Coronavirus COVID-19 Thread

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Sorry I missed it in all the posts.

No problem :)

This kind of information makes me wonder...

Great, hold on to that, find a study which answers that question and come back to us with it.

Remember I asked you to read the information that was there, not the information you wanted to see, then find evidence that either confirmed or disproved the statements. It's great that particular line got you thinking "That's Odd" and "What If" but you still need to track down the supporting evidence, go get it! Do any of the other points in that article answer the question though? I believe there was something about Hamsters...?

Bring me evidence that a smaller inoculum (initial exposure) viral load does not effect the severity of the following infection and you will triumph.

 

[Bambooza]

No problem :)


Great, hold on to that, find a study which answers that question and come back to us with it.

Meanwhile, what about the Hamsters which you have similarly glossed over? remember I asked you to read the information that was there, not the information you wanted to see, then find evidence that either confirmed or disproved the statements

Nothing does not beat Something. Even if the Something isn't as complete as you'd like it to be at this moment in time, it is a thousand times more than Nothing. If you have Something to back up your Nothing, bring it and you'll have Something. So far, even with the observations stated, you still have Nothing. Go, find, present :)

Reminds me of a mathematical problem. Jim always lies, Jim says all of his hats are blue. The assumption that either Jim has no hats or that some of his hats are not blue could be the possible correct answer when the truth is as you pointed out that if Jim did not have any hats then the following statements would be true, all, none or some of the hats are blue are all true statements. And given that Jim always lies and all of his hats are blue the mathematical answer is Jim has hats but as to the color of those hats it's indeterminate from the information given.

And I do remember prefacing this most recent conversation with the information I have not found any information. It's not saying that the information doesn't exist but that I am currently unaware of such information. (secretly I had hoped you guys would have it and then the question could be answered but atlas you have failed me :P )

As for the hamster while I did not directly talk about them I think I covered the subject in that the tests used isolated testing to test parts of the question as in if covid19 is predomently transmitted by aerolized particles then tests like this
. Surgical mask partition reduces the risk of non-contact transmission in a golden Syrian hamster model for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). Clin Infect Dis2020;71:2139-49.
would go a long way toward knowing to what degree masks and the material they are made of reduces the spread. There have recently been lots of studies done on particle capture size, spray pattern, and hang time. And each one is beneficial in the effectiveness of masks it does not answer the first question as to how is covid19 spread? Without first knowing how covid19 is spread and the likeliness of each pathway the studies on mask effectiveness it's missing the bigger question.

It's like the saying spending pounds to save pennies. While I am not saying masks are pennies just that without knowing the probability of aerosolized particles being a cause of infection all the research on masks while not useless is still missing the overall scope and big picture as to how big or little it truly is.

In programming, I look at similar cost analysis daily in so much as what the impact will be. I can spend a week reducing the CPU cycle time of an algorithm by 5 minutes vs a month to reduce the CPU cycle time of another algorithm by 5 milliseconds. Without any more data, it would be hard to know which task I should do. But when I tell you that the first one gets run once every six months and the second one gets ran 100k times a day it becomes easy to tell which one should get completed.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Reminds me of a mathematical problem. Jim always lies, Jim says all of his hats are blue. The assumption that either Jim has no hats or that some of his hats are not blue could be the possible correct answer when the truth is as you pointed out that if Jim did not have any hats then the following statements would be true, all, none or some of the hats are blue are all true statements. And given that Jim always lies and all of his hats are blue the mathematical answer is Jim has hats but as to the color of those hats it's indeterminate from the information given.

And I do remember prefacing this most recent conversation with the information I have not found any information. It's not saying that the information doesn't exist but that I am currently unaware of such information. (secretly I had hoped you guys would have it and then the question could be answered but atlas you have failed me :P )

As for the hamster while I did not directly talk about them I think I covered the subject in that the tests used isolated testing to test parts of the question as in if covid19 is predomently transmitted by aerolized particles then tests like this
. Surgical mask partition reduces the risk of non-contact transmission in a golden Syrian hamster model for coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19). Clin Infect Dis2020;71:2139-49.
would go a long way toward knowing to what degree masks and the material they are made of reduces the spread. There have recently been lots of studies done on particle capture size, spray pattern, and hang time. And each one is beneficial in the effectiveness of masks it does not answer the first question as to how is covid19 spread? Without first knowing how covid19 is spread and the likeliness of each pathway the studies on mask effectiveness it's missing the bigger question.

