doctor said.......we are not at the end of the COVID's worst days. We are at the beginning of them.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Found this interesting ... 

_Some of this work is conducted at large, specialized facilities, but because of advances in technology, genome sequencing can also be carried out in smaller labs. Hospitals and universities around the world are collecting samples from people with COVID-19. Some in-house sequencing devices are the size of a smartphone or suitcase, and many can report a genome sequence within 7–8 h. _

from here - https://cen.acs.org/biological-chemistry/genomics/genomic-epidemiology-tracking-spread-COVID/98/i17


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

sags said:


> They told my wife they are vaccinating 400 people a day, and told her to encourage people to get the shot.
> 
> At the current rate....with a population of 400,000........it is going to take a long time to get the shots into arms.
> 
> ...


Hey Sags, how's your wife doing after her vaccination. Anything to report?

Since her vaccination have you noticed any of the following symptoms:

1) Rapitis - A new strong urge to listen to loud rap music and the desperate need to make someone your bi_ch.

2) Musicaldaisy - No matter what question you ask her she immediately breaks into a 3 minute song and dance, throughout the house and over the furniture, a lot like a bad broadway musical.

3) Rainbowlaria - Her morning stool comes out in the colours of a rainbow.

Anything like that? lol


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

LOL.....just a sudden desire to order Chinese food for New Year's dinner tomorrow...."I will pay", she said to entice me into sharing in her rebellion.

Chinese food to laugh in the face of the "Chinese virus" .........feels right and tastes good too !


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> Why is this so hard to see? I know you have the media pounding you with what you are regurgitating back but when you listen to the people you know you can trust, you never get those confirmations.


You're the one engaging in armchair epidemiology based on your 30 year old microbiology education.




> Fauci has been asked about the virus many times and the best you get out of him is "this mutation has some physical features that some say might make it more transmittable" Does that really sound like he is confident it is? Do you think if he was sure, as many on this board are, that he might want to make the warning a little more confidently?


All scientists tend to be very cautious in what they say.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

andrewf said:


> All scientists tend to be very cautious in what they say.


Ohhhh .. .that is so not true on many levels.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

cainvest said:


> Ohhhh .. .that is so not true on many levels.


Academic discourse is loaded with weasel words to hedge what they are saying.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> You're the one engaging in armchair epidemiology based on your 30 year old microbiology education.
> 
> All scientists tend to be very cautious in what they say.


I have always said that when the posts start getting directed more at the poster and not the post, the debate is over. Someone is certainly running out of arguments. Thanks for the discussion.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> I have always said that when the posts start getting directed more at the poster and not the post, the debate is over. Someone is certainly running out of arguments. Thanks for the discussion.


 ... re post #124 from this same thread New UK variant of COVID. Do we need to say more? Maybe time to get a mirror too?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... re post #124 from this same thread New UK variant of COVID. Do we need to say more? Maybe time to get a mirror too?


You mean the joke I made? Just trying to lighten things up. Did Sags sound offended in his reply? If he had of I would have apologized, since it was just a joke. It had nothing to do with what we were talking about on this thread.

In Andrews case, he seem to think that by mentioning that my formal education in Microbiology was a night course, for one semester in 1986, that this would somehow indicate that I did not know what I was talking about. I would have thought that some education would be looked at as something better then no formal education at all, but I can't say exactly what he intended with the comment.

That said, when I see these approaches to a debate I usually can't help but assume they come from a person's lack of anything more concrete to say.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

andrewf said:


> Academic discourse is loaded with weasel words to hedge what they are saying.


Some scientists, just like some people in other occupations, don't do good work and have been caught "adjusting data" to support their position. The nice thing about science is many other scientists routinely check the claims being made.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> I have always said that when the posts start getting directed more at the poster and not the post, the debate is over. Someone is certainly running out of arguments. Thanks for the discussion.


You're the one just waving your hands and saying 'hype'. If you think it is hype, feel free to disregard.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> In Andrews case, he seem to think that by mentioning that my formal education in Microbiology was a night course, for one semester in 1986, that this would somehow indicate that I did not know what I was talking about. I would have thought that some education would be looked at as something better then no formal education at all, but I can't say exactly what he intended with the comment.


You mentioning it was the argument from authority fallacy. What I say is 'regurgitating', what you say is authoritative. Indeed, we can be done here. Neither of us are experts, your night class notwithstanding.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

An apology for directing your response at me personally would have been better received but that reply is OK with me, in any case.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> You mean the joke I made? Just trying to lighten things up. Did Sags sound offended in his reply? If he had of I would have apologized, since it was just a joke. It had nothing to do with what we were talking about on this thread.


 ... did sags answered your question(s)? No, and if you're referring to his post #125 right after yours as a "reply", then you're a mind-reader/assumed that he wasn't offended. And this is nothing to say about the "nature of your joke", directed at his wife who works as a healthcare (nursing home) worker which IMO is an extremely poor joke, done with very poor taste too. And what's so funny about his reporting via his wife's experience on the slow speed of vaccination being done in Ontario?

And your re-observation /new statement "_it had nothing to do with what we were talking about on this thread" ... _duh_. _Yah, it's titled "A new UK variant of COVID". I get that you talk from 2 sides of your mouth too.



> In Andrews case, he seem to think that by mentioning that my formal education in Microbiology was a night course, for one semester in 1986, that this would somehow indicate that I did not know what I was talking about. I would have thought that some education would be looked at as something better then no formal education at all, but I can't say exactly what he intended with the comment.


 ... I see andrewf has addressed this so nothing for me to say here.



> That said, when I see these approaches to a debate I usually can't help but assume they come from a person's lack of anything more concrete to say.


 ... what were you trying to debate with pulling that tasteless "post=joke" of yours? I'm sure you know and can do better given quite knowledge from your background posts.

*Suggestion:* Since you're in a mood for jokes on Covid, open up a thread and joke there ... see how many participants will join you.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Public forums. You certainly do get all kinds.

Is it not possible anymore to have a simple discussion about a subject where each person's differing opinion is discussed based on their opinion and not disintegrate into something personal at some point, usually around the end.

Things like:

Your education level for one
Your partisan or political beliefs
The poster is an alarmist or pessimist
Whether you are a socialist or a capitalist
Whether you ever said something nice about Justin Trudeau before
If you ever worked in the Financial Services Industry, especially as an Advisor.
If you have ever received a commission on a sale (I mean how ethical could you ever possibly be?)
My favourite. If you debate a topic well, you are labeled to it like it is a religion of yours. Unwilling to look at any other point of view, therefore, your current opinion and relevant points must be corrupt and should all be dismissed. I mean really?

etc. (there are a lot more of them)

They rarely have anything to do with the topic being discussed. When I see them used they usually are an attempt to quickly sway opinion away from someone groundlessly without having to go to the trouble of disputing their point. It is a weak argument.

We know people use these personal descriptions to frame their own opinions, especially when the subject is one that they have little knowledge of, and it is my opinion, that is why they are used. When I see it I figure a "agree to disagree" would have been a lot more fair and honourable.

It's difficult. I am not perfect here either. We know how to win a debate and many times our brains come up with this stuff without us noticing that it does not really directly relate to the topic being discussed. At best it might relate to something more general but usually something more general is not being discussed. We should try harder to stay on topic.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Study estimates that the new variant has an R number that is higher by 0.4 and 0.7, where a number <1 is needed to slow the rate of infection. That means we need much more vaccination and/or distancing to achieve an effective R number of <1. Bad news bears. Not just 'hype'.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Well there you go. You did not state what education level a person should have in order to understand what that video is saying but it seems to be that someone did something in some study and therefore it is proven to be more infectious and therefore a big problem. They now know that nobody did anything wrong, during the pandemic, the virus is all at fault for increased infections.

Would be nice if they listed the study. I have seen a lot of studies linked that are just a little worse then an opinion without back up explanations, but without any info, I will admit I can't say that it was not done properly. So you win. Well done. Great discussion.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

andrewf said:


> Study estimates that the new variant has an R number that is higher by 0.4 and 0.7, where a number <1 is needed to slow the rate of infection. That means we need much more vaccination and/or distancing to achieve an effective R number of <1. Bad news bears. Not just 'hype'.





OptsyEagle said:


> They now know that nobody did anything wrong, during the pandemic, the virus is all at fault for increased infections.


Maybe this is the correct way to go about it for all governments and not just the UK?

If a sudden rise in cases occurs with a new genome detected they should lock down all travel to that area. Each time we get a "roll of the dice" mutation there is always a chance of it being a "super covid".


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Summary (and off topic) on post #134, read everything on a forum with a grain of salt and grow thick skin as you keep reading ... especially with posts from commissioned insurance salespeople.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

I will give a brief overview of why my opinion was more skeptical on this mutation then others and especially the media. It is not that I am a skeptical person and obviously I personally could have no idea how contagious any mutation might be.

It actually goes back those 34 years to my college days. That night course I took in microbiology that Andrew alluded to earlier. I also listed info on another thread about the issues surrounding bio-weaponry. This was done because it was a great way to understand some of the most basic attributes of virology. I learned this rule during those classes and it was so simple to understand I never forgot it and it was probably the one that created my skepticism here:

*The more violent the virus = the less transmissive the virus

The less violent the virus = the more transmissive the virus*

Just a basic rule. The idea is that if you have a very violent virus. One that makes you sick very quickly and probably kills you, it will also become harder to transmit because the infected get symptoms right away and eventually die. In both of those cases they tend to stay home soon after infection and therefore, infect less people, or die and infect no one anymore.

That above rule has protected humanity more then herd immunity has for thousands of years. If it was not for that general rule, there is a very good chance our species would not continue to exist on this earth anymore. How lucky is that?

In the study above, I severely doubt they did much work on the virulence of the virus or how long is the incubation period, which is more important, in my opinion, on a viruses ability to spread then how well it might hang onto your ACE2 receptors. But who knows, perhaps they did.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> Well there you go. You did not state what education level a person should have in order to understand what that video is saying but it seems to be that someone did something in some study and therefore it is proven to be more infectious and therefore a big problem. They now know that nobody did anything wrong, during the pandemic, the virus is all at fault for increased infections.
> 
> Would be nice if they listed the study. I have seen a lot of studies linked that are just a little worse then an opinion without back up explanations, but without any info, I will admit I can't say that it was not done properly. So you win. Well done. Great discussion.