It's like the saying spending pounds to save pennies. While I am not saying masks are pennies just that without knowing the probability of aerosolized particles being a cause of infection all the research on masks while not useless is still missing the overall scope and big picture as to how big or little it truly is.

In programming, I look at similar cost analysis daily in so much as what the impact will be. I can spend a week reducing the CPU cycle time of an algorithm by 5 minutes vs a month to reduce the CPU cycle time of another algorithm by 5 milliseconds. Without any more data, it would be hard to know which task I should do. But when I tell you that the first one gets run once every six months and the second one gets ran 100k times a day it becomes easy to tell which one should get completed.

I think I see where you are coming from, trying to answer the big picture - but many of the pixels are still dark and its not obvious what size or shape the screen is yet... at this point the points of light are what are able to be investigated. A research study on if the virus travels on aerosol fecal matter ejected from a toilet flush and transmitted on toothbrushes stored too close in the bathroom is a waste of time/resourse unless there is a clue its a contributor to transmission. And pixel by pixel starting with the most obvious and getting clues along the way to the more obscure, the picture shall illuminate.

The question we are trying to answer here for now is the one stated, does the size of the initial viral exposure effect the eventual overall serverity. It won't answer all of the question at once but it will steer society where to focus efforts, minimising that viral load while not locking down completely, and in doing that other less obvious factors will be uncovered and be bought to light.

Like jigsaw pieces the answer to that one question will then fit together to create a bigger picture. I am a Hollistic Thinker mentally working on overviews rather than little puzzle peices but science discovery doesn't work that way very often. Before being able to think about Black Holes we needed the theory of gravity to be discovered - and as Newton said, even he was "standing on the shouders of giants so that I might see further."

 

[Bambooza]

I think I see where you are coming from, trying to answer the big picture - but many of the pixels are still dark and its not obvious what size or shape the screen is yet... at this point the points of light are what are able to be investigated. A research study on if the virus travels on aerosol fecal matter ejected from a toilet flush and transmitted on toothbrushes stored too close in the bathroom is a waste of time/resourse unless there is a clue its a contributor to transmission. And pixel by pixel starting with the most obvious and getting clues along the way to the more obscure, the picture shall illuminate.

The question we are trying to answer here for now is the one stated, does the size of the initial viral exposure effect the eventual overall serverity. It won't answer all of the question at once but it will steer society where to focus efforts, minimising that viral load while not locking down completely, and in doing that other less obvious factors will be uncovered and be bought to light.

Like jigsaw pieces the answer to that one question will then fit together to create a bigger picture. I am a Hollistic Thinker mentally working on overviews rather than little puzzle peices but science discovery doesn't work that way very often. Before being able to think about Black Holes we needed the theory of gravity to be discovered - and as Newton said, even he was "standing on the shouders of giants so that I might see further."

It's more than not knowing where the jigsaw pieces should be placed as much as we don't know the scale of the piece either. Mask wearing while a part of the overall picture might be a small dot or a large part, we are lacking the knowledge to know the scale let alone where it belongs.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

It's more than not knowing where the jigsaw pieces should be placed as much as we don't know the scale of the piece either. Mask wearing while a part of the overall picture might be a small dot or a large part, we are lacking the knowledge to know the scale let alone where it belongs.

But from our research we can see respitory droplets are a critical corner piece, that much is very clear viral shedding is present in the exhilation of infected people both symptomatic and asymptomatic... From there we have found the edge peices which are masks and social distancing which do have an effect on infections controling trandmission and impacting on serverity of infection - from there we can make inroads to the core of the puzzle.