I have no idea what you're getting at, other than engaging in petulance. The infectivity of this strain seems to be completely unrelated to any particular government's failure or success in controlling the outbreak thus far. Here is the study. It was not hard to find.



https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-12-31-COVID19-Report-42-Preprint-VOC.pdf


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> I will give a brief overview of why my opinion was more skeptical on this mutation then others and especially the media. It is not that I am a skeptical person and obviously I personally could have no idea how contagious any mutation might be.
> 
> It actually goes back those 34 years to my college days. That night course I took in microbiology that Andrew alluded to earlier. I also listed info on another thread about the issues surrounding bio-weaponry. This was done because it was a great way to understand some of the most basic attributes of virology. I learned this rule during those classes and it was so simple to understand I never forgot it and it was probably the one that created my skepticism here:
> 
> ...


You seem to be positing that harmfulness and infectiousness are tightly inversely correlated on a kind of efficient frontier. Just because there is an efficient frontier, does not mean all combinations lie on it. COVID-19 could have been much worse. As you said, this tendency of infectious disease is a rule of thumb, not a physical law of the universe. This new strain may just be more adaptive (closer to the efficient frontier) in that it can infect people more readily while not being any more or less harmful to those infected.

You seem remarkably closed to any information that does not conform to your preconceived notions of how the world works. Perhaps there is more to virology and immunology than one might learn in a night class in 1986.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> I have no idea what you're getting at, other than engaging in petulance. The infectivity of this strain seems to be completely unrelated to any particular government's failure or success in controlling the outbreak thus far. Here is the study. It was not hard to find.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-12-31-COVID19-Report-42-Preprint-VOC.pdf


I will give them that. They did take some of the same course as me and they did test for incubation periods, etc., so I will give you that this virus might actually be more contagious. In my defense, I never said it was not. I said that they did not know that it was more contagious. You will notice the date of that study is December 31 and this thread got started 14 days ago. I also said that transmissivity cannot be determined by simply looking at how many people have that particular mutation over time. Knowing that as well, they did thankfully take their investigation a lot further.

Thanks for the study.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> You seem to be positing that harmfulness and infectiousness are tightly inversely correlated on a kind of efficient frontier. Just because there is an efficient frontier, does not mean all combinations lie on it. COVID-19 could have been much worse. As you said, this tendency of infectious disease is a rule of thumb, not a physical law of the universe. This new strain may just be more adaptive (closer to the efficient frontier) in that it can infect people more readily while not being any more or less harmful to those infected.
> 
> You seem remarkably closed to any information that does not conform to your preconceived notions of how the world works. Perhaps there is more to virology and immunology than one might learn in a night class in 1986.


Please Andrew, lets not post another opinion directed at the poster as a reason why a post might not be correct. Let's keep focused on the actual post itself. Can we not do that?

So ignoring your 2nd paragraph, I will agree with your first paragraph that it cannot be a perfect relationship between transmission and virulence. They are highly inversely correlated and they are a big factor in our virus survival throughout the ages, but are there other things that contribute to transmissivity, other then the virulence of the virus. Of course. We know that. All I am saying is that it is the most important factor...and to head off a possible dispute on that I will weaken that statement to "it is a big factor". If you want to dispute that I am ready to go.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

By the way Andrew, why do you keep coming back to my night course. You seem to think it is important for everyone to know. Obviously you must know that the only reason you even know about it, is because I told everyone. If I was trying to impress people with education credentials I think I would invent something more extensive then a night course for one semester, in 1986. Obviously you should see that I am willing to stand on my own opinions and have little interest in credentials, since they don't really prove much, in my opinion. They really can be a distraction at times.

That said, are you sporting some kind of higher education that you seem to think automatically makes your opinions more correct then mine? or am I just annoying you and you want to annoy me back?

This stuff always perplexes me. Kind of why I posted about it a few posts back.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> That said, are you sporting some kind of higher education that you seem to think automatically makes your opinions more correct then mine? or am I just annoying you and you want to annoy me back?


You seemed to be using it as pretext too 'hold court' in the other thread. I would have couched it in a bit more humility about what we do and do not know. I have no formal training in this area, but enough in mathematics and logical thinking. As I said, I am not an expert, just interpreting what I hear from a variety of expert sources.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

Beaver101 said:


> I wouldn't call 34 fines out of 700 calls/complaints as ratting/snitching on their neighbours, especially we're a year into this pandemic. Obviously, these were clear legal violations otherwise the police has better things to do.


 There was more officers than violators. In addition to this several cops are not wearing masks. 
Don’t the police need a warrant or something to enter the private properly in Canada?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ I don't think you can use this video to judge "police strom(sic) gathering of six people" (due to a ratting???) when clearly only one person (a younger individual) was being yanked out by the cops. And the video doesn't show whether a warrant was presented first but did show the cops did not enter the home. 

Anyhow, those are Quebec cops of which I have no idea what methods they use to arrest people there. Besides, it's nothing new that cops generally like to use brutality before brains. Happens all the time, even in Toronto, Ontario.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> You seemed to be using it as pretext too 'hold court' in the other thread. I would have couched it in a bit more humility about what we do and do not know. I have no formal training in this area, but enough in mathematics and logical thinking. As I said, I am not an expert, just interpreting what I hear from a variety of expert sources.


My point is that you seem to believe that we should all simply take what these so called experts say and not question it because we all did not take the time to obtain a much higher academic or professional level of experience. I only need to point you towards all the experts telling us that masks had absolutely no protective benefit to non-healthcare workers. I could then, within about 6 weeks time, show you all the experts now saying the exact opposite. I could link you to my posts on the matter, long before those days questioning the wisdom of a no mask policy, but it would probably require a link to another forum and that's not nice to this forum and hopefully not necessary.

My point is that my education level will never be enough, nor will anyones. It is a persons ideas and their opinions and their backup explanations and any other information they can gather on the subject, that can lead a person to the correct much better then just waiting for the experts to help us along. Even if they are quick enough they leave out so much info on the matter, their assistance becomes much less helpful.

Did my education really let me down in our argument. I said:


No one could know a virus was more transmittable simply by looking at population infections - I was correct
I said that there is a lot more to how transmissive a virus is then just how its physical make up is, as seen through a microscope - I was correct

My court, as you call it, up thread was to point out to others that when you and anyone else, including me, use those types of things they are discriminatory to the points being made. I have noticed that this debating technique usually happens when one runs out of points. I suggest at those times we just agree to disagree. It is more honourable. You don't have to take my advice. You can continue to debate anyway you want. It did not hurt my feelings. Just something to think about.

Good discussion. All though one on a fairly immaterial point. The infectiousness of the virus will not change things much, for most of us, going forward. Covid-19 will be with us a very long time. It really does not matter to me which mutation it is. They all have to go. Whether Covid-19 is with us for 6 more years or 16 more years, it will make little difference to most individuals who have been vaccinated. Most of the rest should know the solution to their woes.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

Beaver101 said:


> due to a ratting???


According to “free, unbiased and independent“ cbc (that blurred cops faces on the video on their website along with turned off commenting section.)
Police were called to a home on rue le Baron around 11:30 p.m. ET Thursday evening after receiving an anonymous complaint from a neighbour. They encountered six people from multiple households having a private gathering.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

OptsyEagle said:


> Whether Covid-19 is with us for 6 more years or 16 more years, it will make little difference to most individuals who have been vaccinated.


we don’t know this for sure, at the moment any statement of vaccine effectiveness against variant is a pure speculation and a white lie by the corrupt government, aimed to prevent crowds from panicking and line up obediently for the inoculation with experimental vaccine. 
According to Bloomberg
The newly identified U.K. variant — known as B.1.1.7 — seems to be more contagious than other more-established strains. It also appears to be more genetically distinct. But more research will be needed to prove whether it's in fact more contagious, as well as how it might affect vaccines.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Ukrainiandude said:


> According to “free, unbiased and independent“ cbc (that blurred cops faces on the video on their website along with turned off commenting section.)
> Police were called to a home on *rue le Baron around 11:30 p.m. ET Thursday evening *after receiving an anonymous complaint from a neighbour. They encountered six people from multiple households having a private gathering.


 ... I'm not sure CBC is considered independent and unbiased but definitely "free" news. So what's your point that the news outlet (or any others for that matter) is biased and not-independent? Especially, you didn't mind pointing out the street this household was located even (which in itself was taken off from the CBC news reporting I presumed, along with the exact time and date.)

Anyhow, unless you were actually there, both you and I can speculate on all the circumstances (ratting et al) based on that video plus CBC's reporting here. And you can continue to b1tch here all you want because at the end of the day ... nothing improves. This is how the real world works.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Ukrainiandude said:


> we don’t know this for sure, at the moment any statement of vaccine effectiveness against variant is a pure speculation and a white lie by the corrupt government, aimed to prevent crowds from panicking and line up obediently for the inoculation with experimental vaccine.
> According to Bloomberg
> The newly identified U.K. variant — known as B.1.1.7 — seems to be more contagious than other more-established strains. It also appears to be more genetically distinct. But more research will be needed to prove whether it's in fact more contagious, as well as how it might affect vaccines.


No one really knows anything for sure. That does not change the fact that the much higher probability is that covid-19 will be with us for quite a long time. This is primarily due to reluctance to vaccinate. I could literally care less, which decision a person makes on that subject. However, knowing the basic issues, I suspect the young will decline it in enough numbers to ensure the virus persists for quite a while. Right now, children under 16 cannot be vaccinated, so we know that population will still maintain a fairly good level of infection.

Your point is well taken, however, not knowing something for sure does not make the opposite anymore probable.

Also, please understand that when I say Covid-19 will be with us for many years. I am not saying that current death rates and hospitalizations will be the same as they are today. They will be almost negligible compared to hospitalizations and deaths from other sources. It will just make a few news stories over the next few years. That's all I am expecting it to amount to, with a few exceptions of horror. Let's face it. That's just like any other day of the week, from other issues, when you think about. It will blend into the background of life and we will move on.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> The infectiousness of the virus will not change things much, for most of us, going forward. Covid-19 will be with us a very long time. It really does not matter to me which mutation it is. They all have to go. Whether Covid-19 is with us for 6 more years or 16 more years, it will make little difference to most individuals who have been vaccinated. Most of the rest should know the solution to their woes.


The vaccine is not 100% effective. So it does matter how infectious the virus is. The more infectious it is, the more people will have to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity to protect those for whom the vaccine does not work. This is basic epidemiology.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> The vaccine is not 100% effective. So it does matter how infectious the virus is. The more infectious it is, the more people will have to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity to protect those for whom the vaccine does not work. This is basic epidemiology.


I agree with you on that but It does not change my point. If you look closely at what you just said, people need to get vaccinated OR they will get infected. When it comes to immunity only, which is what gets us to herd immunity, those two events, are the same thing.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

You were saying that if you're immunized, you ought not concern yourself with what happens to others. The less than full effectiveness of the vaccine is a reason why they should care. You have no idea if you are the 1 in 20 for whom the vaccine is ineffective until you become infected.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

andrewf said:


> The vaccine is not 100% effective.


According to big pharma the vaccine is 95% effective, as Israel have already over 12% of its population vaccinated with Pfizer, we should soon learn some truth. First shot according to Pfizer will give some protection 12 days post inoculation. It will be either a big triumph or grand fiasco.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

andrewf said:


> You were saying that if you're immunized, you ought not concern yourself with what happens to others. The less than full effectiveness of the vaccine is a reason why they should care. You have no idea if you are the 1 in 20 for whom the vaccine is ineffective until you become infected.


So what is your plan with that? Stay indoors, keep 6 feet away from everyone, wear a mask always until the very last infection is gone from the planet, no matter how many years that might take? That's certainly not my plan.

By the way, things are not going to go down the precise way you described but I do tire with our conversation so I will leave you to your conundrum. Let us know what you come up with for a fix.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> So what is your plan with that? Stay indoors, keep 6 feet away from everyone, wear a mask always until the very last infection is gone from the planet, no matter how many years that might take? That's certainly not my plan.
> 
> By the way, things are not going to go down the precise way you described but I do tire with our conversation so I will leave you to your conundrum. Let us know what you come up with for a fix.


No, I am merely dampening your earlier declaration that the pandemic is over. And mutations that make the virus more virulent are bad news, not irrelevant 'hype'. I've been very clear.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

It is going to be fine Andrew. Thanks for the heads up. We are all going to be OK. Trust me...or not.

Have a great day.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

andrewf said:


> The vaccine is not 100% effective. So it does matter how infectious the virus is. The more infectious it is, the more people will have to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity to protect those for whom the vaccine does not work. This is basic epidemiology.


Many things matter going forward ....

How long till we get a large percentage of the population vaccinated
How many have already recovered
If new strains appear that are actually more infectious

And the list goes on.

One of the big questions going forward will be ... how long will the average immunity last for both vaccinated and recovered people?


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

cainvest said:


> how long will the average immunity last for both vaccinated and recovered people?


 Well, several reports mentioned that in six to seven months after the first infection people got sick again. I don’t see how a vaccine that creates limited amount of antigen (viral spikes) will confer a more robust and longer lasting protect vs natural disease.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Ukrainiandude said:


> Well, several reports mentioned that in six to seven months after the first infection people got sick again. I don’t see how a vaccine that creates limited amount of antigen (viral spikes) will confer a more robust and longer lasting protect vs natural disease.


Yes I've heard of a few reports of this via the media but I'm wondering what the actual numbers are on a large scale.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

Delaney makes a powerful case for paying every American who takes a vaccine around $1,500. Upon receiving proof that you have taken the jab you receive a cheque or direct deposit, which has multiple impacts. This helps speed immunization, it provides powerful economic stimulus just as the economy is beginning to reopen by pushing back the pandemic faster and it reduces hospital and social service expenditure, allowing them to manage fewer cases sooner.

why not pay Canadians to take the vaccine?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Ukrainiandude said:


> Delaney makes a powerful case for paying every American who takes a vaccine around $1,500. Upon receiving proof that you have taken the jab you receive a cheque or direct deposit, which has multiple impacts. This helps speed immunization, it provides powerful economic stimulus just as the economy is beginning to reopen by pushing back the pandemic faster and it reduces hospital and social service expenditure, allowing them to manage fewer cases sooner.
> 
> why not pay Canadians to take the vaccine?


Since what you say above would work but really should not be required by a government who did so much to bring this life saving vaccine to its people, I would be more in favour of holding something back if a person does not get vaccinated.

For example:
No personal exemption for 2021 unless one can confirm their vaccination. That's $2,500 in extra taxes right there, for anyone still on the fence. That would fill the vaccine clinics and when it is all done the government will have a little extra money to pay for some of this stuff, from anyone that still refused.

They won't do the above but it would be more fair.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I like the $1500 cash payment better. I think it is a great idea.

A lot of poor people.....homeless etc. have no interest in tax returns or personal exemptions and they are high risk for spreading the virus.

Also as noted, a $1500 benefit would be spend in the economy and help businesses that are suffering.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Ukrainiandude said:


> why not pay Canadians to take the vaccine?


Why pay since people are taking it and we don't even have enough vaccine to go around yet.



OptsyEagle said:


> For example:
> No personal exemption for 2021 unless one can confirm their vaccination. That's $2,500 in extra taxes right there, for anyone still on the fence. That would fill the vaccine clinics and when it is all done the government will have a little extra money to pay for some of this stuff, from anyone that still refused.
> 
> They won't do the above but it would be more fair.


Is it fair ... what about those with no income?
It kind of favors the "well off" crowd doesn't it?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

cainvest said:


> Is it fair ... what about those with no income?
> It kind of favors the "well off" crowd doesn't it?


It makes it income tested. No income people would pay nothing. Higher income people would pay $2,500 maximum.

Anyway, they won't do it, so it makes little difference. It just seems to me that to be required to pay someone something to do something , that was very expensive and designed to protect them, kind of shows the pathetic nature of humanity. Not that I did not know its true nature, but when you see it illustrated in real time, it kind of makes one a little disappointed.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OptsyEagle said:


> It makes it income tested. No income people would pay nothing. Higher income people would pay $2,500 maximum.
> 
> Anyway, they won't do it, so it makes little difference. It just seems to me that to be required to pay someone something to do something , that was very expensive and designed to protect them, kind of shows the pathetic nature of humanity. Not that I did not know its true nature, but when you see it illustrated in real time, it kind of makes one a little disappointed.


Sorry, meant to say targets the well off crowd. Removing the exemption amount would result in an adjustment to ones marginal tax rate right? Also, it provides no incentive to non-workers or those with very low income.

In any case, I don't agree we need a cash incentive to get vaccined.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

*U.K. scientists worry vaccines may not protect against coronavirus variant found in South Africa
Variant first seen in South Africa has mutations in spike protein used to infect human cells*
*


https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-19-vaccine-south-africa-variant-1.5860585


*


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Ukrainiandude said:


> https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-19-vaccine-south-africa-variant-1.5860585


Yikes, hopefully not. Too early to know.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Ukrainiandude said:


> U.K. scientists worry vaccines may not protect against coronavirus variant found in South Africa


Don't just worry about that single one, there are 343 registered mutations in the last month alone.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

cainvest said:


> Don't just worry about that single one, there are 343 registered mutations in the last month alone.


That was very responsible of those mutations to go through all the trouble of registering. It almost sounds like they are looking for citizenship. lol


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Ukrainiandude said:


> *U.K. scientists worry vaccines may not protect against coronavirus variant found in South Africa
> Variant first seen in South Africa has mutations in spike protein used to infect human cells*
> *
> 
> ...


They can do a serum test to determine the effectiveness of the vaccine against any mutation. Keep in mind that the immune system is not exactly an on or off mechanism. It is more of a glacially slow, slow, OK, faster, very fast. Various degrees of speed and remember surviving Covid-19 has always been about time. How much do you have and is it enough?

My suspicion is that the worst a new mutation is going to get is to change your vaccinated immune system from very fast to OK, for instance. OK, will keep you alive and most likely out of the hospital. At the end of the day, that is the overall objective.

Just my opinion of course.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

This virus strain is man made in the Wuhan lab and is not derived from nature. There was a lab accident and the virus escaped into the city of Wuhan.

(Interesting to note that in the early days, and continuing in an outbreak in Beijing today, the Chinese put people in protective gear on the streets to spray everything with disinfectant. That means they believed that it could be spread from surfaces. They also totally locked down and used heavy PPE to move the infected around. They knew exactly what they were dealing with very early in the pandemic and their story keeps changing. They have also not allowed independent scientists to investigate the origin of the virus.)

Another top level Chinese scientist has defected to the US and is talking to US authorities. This is the second top level Chinese scientist saying the same story.

So, we really don't know how the virus will react and change. It isn't like anything we have ever seen before.

From my limited understanding this virus is a "hybrid" developed from several dangerous viruses. It was being developed for the Chinese military.

I wonder what ties our Winnipeg lab has to the story. The Chinese people removed from the lab by the RCMP kind of disappeared from the news.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OptsyEagle said:


> That was very responsible of those mutations to go through all the trouble of registering. It almost sounds like they are looking for citizenship. lol


Least it could do living for "rent free" I think.
I wonder how many mutations get by without being detected. I guess in the end the focus is on variants that become the dominant, stronger ones.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

cainvest said:


> Least it could do living for "rent free" I think.
> I wonder how many mutations get by without being detected. I guess in the end the focus is on variants that become the dominant, stronger ones.


Absolutely. I know I have not worried about Neanderthals in a long time either. lol


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OptsyEagle said:


> Absolutely. I know I have not worried about Neanderthals in a long time either. lol


lol 

I do wonder why they didn't test on all those minks in Denmark a while back ... seemed like a good situation for animal trials since it crossed over to humans. I wonder if the mRNA vaccines work on animals as well?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

cainvest said:


> lol
> 
> I do wonder why they didn't test on all those minks in Denmark a while back ... seemed like a good situation for animal trials since it crossed over to humans. I wonder if the mRNA vaccines work on animals as well?