Another corner piece may be as you say a different vector like physical face contact, but research has not found many critical clues yet - it may be a piece of sky in the top right, difficult to match up with other sky pieces but may come together late on, or it may just be an edge piece of that sky on the same side as our respiritory droplets corner, or indeed it may be a minor piece of field somewhere in the lower middle... Another edge piece which has been found is hand washing and hand sanitizer but again its another sky piece...

The easiest peices of the Jigsaw to put together usually make up the detail of the picture and the more obvious conclusions of research can be the most critical in understanding an issue or at least provide inroads to making the picture...

We have never said other vectors were not a factor, but I suppose our questioning is based on how much of a factor? If it was a major contributor to the problem the piece would be full of detail other parts can click with as with resperitory droplets... Right now it just seems like its a featureless part of a blank blue sky. As its not blatantly obvious, it may be a factor and a part of the whole picture, but its unlikely to be a critical corner, at least not at this point in the Virus's evolutionary path.

 

[Bambooza]

But from our research we can see respitory droplets are a critical corner piece, that much is very clear viral shedding is present in the exhilation of infected people both symptomatic and asymptomatic... From there we have found the edge peices which are masks and social distancing which do have an effect on infections controling trandmission and impacting on serverity of infection - from there we can make inroads to the core of the puzzle.

The thing is we don't how much respiratory droplets play in transmitting infection. While we know the virus can be found in droplets and studies on mice and hampsters have shown that lacking any physical contact the infection can spread but the rate of spread has been shown to be slower than when placed in the same physical area. While the distance between the subjects could play as much of a part as other things it's not known just speculated. So much of what you mentioned is based upon educated guess and speculation but does not take into account all of the variables like you saying we have found that mask-wearing AND social distancing have shown a reduction in the rate of spread of covid19 in the general public. But that still misses how much wearing a mask keeps people from touching their eyes, nose, and mouth and is a reminder to be vigilant about washing their hands. And we know that not being around someone who is sick prevents you from getting sick. So it's still not known if wearing a mask on its own has any impact or limited impact or a lot of impact on the spread of virus-like covid19. You cannot take a situation that has many factors and say look see masks work as it cannot be logically separated from the other aspects. There have been studies that isolate masks and they do show a reduction in the spread over the control but the tests also show that on a whole the rate of spread is significantly reduced from when all the mice are together. It is important to know all of the variables in each study and not just the ones pointed out but ones that were overlooked or left out.

Another corner piece may be as you say a different vector like physical face contact, but research has not found many critical clues yet - it may be a piece of sky in the top right, difficult to match up with other sky pieces but may come together late on, or it may just be an edge piece of that sky on the same side as our respiritory droplets corner, or indeed it may be a minor piece of field somewhere in the lower middle... Another edge piece which has been found is hand washing and hand sanitizer but again its another sky piece...

The easiest peices of the Jigsaw to put together usually make up the detail of the picture and the more obvious conclusions of research can be the most critical in understanding an issue or at least provide inroads to making the picture...

Sometimes it is that simple but more often it hides the complexity of the problem. After all look at gravity, you drop something it falls to the earth simply right? But even in that, the earth is not uniform in its gravity. And each time we uncover something we find out just how much more we don't know.

We have never said other vectors were not a factor, but I suppose our questioning is based on how much of a factor? If it was a major contributor to the problem the piece would be full of detail other parts can click with as with resperitory droplets... Right now it just seems like its a featureless part of a blank blue sky. As its not blatantly obvious, it may be a factor and a part of the whole picture, but its unlikely to be a critical corner, at least not at this point in the Virus's evolutionary path.

And I will strongly caution against assuming that the unknown is a small part of the whole and that we know more than we do. All too often those small corners are where the breakthroughs are and they open up huge areas that engulf the limited knowledge we had prior.