Can you bring me up to speed, with a reader's digest version of the mink issue. I haven't figured out if it is us infecting the minks or the minks infecting us or if it has nothing to do with either of those events. Did the bats put up a solid defense and are now exonerated from Covid responsibility by pointing a finger at the minks as the more guilty culprit? I haven't been able to figure it all out. 

I think there are some infected minks in Canada as well, but I am not totally sure since my knowledge on the mink issue is certainly not extensive.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

*Ambulance workers in Los Angeles County, California, have been told not to transport hospital patients that have extremely low chances of survival.








Covid: LA ambulances told not to transport some patients to hospital


LA County is experiencing one of the worst US Covid outbreaks, with hospital supplies running low.



www.bbc.com




*


sags said:


> From my limited understanding this virus is a "hybrid" developed from several dangerous viruses. It was being developed for the Chinese military.


I think the USA government impotence to bring the pandemic under control in the same way done by China is mainly the reason for speculation about origin of the virus.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OptsyEagle said:


> Can you bring me up to speed, with a reader's digest version of the mink issue.


It went from humans to minks and back to humans.
First couple of paragraphs here explain it -> SARS-CoV-2 mink-associated variant strain – Denmark

IIRC, the potentially more contagious "UK strain" closely resembled the "mink strain".


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

Ukrainiandude said:


> I think the USA government impotence to bring the pandemic under control in the same way done by China is mainly the reason for speculation about origin of the virus.


China moved quickly since they actually learned something from the SARs outbreak it seems. Once China identified the virus in Wuhan as early as January last year they completely locked down that city and other cities in Hubei Province - full stop. Not a joke lockdown, but a full lockdown. The government's authoritarianism worked for them in that regard and they brought it under control fairly quick. 

Now compare what China did to stop the spread and compare that to what the USA did - which was virtually nothing.

I think that's the answer and nothing more.

ltr


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I don't think it is totally speculation anymore. It definately isn't a conspiracy story.

China is complaining the last few days about the US Deputy National Security Advisor's Matthew Pottinger's public comments regarding the mounting evidence the virus was developed in the Wuhan lab.









Lab leak is the 'most credible' source of the coronavirus outbreak


Donald Trump's Deputy National Security Adviser Matthew Pottinger told politicians that even China's leaders now admit their previous claims the virus originated in a Wuhan market are false.




www.dailymail.co.uk





There is one whistleblower top level Chinese expert who defected to the US sounding the alarm already. She was largely ignored by the public.

There is now another similar Chinese expert who defected and is talking to US intelligence.

They say there will be full documentation released from the two scientists and others. They claim it will reveal exactly how the COVID19 was developed.

The story from one of the Chinese scientists is here on the BBC









Covid: Wuhan scientist would 'welcome' visit probing lab leak theory


A top Chinese scientist addresses claims the coronavirus leaked from her lab in the city of Wuhan.



www.bbc.com


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

cainvest said:


> It went from humans to minks and back to humans.
> First couple of paragraphs here explain it -> SARS-CoV-2 mink-associated variant strain – Denmark
> 
> IIRC, the potentially more contagious "UK strain" closely resembled the "mink strain".


Thanks for that. Appreciate it.

It sounds to me that these minks might pose as much, if not more of a problem to unvaccinated people, then just the other unvaccinated people. Since the people will eventually get infected and then get some immunity, but the minks issue could go on and on and on. It might really delay herd immunity, perhaps right down to the last man or women.

Perhaps it is another reason not to buy a mink coat. lol


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> I don't think it is totally speculation anymore. It definately isn't a conspiracy story.
> 
> China is complaining the last few days about the US Deputy National Security Advisor's Matthew Pottinger's public comments regarding the mounting evidence the virus was developed in the Wuhan lab.
> 
> ...


 ... say "HYPOTHETICALLY" (note: that's a BIG hypothetical) it's true that the Covid19 virus was released from the Wuhan lab (accidental or otherwise), what is the rest of the world (including China) going to do, to stop the spread? Keep pointing fingers at each other?

Btw, your last link about one of the Chinese scientist interviewed with in-depth knowledge of SARs, viruses, etc and the Wuhan lab, a Professor Shi Zhengli stated that:



> To a follow-up question about whether that would include a formal investigation with access to the WIV's experimental data and laboratory records, Prof Shi said: *"I would personally welcome any form of visit based on an open, transparent, trusting, reliable and reasonable dialogue.* But the specific plan is not decided by me."


 ... unfortunately, her hands are tied.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Discovering the source of viruses is crucially important for scientists to model the predictive behavior of a virus.

In this particular case, regarding the spread of the virus, it may be worthwhile to know if the virus is highly contagious when left on roads, sidewalks, counters etc.

I read the COVID19 virus was found inside water drains. Can it contaminate a water source by being in the piping ? We should know that information.

What was this virus designed to do, how to do it, what was the hybrid model and will it mutate faster than other viruses.

I think there is lots of information the scientists would like to know.

Much of the dialogue is that this virus will do this or that........because that is what other "natural" viruses do, but what if this isn't a natural virus ?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

OptsyEagle said:


> It sounds to me that these minks might pose as much, if not more of a problem to unvaccinated people, then just the other unvaccinated people.


At least the minks are contained but it shows the human to animal and back to human transfer can occur.

A very scary narrative would be if a new strain became highly infectious to dogs. Dogs use their noses at ground level (where the virus mainly falls) and interact with humans on a large scale (licking hands and faces).


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> Discovering the source of viruses is crucially important for scientists to model the predictive behavior of a virus.


 ... if you read the link, they scientists already know what is the source of the virus, bats. However, they are still investigating the "original" source ... how did it get transmitted to the bats? And then jumped to humans.



> In this particular case, regarding the spread of the virus, it may be worthwhile to know if the virus is highly contagious when left on roads, sidewalks, counters etc.
> 
> I read the COVID19 virus was found inside water drains. Can it contaminate a water source by being in the piping ? We should know that information.


 ... at this point, we already know how the virus is transmitted - via aerosols and when it is most contagious - when someone coughs/sneezes/sing/yell/talking moistly (a line from our PM where I call it as blabberous) and someone else then inhales or ingest those germs. That's why we are wearing masks (mouth & nose coverings) and told to wash our hands vigorously. Plus disinfect our deliveries ... all within the known "life" of the virus, tested in the lab - 6 hours on metals? 24 hours on cardboxes? (Can't recall exact lifetime of the virus on what materials).

And yes, Covid19 is found inside our water drains - as with sewage that scientists(? or is it sanitary engineers?) study from but if we need to further study as to how "deadly" that contamination is on our drinking water, I think more than 90% of the world's population are infected, if not dead by now. And no more Chinese take-outs for you and Domino pizzas for me.



> What was this virus designed to do, how to do it, what was the hybrid model and will it mutate faster than other viruses.


 ... only if you believe it was "man-made", and say hypothetically it was, I say we have created our own monster.



> I think there is lots of information the scientists would like to know.
> 
> Much of the dialogue is that this virus will do this or that........because that is what other "natural" viruses do, but what if this isn't a natural virus ?


 ... you're speculating it isn't a natural virus ... maybe it was planted here on from aliens, for all I know. Then what? Or maybe the virus was here, a gazillions of years of ago before man came about? Then what? Still doesn't solve the problems or stop or even slow down the pandemic. This does not mean I don't agree with you that we should study the behaviour of the virus of which I'm sure is being done constantly, perhaps not fast enough ... otherwise, how would have the vaccines been produced?


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> ... Plus disinfect our deliveries ... all within the known "life" of the virus, tested in the lab - 6 hours on metals? 24 hours on cardboxes? (Can't recall exact lifetime of the virus on what materials).











Surface Cleaning and COVID-19: What You Should Know


It’s unlikely, but there have been a few cases of COVID-19 potentially spreading through surfaces. Find out how and when you should clean your home to keep you and your family safe.




www.webmd.com








Beaver101 said:


> ... And yes, Covid19 is found inside our water drains - as with sewage that scientists(? or is it sanitary engineers?) study from but if we need to further study as to how "deadly" that contamination is on our drinking water, I think more than 90% of the world's population are infected, if not dead by now.


From what I've read, the water drains are testing negative. It's when it is mixed with someone spitting or popping that it's been detected.

Chlorine kills covid-19 on surfaces and in pools so likely the water treatment before it's piped to one's house has taken care of it.


Cheers


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> So the couple lied to the health authorities. I doubt they can be trusted to self quarantine. They should be wearing gps ankle bracelets.


 ... an update. 

Durham couple who contracted UK COVID variant charged after allegedly misleading contact tracers

The lying couple, a medical doctor (unbelieveable!) & paramedic hubby charged. I think her license should be revoked too.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... an update.
> 
> Durham couple who contracted UK COVID variant charged after allegedly misleading contact tracers
> 
> The lying couple, a medical doctor (unbelieveable!) & paramedic hubby charged. I think her license should be revoked too.


This is why the Federal Government should be
1. Stopping all non-essential travel.
2. Enforcing a mandatory 2 week quarantine.

They have the authority, they should have done this months ago. I wonder how many lives their inaction has cost.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> This is why the Federal Government should be
> 1. Stopping all non-essential travel.
> 2. Enforcing a mandatory 2 week quarantine.
> 
> They have the authority, they should have done this months ago. I wonder how many lives their inaction has cost.


 ... what? And allow 1. rich travellers (especially for those in the upper echelons of the government who just need to get away from Canada), 2. the airlines, 3. the insurance companies out to make a buck or two, and 4. colluding shareholders ... "all" screaming in the Fed's ears? Can't have that. 

You should by now that the $$$-making-mentality (long in a pandemic) trumps lives.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Duh ... previously it was stated that the new variant was not necessarily deadlier, only more transmissible. Now it's deadlier ... and more transmissible. Boy oh boy.

Britain says new COVID-19 variant may carry higher risk of death



> ... _CHIEF SCIENTIFIC ADVISER, PATRICK VALLANCE
> 
> “When we look at data from hospitals – so patients who are in hospital with the virus – the outcomes for those with the original virus or the new variant look the same. So there’s no real evidence of an increase in mortality for those in hospitals.
> 
> ...


 ... maybe the above is just "hypee, hypee" news.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

If a variant is more contagious, it is reasonable to assume that one cannot only obtain it more easily, but if it can be obtained more easily, then one should also be obtaining a higher dose of it. If one obtains a higher dose of a virus, that will result in it being more severe to the infected. If an infection results in more severity to the infected, it will correspondingly become less contagious because of that.

Give that one some thought and let me know where we end up with it.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Scientists are also questioning if the current vaccines will be effective against the new variant viruses.









COVID research: a year of scientific milestones


Nature waded through the literature on the coronavirus — and summarized key papers as they appeared.




www.nature.com


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... what? And allow 1. rich travellers (especially for those in the upper echelons of the government who just need to get away from Canada), 2. the airlines, 3. the insurance companies out to make a buck or two, and 4. colluding shareholders ... "all" screaming in the Fed's ears? Can't have that.
> 
> You should by now that the $$$-making-mentality (long in a pandemic) trumps lives.


Well yeah.
Trudeau has to realize that his job as PM is to run the country for the benefit of the citizens, not his rich friends.

People before money.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> If a variant is more contagious, it is reasonable to assume that one cannot only obtain it more easily, but if it can be obtained more easily, then one should also be obtaining a higher dose of it.


 ... sounds convoluted here.



> If one obtains a higher dose of a virus, that will result in it being more severe to the infected.


 ... common sense, n'est ce pas? 



> If an infection results in more severity to the infected, it will correspondingly become less contagious because of that.
> 
> Give that one some thought and let me know where we end up with it.


 ... are you okay?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Unfortuneately beav. You not understanding my posts does not mean they need clarification.

If you have a question let me know. English is preferred.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Fortuneately, no further questions or clarifications needed. EOM.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I'm concerned about the UK situation. The UK numbers are getting worse even with their very strict lockdown.

It makes me wonder if this is another case of watching international stories and kind of shrugging it off because it hasn't started happening here yet.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

james4beach said:


> I'm concerned about the UK situation. The UK numbers are getting worse even with their very strict lockdown.
> 
> It makes me wonder if this is another case of watching international stories and kind of shrugging it off because it hasn't started happening here yet.


Where did you see that? On worldometer it looks like their cases/day has been dropping since the peak on Jan 8.








United Kingdom COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer


United Kingdom Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.




www.worldometers.info





Deaths is still rising but that's a lagging indicator.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

They're just like most other Christian nations.
They are having the same Christmas spike that's now ending.

But I agree, we should definitely close our borders until we know what's going on with these variants.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

james4beach said:


> I'm concerned about the UK situation. The UK numbers are getting worse even with their very strict lockdown.
> 
> It makes me wonder if this is another case of watching international stories and kind of shrugging it off because it hasn't started happening here yet.


You can imagine then if you are wondering what is causing the UKs current situation that they are looking for answers as well and perhaps why we have all this focus on a new culprit, like the new variants in the news today.

My post #196 that Beaver so completely dissected, without adding any reason as to what was wrong with it, was posted to help readers understand that with virology, even if a virus is more contagious and consequently more violent to the infected, it can still end in there being less people admitted to hospital and/or dying. The reason being is that as people get sicker quicker they take themselves out of the community (stay at home sick) and therefore they will infect less people with this more contagious and more violent virus. That is what I am saying.

It does not guarantee it, and the opposite can happen, but due to all the moving parts with respect to viral infections, the positive scenario has as much chance of developing as the scarier one.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

Repost


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Beaver101 said:


> Duh ... previously it was stated that the new variant was not necessarily deadlier, only more transmissible. Now it's deadlier ... and more transmissible. Boy oh boy.
> 
> Britain says new COVID-19 variant may carry higher risk of death
> 
> ... maybe the above is just "hypee, hypee" news.


Being more transmissible is far more problematic than being marginally deadlier. Transmissibility is exponential.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

OptsyEagle said:


> The reason being is that as people get sicker quicker they take themselves out of the community (stay at home sick) and therefore they will infect less people with this more contagious and more violent virus. That is what I am saying.
> 
> It does not guarantee it, and the opposite can happen, but due to all the moving parts with respect to viral infections, the positive scenario has as much chance of developing as the scarier one.


As you say, there are lots of moving parts. These things are tough to model and there are many pieces to them so I wouldn't want to just eyeball it and say what situation causes what to happen.

One of my friends is a research prof at the University of Manitoba and develops computer models for disease spread, including through hospitals and whole cities. He works with the Public Health Agency of Canada.

Sadly, there was no money available for his research work. I bring this up because it's a good example of why the government should be funding pure research in all kinds of areas, even when the need isn't obvious. Nearly all pure R&D funding comes from government. If the government had helped fund his research, we might have had superior computer models ready to go at the start of the outbreak.

I wish our society and politicians were smart enough to have people work on these problems, and do the research, *before* disasters happen. Sigh.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

james4beach said:


> As you say, there are lots of moving parts. These things are tough to model and there are many pieces to them so I wouldn't want to just eyeball it and say what situation causes what to happen.
> 
> One of my friends is a research prof at the University of Manitoba and develops computer models for disease spread, including through hospitals and whole cities. He works with the Public Health Agency of Canada.
> 
> ...


We already know that by taking simple precautions like social distancing and wearing masks that the transmission rates change dramatically. We then have the natural effects where higher viral transmission characteristics can also make a person sicker taking them out of the infecting pool quicker, changing those very same transmission rates correspondingly, as well. I have often wondered why people even attempt to model this stuff. Perhaps that had something to do with the funding reductions in that specific area as well. I cannot say.

What I can say is that with all this in mind, plus the fact that there is not too much more we can do to fight this pandemic, for any variant, it seems to me the only question we need answered concerning any new mutation, is whether the vaccine recognizes it or not. The rest is just filling news slots in my opinion.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Hopefully this pandemic will be a wake up call for governments to stockpile PPE and spend money on research and development of treatments and vaccines.

We need to be prepared for future unknown attacks. Scientists fear that climate change causing the tundra to thaw could release ancient pathogens for which we have no immunity.

Maybe it will never happen, but maybe it will. We don't know and must be prepared for any eventuality.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Hopefully this pandemic will be a wake up call for governments to stockpile PPE and spend money on research and development of treatments and vaccines.
> 
> We need to be prepared for future unknown attacks. Scientists fear that climate change causing the tundra to thaw could release ancient pathogens for which we have no immunity.
> 
> Maybe it will never happen, but maybe it will. We don't know and must be prepared for any eventuality.


We did that after SARS, then they ignored it, because planning for emergencies isn't politically interesting.
They'd much rather talk about Trudeaus socks than the tons of PPE they scrapped from the federal stockpiles. (not a jab at Trudeau).

Think about it, we had stockpiles of pandemic materials, from our experience with SARS. Some moron decided to throw out the expired materials and not replace them.
No public outcry, don't even remember it hitting the news (I'm almost as guilty as the next guy).


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Most of these complaints are "Monday morning quarterback" analysis. At the end of the day, we are all human and as such, none of us can see the future clearly. This is the worst pandemic I have lived through. I have heard and researched others. I knew one like this, or worse, could and would come, but I did not know when. A pandemic like this did not happen for the 56 years I have been alive so eventually you assume it will be someone else's problem, in the future.

As Matt said. We cannot blame others without adding ourselves to that same list. The best thing to do, when we see these mistakes is to learn from them and hopefully not repeat them. That probably won't happen either but that is also due to human frailties, so again, I usually move on from these blame games, when I can.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Wearing N95 masks would save lives, but here we are a year later and few people have access to them.

They cost $5 each......but what does ICU treatment cost ? 

People buy a box of cheap masks made in China for a few bucks and pretend they are magically protected.

If you don't hold the decision makers responsible........nothing will change.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^


> ... _If you don't hold the decision makers responsible........nothing will change_.


 ... +110%. 

I.e. we (the taxpayers, the customers) are *paying *you=decison-maker to do YOUR f-job right in the first place.

Edit:clarify the "you"


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Wearing N95 masks would save lives, but here we are a year later and few people have access to them.
> 
> They cost $5 each......but what does ICU treatment cost ?
> 
> ...


So I assume you're going to vote Trudeau out of office for shipping our stockpile of PPE to china back in February?


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

Took a look at the mutations this morning, appears it is slowing down a little. Could be a number of reasons for this, some good, some bad.

Also interesting to see which genomes are dominant in each country. Canada shows mainly older strains while the USA is hit the hardest by their own strain and many parts of Europe are showing the new mutations are in control.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

sags said:


> Wearing N95 masks would save lives, but here we are a year later and few people have access to them.


N95 would be great, but think of even the cheaper basic surgical masks.

These were impossible to find in Canada! We were trying to fabricate our own masks from t-shirts and shop towels, for god sake.


----------



## Ukrainiandude (Aug 25, 2020)

Blood samples exposed to the new variants appeared to have sufficient antibodies to achieve this neutralising effect, although it was not as strong for the South Africa variant as for the UK one. 
Moderna says this could mean that protection against the South Africa variant might disappear more quickly. 
Prof Lawrence Young, a virus expert at Warwick Medical School in the UK, said this would be concerning.
Moderna is currently testing whether giving a third booster shot might be beneficial.
bbc news


----------



## newfoundlander61 (Feb 6, 2011)

It has now been discovered here in Kingston, Ontario. "A lab test has confirmed a case of B.1.1.7, a “new, more easily transmissible variant of COVID-19” that was first seen in the United Kingdom"


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

There have been a number of previous cases already identified.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> N95 would be great, but think of even the cheaper basic surgical masks.
> 
> These were impossible to find in Canada! We were trying to fabricate our own masks from t-shirts and shop towels, for god sake.


You still can't get N95 masks reliably.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Couple who chartered plane to get COVID vaccine in Yukon misled about jobs, locals say. Now they face charges — and fury

This could go to the Covid thread but don't want it to supercede my other post there so it's here instead. 

2 Covidiots with one being a CEO... privileged much?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

This is interesting. They only used 2000 people and I doubt they had time to look over a long enough time but South Africa has now suspended the use of the Astrazeneca vaccine for healthcare workers until they get more info.









South Africa suspends rollout of AstraZeneca vaccine after study


South Africa has suspended plans to inoculate its front-line health care workers with the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine after a small clinical trial suggested that it isn't effective in preventing mild to moderate illness from the variant dominant in the country.




www.cp24.com





I have mentioned a few times, that from what I have seen, our young seem to already have immune systems almost as effective as the vaccines. In this small study the average age was 31. That might also be the problem in why the vaccine did not seem to look more effective then not using the vaccine.

Anyway, this is not going to help the sales of the AstraZeneca Vaccine.

From the data we already have, Healthcare workers and the elderly really should be given a 2 dose vaccine. I have no idea of the logistics of getting the stuff but in my opinion, the various results already show the necessary benefits of this approach and that does not take into account any results on variants, if they make much difference or not.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

That's somewhat concerning. While young people are far less likely to die, there are quite a number of young people who develop lasting disability (brain fog, loss of smell, loss of lung function) that it is unclear they will recover from.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

No one can know what it means but if you consider this data and compare it to Pfizer's for example. Pfizer tested around 38,500 people and found only 94 with Covid, over 6 months. From that they formed their conclusions. If it was identical to the regular strain that Pfizer was measured against, this study would have found 2,000/38,500 x 94 = 5 positives IF they waited over 6 months to get them, which they could not have.

Plus, how many of the 94 above had an average age of 31. So this must either be a study that resulted in a number that probably is not showing statistical high levels of confidence in its conclusion OR this virus is very contagious and they did find a lot more then 5 people to come up with their conclusions. I doubt it is that different, since it would have to be magnitudes higher in contagiousness to make that happen, in such a short time, so I am going to weigh on the fact that this study is probably is not telling us much.

This darn pandemic seems to constantly give us data points in the multitudes, where we can sometimes get many data points to lead us in a direction of conclusion EXCEPT for one or two that then tells us that a particular theory cannot possibly be the case. It is tough to keep up with it all.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> This is interesting. They only used 2000 people and I doubt they had time to look over a long enough time but South Africa has now suspended the use of the Astrazeneca vaccine for healthcare workers until they get more info.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think it's key that the article talks about a specific strain.

With over 4000 variants, I'm glad that Canada is finally (maybe) shutting the borders to non essential travel, until they get a handle on this.

I agree, we shouldn't half a** this, lets get the vaccines, get it done.

Also I don't care if the vaccines don't stop mild/moderate cases, I care if it helps keep people from being hospitalized and suffering serious harm.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

MrMatt said:


> With over 4000 variants, I'm glad that Canada is finally (maybe) shutting the borders to non essential travel, until they get a handle on this.


I think what we're doing is too weak. Testing negative on arrival is absolutely not a guarantee you are not bringing in an infection.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

andrewf said:


> That's somewhat concerning. While young people are far less likely to die, there are quite a number of young people who develop lasting disability (brain fog, loss of smell, loss of lung function) that it is unclear they will recover from.


The media has done a poor job getting out the message of the dangers of COVID.

I think that people in their 20s, 30s, 40s tend to think this is no big deal and have no fear of catching it. That's why the younger adults still go to parties. The message they have heard from the media is that this is an old person's disease.

Many young (20-40s) people wear masks etc and they think they are only doing it for the benefit of elderly people around them. I don't think the message has sunk in that they should be doing these things to *protect themselves* from the virus.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

North Americans are incapable of knocking this thing down. We’re just rolling the dice until the vaccines arrive. I’ve had family go on vacation outside the country and visit friends during Ontario’s stay at home order.....both groups from the province‘s worst hot spot.

was chatting with some friends yesterday and sharing photos of our stay at home SuperBowl ”party”. Funny, a few friends were suspiciously absent from the group chat......wonder what they were up to and where?

Ontario is starting to loosen things up and every doctor interviewed on the news says it’s too early. Schools just re-opened in much of the province and variants are popping up everywhere. There’s a lot going on.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

andrewf said:


> I think what we're doing is too weak. Testing negative on arrival is absolutely not a guarantee you are not bringing in an infection.


Yeah, I think it should be a test to get on the plane, and a 14 day quarantine to move on.

As it is when Ontario started screening they were finding several people testing positive, as they stepped off the plane.
I say quarantine them all, the pleasure travellers have had more than enough time to come hyome.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

There is a lot of testing theatre going on. I refer to my grandfather's assisted living home (attached to LTC). My uncle/his son got a negative COVID test and permission to enter the building to help him set up an internet connection so he can facetime with family. He's allowed to go back as often as needed for the next 14 days. A negative COVID test does not confer any immunity, and you could literally become contagious the next day. So, a negative COVID test in this case means rather little. Maybe a slight reduction in risk vs not testing at all?

I feel like testing people on arrival at an airport is similar. If they were exposed during the travel from their point of departure (the riskiest part of being out of the country, one would think) they are virtually guaranteed not to test positive by the time they arrive, whether they later develop an infection or not. You will only be catching people who were infected at night clubs, family events or restaurants several days before they return and had time for infection incubation to be detectable on the test. The whole thing is kabuki if you're not keeping them in a hotel for 14 days.

If we were to apply this logic to some of the superspreader events that seeded infection in Canada early on, like the Jewish wedding in NYC with family in Montreal. I highly doubt those people returning from the wedding would test positive at the airport in Montreal after the wedding. They might even have been released from the hotel following their negative test with active infection to seed their community, with the added false sense of comfort from a negative test!


----------



## robfordlives (Sep 18, 2014)

Almost as if a virus is behaving like a virus as cases plummeting around the world despite different lockdown measures and vaccine rollouts. All coronaviruses subside at end of January historically. Does the media focus on that? Of course not, it's the new strains you only hear about....although somehow in South Africa cases are also plummeting despite a middling lockdown (equivalent to California measures). As a society it is time to move forward and allow these small businesses to survive


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

robfordlives said:


> Almost as if a virus is behaving like a virus as cases plummeting around the world despite different lockdown measures and vaccine rollouts. All coronaviruses subside at end of January historically. Does the media focus on that? Of course not, it's the new strains you only hear about....although somehow in South Africa cases are also plummeting despite a middling lockdown (equivalent to California measures). As a society it is time to move forward and allow these small businesses to survive


Nevermind that we have had other waves that peak at different times in different places?


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

james4beach said:


> The media has done a poor job getting out the message of the dangers of COVID.
> 
> I think that people in their 20s, 30s, 40s tend to think this is no big deal and have no fear of catching it. That's why the younger adults still go to parties. The message they have heard from the media is that this is an old person's disease.


They just don't believe official media... as there is a lot of hysteria in media.
Last week I checked official numbers from Peel, I live in Mississauga (city with almost 1M people) and for whole year from Covid 19 died just 8 people of my age bracket (50-59) (more people die in car accidents in couple of weeks), 4 people died in bracket (40-49) and 1 person in bracket 20-29...


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ So are you saying you're Covid-immune or ever so lucky that you're not one of the stats because you'll be living, working, and staying forever in Mississauga, Ontario, CANADA?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

andrewf said:


> Nevermind that we have had other waves that peak at different times in different places?


 ... I think we should pray that lifting the lock-downs don't collapse the health systems so that we can prove robfordlives' suggestion is correct.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Ontario's Doug Ford opens up some bars so NHL players can go boozing.....clueless or what ?

The bars will have employees who aren't in the NHL bubble and live in the community. What a dumb decision.


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

sags said:


> Ontario's Doug Ford opens up some bars so NHL players can go boozing.....clueless or what ?
> 
> The bars will have employees who aren't living in the NHL bubble and live in the community. What a dumb decision.


_Ontario's Doug Ford opens up some bars_ so small businessmen don't go bankrupt.

ltr


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> Ontario's Doug Ford opens up some bars so NHL players can go boozing.....clueless or what ?
> 
> The bars will have employees who aren't in the NHL bubble and live in the community. What a dumb decision.


 ... what are so special about these "bars" ?... next thing you know the BBQ guy Adamson is going to be screaming or launching a lawsuit.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> _Ontario's Doug Ford opens up some bars_ so small businessmen don't go bankrupt.
> 
> ltr


 .. you mean so a "select-few small businessmen" don't go bankrupt? Besides, what's so special about bars or these "some bars"? It's not like Ontarians can't get their booze from their local liquor store. 

Heck, you can even buy beers at the supermarkets instead of restaurant take-outs.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

We have to let businesses open up as soon as possible. That date will vary depending on each persons personal views but knowing they must open up sometime, I have to assume the time is when the active infections, in their area, are lowered to some specific level. If they can come up with some unique situation, where a bar can open up and be a little less dangerous, we should have no problem with that. Keep in mind that perhaps with the exception of healthcare workers, the NHL players are probably one of the most tested people in our society. The workers will wear a mask. I have less of a problem with this then opening up a bar up for regular business.

I find that sometimes we lose touch with what I call "OptsyEagle's Covid rule #1". It is stated like this:

No matter how stupid a person is. No matter how many precautions and rules they break. No matter what their opinion is on freedom versus safety, and no matter how many people join them in their opinions and actions. It is absolutely impossible to get infected if no one is around them with the infectious Covid-19 virus.

Certainly that rule does not protect the NHL players here 100%, or the workers, but it does illustrate some of the logic that needs to be factored in when a business can open up with an acceptable level of risk.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ So are you saying you're Covid-immune or ever so lucky that you're not one of the stats because you'll be living, working, and staying forever in Mississauga, Ontario, CANADA?


I'm saying that lockdowns are exaggerated . There a lot of death from different deceases 




__





Leading causes of death, total population, by age group


Rank, number of deaths, percentage of deaths, and age-specific mortality rates for the leading causes of death, by age group and sex, 2000 to most recent year.




www150.statcan.gc.ca




After Covid done, Health official warn about "tsunami of cancer" as cancer tests dropped 80-90% and there will be similar issues with other diseases, include a mental ones.
Suicide rates also sharply increase.
Economy should be opened ASAP...


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

gibor365 said:


> I'm saying that lockdowns are exaggerated . There a lot of death from different deceases
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Gibor. You are missing one particular glaring fact. Covid-19 had an infection rate of 2.8 BEFORE we responded to it with precautions and lockdowns. It was our response that got the infection rate down to fluctuating between 0.95 and 1.05. Not only that but in Ontario's graph, scrolling down to new cases and deaths:






Datasets - Ontario Data Catalogue







covid-19.ontario.ca





You can clearly see that deaths per new cases dropped dramatically as we responded to the virus by wearing masks and distancing to reduce the dose of infection to more manageable levels. I haven't done all the math to calculate this exponential difference in infection rates and deaths but suffice to say that after an entire year of response, *the number of lives saved by our global precautions would currently be in the millions *compared to how many would have died if we simply did not lockdown or protect ourselves in any way.

So your comparison of traffic accidents to precautioned/lockdown Covid-19 deaths is an apples to oranges comparison.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> We have to let businesses open up as soon as possible. That date will vary depending on each persons personal views but knowing they must open up sometime, I have to assume the time is when the active infections, in their area, are lowered to some specific level. If they can come up with some unique situation, where a bar can open up and be a little less dangerous, we should have no problem with that. Keep in mind that perhaps with the exception of healthcare workers, the NHL players are probably one of the most tested people in our society. The workers will wear a mask. I have less of a problem with this then opening up a bar up for regular business.
> 
> I find that sometimes we lose touch with what I call "OptsyEagle's Covid rule #1". It is stated like this:
> 
> ...


 ... so what do you consider as an "acceptable" level of risk, OE's Covid rule #1 not withstanding?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

gibor365 said:


> I'm saying that lockdowns are exaggerated . There a lot of death from different deceases
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 ... how are lockdowns "exaggerated"? A lockdown is a lockdown provided one follows the rule(s) of the lockdown. Unless you're saying lockdowns are not necessary given the soaring infection rate and deaths due to Covid?



> After Covid done, Health official warn about "tsunami of cancer" as cancer tests dropped 80-90% and there will be similar issues with other diseases, include a mental ones.
> Suicide rates also sharply increase.
> Economy should be opened ASAP...


 ... of course, there'll be a tsunami of cancer, suicides, plus a host of other diseases because our hospitals has been swamped with Covid patients. Hell, just going to your own dentist now requires multiple screening processes.

I gather you did read the news that elective surgeries had been postponed during first wave last year, and now we're in the second wave, the backlog is even greater.

Based on your logic and the urgency to open the "economy" (are you actually that busy at work?), I think we should give Covid patients last priority. Better yet, ship them out to a Covid Island (like Leprosy) and let them die there, correct? Especially now we have multiple, more infectious variants ... also exaggerated by nonCovid believers.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> ... so what do you consider as an "acceptable" level of risk, OE's Covid rule #1 not withstanding?


OE Rule #1 is the starting point of the answer. That is why I posted it. From the base of current active infections, along with the infection rate, it is not difficult to calculate how many infections will lead to how many more infections which will lead to a certain number of hospitalizations, etc. That is how science can address this question. They then determine how many people they can have in the hospital and that is what determines when businesses can resume and what other measures can be relaxed.

Obviously in Toronto, more precaution is required. In a small town in Northern Saskatchewan very few businesses should be closed right now. To not open them is another case of someone forgetting OE Rule #1.

Mask wearing indoors should be continued across the country, simply because it is easy to do and it will keep you above ground in the few cases where you get to be the first, in some small town, to be infected. A mask will save your life.

Can you see how that works?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ No, can't see how the discussion jumped from Toronto to Northern Saskatchewan for one. 

Besides, you still haven't answered the question based on your expertise. And please don't make me jump hoops and loops trying to figure out from your OE Rule #1 as a starting point to the (your ) answer.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The rural Republican States used the same logic that they were sparsely populated and far away from COVID hotspots, so they could stay open.

It didn't stop the virus. The infection rates went up and their small regional hospitals were soon overloaded.

All it takes is one person to start an outbreak no matter how distant it is.

Opening schools and businesses now when the new highly contagious variants are circulating in the community is beyond stupid.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

As to the NHL players....they are staying in 5 star hotels that have dining rooms. They can order room service any time or eat together in a banquet room.

While they enjoy the restaurants and bars, first line healthcare workers are living away from home and eating dinner out of a brown bag........to protect their own families.

Ontarians are very angry about this dumb decision and I wouldn't be surprised if Ford changes the rule pretty quickly.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> ... how are lockdowns "exaggerated"? A lockdown is a lockdown provided one follows the rule(s) of the lockdown. Unless you're saying lockdowns are not necessary given the soaring infection rate and deaths due to Covid?
> 
> ... of course, there'll be a tsunami of cancer, suicides, plus a host of other diseases because our hospitals has been swamped with Covid patients. Hell, just going to your own dentist now requires multiple screening processes.
> 
> ...


" tsunami of cancer" will be not because " our hospitals has been swamped with Covid patients", but because people don't get those tests because of "lockdown" hysteria! And how suicides related to the fact that our medical system is piece of ****?!
Everyone knew that there will be 2nd wave, but our OHIPs did nothing to increase ICUs number ... sure , for the better to shut down Canadian already very weak economy..
Covid patients should've have same priority like al other patients..
P.S. Also there are a lot of lies about overwhelmed ICUs.... my nephew (who almost died as her family doctor told her parents not to go to hospital, even though she had extremely difficult appendicitis) was for 3 weeks in ICU in Sick Kids hospital together with her mom who told me that ICUs were completely empty (this was in April last year)


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

gibor365 said:


> I'm saying that lockdowns are exaggerated . There a lot of death from different deceases
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You let COVID run rampant, and our hospital system that normally runs at 80-90% utilization quickly goes over 100%. Then you have to start rationing care. That means triaging older people and letting them die. So a successful lockdown looks a lot like what we have experienced in Ontario. If we didn't impose any limitations at a government level, I don't doubt that deaths would be close to 10x by now, maybe worse once we have to start withholding care and fatality rate spikes. Maybe you should remind yourself how dire things were in Wuhan and Northern Italy. If you don't do things to limit spread, you're just a matter of a few doublings away from that situation.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

andrewf said:


> If we didn't impose any limitations at a government level, I don't doubt that deaths would be close to 10x by now, maybe worse once we have to start withholding care and fatality rate spikes. Maybe you should remind yourself how dire things were in Wuhan and Northern Italy. If you don't do things to limit spread, you're just a matter of a few doublings away from that situation.


10X, 100X - this is all speculations...
Maybe 1st lockdown back in March was justified, 2nd - don't think so, especially when Toronto and Peel were in lockdown and Halton and York weren't ... I live on the border with Oakville and during Peel lockdown visited Oakville Mall in the midweek in the afternoon ... and I can assure you, I;ve never seen so packed Mall in Canada in my life (probably all Peel/Toronto people went there)... Still , Halton never had more than 100 cases per day.
_That means triaging older people and letting them die. - _here you have a dilemma, to let some terminally ill 85+ to die from Covid (who gonna die in any case in matter of days, weeks or months) or a bit later to let many young people to die from non-Covid diseases


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

gibor365 said:


> 10X, 100X - this is all speculations...
> Maybe 1st lockdown back in March was justified, 2nd - don't think so, especially when Toronto and Peel were in lockdown and Halton and York weren't ... I live on the border with Oakville and during Peel lockdown visited Oakville Mall in the midweek in the afternoon ... and I can assure you, I;ve never seen so packed Mall in Canada in my life (probably all Peel/Toronto people went there)... Still , Halton never had more than 100 cases per day.
> _That means triaging older people and letting them die. - _here you have a dilemma, to let some terminally ill 85+ to die from Covid (who gonna die in any case in matter of days, weeks or months) or a bit later to let many young people to die from non-Covid diseases


Gibor. This was not speculation. It was educated models. Do you really think the virus was just going to fizzle out on its own. If no precautions were taken it would have ravaged our society. Even if you give no consideration to the lives of older people, which obviously you don't, the death rate in your age group was reduced from around 3% that China saw before any precautions were taken to about 0.5% now. That was a 6 fold decrease in death rates for people of your age and we are not done yet. That 0.5% is on a very low infection rate solely due to precautions. 3% on a number that would definitely be 10 x higher for sure, if infections were allowed to grow exponentially, you would find your comfort zone for your age group would have seen significant carnage. This was a nasty virus.

You are simply looking at a situation where precaution reduced the damage and then are saying since their has been little damage, why did we inconvenience people your age with precautions?


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^
_



That means triaging older people and letting them die. -

Click to expand...

_


> here you have a dilemma, to let some terminally ill 85+ to die from Covid *(who gonna die in any case in matter of days, weeks or months) *or a bit later to let many young people to die from non-Covid diseases


 ... seems like someone wants to play God here.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

The epidemiologist's dilemma is that a successful lockdown/containment strategy looks like an overreaction in hindsight.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

_ Do you really think the virus was just going to fizzle out on its own - _It's possible, no one can predict virus behavior... do you remember how SARS suddenly disappear?! no one could explain how it happened..
US an Russia don't have lockdown and average numbers are going down...
Israel has similar to Canada lockdown (even more strict) , they fully vaccinated more than quarter of population (practically everyone who wanted already got at least 1 vaccine) and average numbers aren't going down at all


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

gibor365 said:


> _ Do you really think the virus was just going to fizzle out on its own - _It's possible, no one can predict virus behavior... do you remember how SARS suddenly disappear?! no one could explain how it happened..
> US an Russia don't have lockdown and average numbers are going down...
> Israel has similar to Canada lockdown (even more strict) , they fully vaccinated more than quarter of population (practically everyone who wanted already got at least 1 vaccine) and average numbers aren't going down at all


I could explain it to you in 5 minutes. We contained it. We quarantined people quickly. Kept others away from infected individuals. The virus died out. A major benefit the 1st SARS virus had was that it was much more deadlier. That may not sound like a benefit but due to this feature the infected got sick very quickly. That forced them to go home and out of the general public quickly as well, which reduced the infection rate to a much more manageable level. Unfortunealy Covid-19 does not have the same attributes and its infection rates can be very nasty without counter measures by us. That is how a deadlier virus kills less people and a more benign one like C-19 kills so many more. Virology 101. Don't blame yourself if you are confused.

As for Russia and the US. Down from what? The US has lost 469,000 people. More then WWll. Just because we get a time where humans don't necessarily get together (no Christmas) for some period of time and numbers go down does not prove that precautions don't work or are not necessary.

Gibor. I know you want to be right but you won't be on this one. If our response was all wrong, I think smarter people then you and I could have got that scientific fact through to the people, that did not want to implement precautions in the first place. The problem was that the nastiness of the virus always overcame anyone's wishful ideas. We tried your suggestion, in quite a few jurisdictions, at many times throughout this pandemic and in every case the virus showed us how wrong that plan was and the longer it continued the exponentially damaging it was going to get.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

gibor365 said:


> US an Russia don't have lockdown and average numbers are going down...


Really ... the US doesn't have lockdowns and/or restrictions?


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

cainvest said:


> Really ... the US doesn't have lockdowns and/or restrictions?


Some states do, but majority don't


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Nobody talking about it , but all those lockdowns destroyed many Caribbean countries like Cuba, DR and many more.... Tourism was the major source of income ..The people are literally starving over there... and we should've cancel our travel plans because Trudeau decided to charge every return tourist 2K and put them into "interim camps" for 3 days... Maybe last March-April those measures were justified, but now ....?!
P.S. IMHO, hotel occupation by Russians now are close to 100% ... again Russia saving Cuba


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Gibor, if you keep coming up with another irrational reason to stop using precautions and we keep coming back to prove how irrational and wrong they are, this merry go round is going to get a little annoying to the readers, if it hasn't already.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

gibor365 said:


> Some states do, but majority don't


Looking at this list it appears the majority do have restrictions Coronavirus closures: Map of where US states are tightening restrictions

Your thoughts on that?


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

gibor365 said:


> Nobody talking about it , but all those lockdowns destroyed many Caribbean countries like Cuba, DR and many more.... Tourism was the major source of income ..The people are literally starving over there... and we should've cancel our travel plans because Trudeau decided to charge every return tourist 2K and put them into "interim camps" for 3 days... Maybe last March-April those measures were justified, but now ....?!
> P.S. IMHO, hotel occupation by Russians now are close to 100% ... again Russia saving Cuba


wheres the data for how long it takes to get a test back. I thought Most tests were returned within 24 hours, especially in Ontario with lower testing numbers lately.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

cainvest said:


> Looking at this list it appears the majority do have restrictions Coronavirus closures: Map of where US states are tightening restrictions
> 
> Your thoughts on that?


Ya, and even though they say cases are on the way down....look at Florida. Their population is about 50% larger than Ontario. Yet, they have daily cases SEVEN times higher and SIX times the number of daily deaths (today’s data).


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> wheres the data for how long it takes to get a test back. I thought Most tests were returned within 24 hours, especially in Ontario with lower testing numbers lately.


If Trudeau said 2K and up to 3 nights in approved hotel, it will be 2K and up to 3 nights 

Funny part that Cubans are doing instant Covid test to tourists and Canada "up to 3 days"


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

cainvest said:


> Looking at this list it appears the majority do have restrictions Coronavirus closures: Map of where US states are tightening restrictions
> 
> Your thoughts on that?


My thought as follow
Look at maps See Coronavirus Restrictions and Mask Mandates for All 50 States
In 90% of US businesses are open
Stay in home order is only in 3 states
Mandatory masks maybe in 60% of the states

P.S. Looks like restrictions in US are completely different animal than in Canada


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

gibor365 said:


> My thought as follow
> Look at maps See Coronavirus Restrictions and Mask Mandates for All 50 States
> In 90% of US businesses are open
> Stay in home order is only in 3 states
> ...


I agree Canada has more restrictions but we also have better numbers. Aside from that your previous statement of no lockdowns in the US is a little off.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

cainvest said:


> I agree Canada has more restrictions but we also have better numbers. Aside from that your previous statement of no lockdowns in the US is a little off.


I'd say in US more not lockdown than lockdown ... there are also some restrictions in Russia, people are encourage to wear masks, but all stores, restaurants, arenas, events etc are open


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

gibor365 said:


> _ Do you really think the virus was just going to fizzle out on its own - _It's possible, no one can predict virus behavior... do you remember how SARS suddenly disappear?! no one could explain how it happened..
> US an Russia don't have lockdown and average numbers are going down...
> Israel has similar to Canada lockdown (even more strict) , they fully vaccinated more than quarter of population (practically everyone who wanted already got at least 1 vaccine) and average numbers aren't going down at all


SARS was contained because people only became contagious when they were very sick, often in hospital. COVID-19 has been so much worse because so many cases are mild/asymptomatic. It also spreads much more easily.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

andrewf said:


> SARS was contained because people only became contagious when they were very sick, often in hospital. COVID-19 has been so much worse because so many cases are mild/asymptomatic. It also spreads much more easily.


I was talkin about virus behavior ... it's unpredictable 
btw, did you notice that people just got tired of those lockdowns and restrictions?! During 1st lockdown, March-May last year - road were empty, people tried to stay home and go nowhere...
This last lockdown didn't really change anything, roads are busy like before Covid, stores Ithat opened ) are full... despite of stay-at-home order peope (esp young ones) are partying, travelling etc...
Our son just last months, visited with his friends Whistler and rented cottage up North


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

gibor365 said:


> I was talkin about virus behavior ... it's unpredictable
> btw, did you notice that people just got tired of those lockdowns and restrictions?! During 1st lockdown, March-May last year - road were empty, people tried to stay home and go nowhere...
> This last lockdown didn't really change anything, roads are busy like before Covid, stores Ithat opened ) are full... despite of stay-at-home order peope (esp young ones) are partying, travelling etc...
> Our son just last months, visited with his friends Whistler and rented cottage up North


During the first lockdown, there was a lot of fear because there was so much we didn't know. We didn't have good data on fatality rate, how it spread (aerosol or not? surface transmission or not?), long term effects, what control measures worked or didn't. Many workplaces did not have the PPE, processes or training in place to operate safely. It made sense that things froze up as people and workplaces were working to adapt to the new reality. The next lockdown we could be more targeted with controls so that people could continue working if it was safe to do so. There was also generally less panic. And yes, young people flagrantly ignored the distancing rules. I suppose people learned that the government was very hesitant to harshly enforce rules. And lots of people have since realized that the government can strongly recommend they not travel, but they can still travel if they want, with impunity. Now we just have a little punity in the form of the brief isolation on arrival. I don't see why people feel it is this massive sacrifice to not travel to a foreign destination.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

andrewf said:


> During the first lockdown, there was a lot of fear because there was so much we didn't know.


Sure, especially when last spring Theresa Tam told that no need to wear masks 



> And lots of people have since realized that the government can strongly recommend they not travel, but they can still travel if they want, with impunity. Now we just have a little punity in the form of the brief isolation on arrival. I don't see why people feel it is this massive sacrifice to not travel to a foreign destination.


I wouldn't feel it is " this massive sacrifice " if it would be for 2-3 months at the beginning of pandemic,
but ti keep it for couple of years - yes, this massive sacrifice


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

gibor365 said:


> Sure, especially when last spring Theresa Tam told that no need to wear masks


Was she wrong?


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

cainvest said:


> Was she wrong?











Opinion: Dr. Tam’s about-face on masks damages trust at a crucial time


In these uncertain times, the public’s faith in those calling the shots is absolutely critical. Our top doctor has some explaining to do




www.theglobeandmail.com





This is brutal! and she is still Canada’s "top doctor"! What a joke!


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)




----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

cainvest said:


> Was she wrong?


Dead wrong. You take just about anyone in the ICU currently and all the people 6 feet below ground level, from covid, and I will argue that 98% of them would not be in either of those places *if everyone of them had of worn a mask at the time they were infected*. If I am wrong, then it is only 90% not 98%. That is how important masks are and it becomes very annoying when you consider how easy they are to wear.

As for why she made this mistake. Hard to say. Perhaps she simply listened only to the WHO and waited for their change of heart on the matter. I suspect she had a bias that came from the hope that if Canadians were convinced they did not need a mask, they might donate the ones they had to the healthcare workers, that she was so concerned about at that time. She might also have felt that Canadians would look to the government, to supply proper masks, if she simply came out and said they could be a vital part in our personal safety against this virus.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> As for why she made this mistake.


 Maybe she is just incompetent ?! In any case, she should be fired. What she did - was a crime.
I remember I was telling my mom that no need to wear masks (as per our "top doctor"), good thing that my mom didn't listen to me


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Initially, the scientists didn't believe the virus was spread through airborne droplets. They thought the droplets were too heavy and would fall to the ground.

The science knowledge base has continually expanded since the pandemic started. We know a lot more now than a year ago.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> *Dr. Tam’s earlier contention that masks are useless on asymptomatic people was outdated the moment she said it...*.
> 
> A letter published by a group of physicians in Germany in late January outlined a case of apparent transmission during the incubation period. A case study from February chronicled an asymptomatic 20-year-old Wuhan woman who infected five of her relatives without ever developing symptoms. Research published in March suggested that undocumented infections (meaning not-yet-diagnosed, mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic carriers) were the source of nearly 80 per cent of documented COVID-19 cases. *All of that material was published before Dr. Tam said, in late March, that “there is no need to use a mask for well people.”*


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

gibor365 said:


> ... despite of stay-at-home order peope (esp young ones) are partying, travelling etc...
> Our son just last months, visited with his friends Whistler and rented cottage up North


Yeah, we need tougher enforcement, bigger penalties to stop this kind of behaviour.

I also see these young people travelling around, they really are doing whatever they want and spreading the virus. Whistler for example has been struggling with multiple large outbreaks.

Our young people in Canada / US lack discipline, and they are violating all kinds of rules.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Sometimes I think public flogging was not totally devoid of merit.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Yeah, we need tougher enforcement, bigger penalties to stop this kind of behaviour.
> 
> I also see these young people travelling around, they really are doing whatever they want and spreading the virus. Whistler for example has been struggling with multiple large outbreaks.
> 
> Our young people in Canada / US lack discipline, and they are violating all kinds of rules.


Going to Whistler and cottage can be considered as recreational activities that is allowed under stay-at-home order


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Our young people in Canada / US lack discipline, and they are violating all kinds of rules.


How we can blame young people if they read








Here’s a (growing) list of Canadian politicians who took trips abroad despite COVID-19


Here’s a look at some of the lawmakers who took trips over the holidays — and what consequences they’re facing at home.




www.thestar.com


----------