When it comes to mask-wearing I believe we have enough data to draw some conclusions from when looking at trends within countries over the past two years as there is lots of variation and while the data is not perfect it still contains some usefulness in the general. And from that, we should be able to start making models and explore the data collected to see trends that should help us to know in which direction we should explore more.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

The thing is we don't how much respiratory droplets play in transmitting infection. While we know the virus can be found in droplets and studies on mice and hampsters have shown that lacking any physical contact the infection can spread but the rate of spread has been shown to be slower than when placed in the same physical area. While the distance between the subjects could play as much of a part as other things it's not known just speculated. So much of what you mentioned is based upon educated guess and speculation but does not take into account all of the variables like you saying we have found that mask-wearing AND social distancing have shown a reduction in the rate of spread of covid19 in the general public. But that still misses how much wearing a mask keeps people from touching their eyes, nose, and mouth and is a reminder to be vigilant about washing their hands. And we know that not being around someone who is sick prevents you from getting sick. So it's still not known if wearing a mask on its own has any impact or limited impact or a lot of impact on the spread of virus-like covid19. You cannot take a situation that has many factors and say look see masks work as it cannot be logically separated from the other aspects. There have been studies that isolate masks and they do show a reduction in the spread over the control but the tests also show that on a whole the rate of spread is significantly reduced from when all the mice are together. It is important to know all of the variables in each study and not just the ones pointed out but ones that were overlooked or left out.



Sometimes it is that simple but more often it hides the complexity of the problem. After all look at gravity, you drop something it falls to the earth simply right? But even in that, the earth is not uniform in its gravity. And each time we uncover something we find out just how much more we don't know.



And I will strongly caution against assuming that the unknown is a small part of the whole and that we know more than we do. All too often those small corners are where the breakthroughs are and they open up huge areas that engulf the limited knowledge we had prior.

When it comes to mask-wearing I believe we have enough data to draw some conclusions from when looking at trends within countries over the past two years as there is lots of variation and while the data is not perfect it still contains some usefulness in the general. And from that, we should be able to start making models and explore the data collected to see trends that should help us to know in which direction we should explore more.

"The thing is we don't how much respiratory droplets play in transmitting infection."
Well... for fomite surface transmission actually yes, we kind of do know repository droplets play a part... Apart from infrequent bowel infection of COVID, the viral sheading is heavily detected in exhalation and where discovered on surfaces it is often contained within repository droplets which can be detected as present on the surface and identified as containing the virus:

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

So a mask which eliminates or reduces the amount of escaping droplets from the respiratory tract also reduces the viral load received from surfaces regardless of if it's direct from the air or indirect fomite transmission from infected surface to face contact where the droplets have landed or been placed after being coughed on to a hand...

Again I'm not saying it's the only generator of Viral shedding, as said the virus can be detected in the bowel and stools but it's not the corner piece that aerosol is or they'd be detecting fecal matter on all of these surfaces where they are finding respiratory droplets and settled aerosol droplets. It's the biggest transmission driver for COVID-19 because every time it gets better at infecting, generating virus and producing sheading from the lungs, things get worse and in the rare occasions COVID gets a bit worse at deeply infecting the lungs, like original Omicron which kept itself higher up in the trachea and main bronchus, things actually got better for a while in regard to severe illness where it didn't do as much damage to the organs...

Is there some kind of secret arcane factor no one has discovered yet (like the theory of gravity, we know its effects but don't know what causes it yet)...? There may be... There may also be people just coughing droplets on their hands, toucheing a door handle then someone touches that and then their face so anything which reduces that initial exhalation viral load, like a mask, will also reduce fomite viral load as it will reduce the amount of virus exiting the production point before it takes a scenic surface route to the target... and it is possible there may be both.

I do understand and appreciate there are knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns. Focusing on the unknown unknowns at the cost of the knowns is favouring nothing over something, but having something to go on is better than having nothing to go on. Perhaps people are sweating COVID-19 out of the pores in their hands and it's infecting surfaces that way, but if it is it's not infecting them with sweat, it's infecting them with repository droplets. From their hands. Possible? Maybe. Likely? Not very.

I'm always happy to change my outlook, however all I ask that it be driven by evidence. If something works but is based on flawed or incomplete information, it still works. We still stick to the ground although we don't know how gravity works. It might be there is an invisible Flying Spaghetti Monster pushing us all down on to the ground with its noodely appendages. Until I get the evidence for that though, I'll enjoy the FSM, but not worship it. Much.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Varient BA.2.75 'Centaurus' grabs attention due to rapid rise and number of mutatio s over its previous varient:

‘Centaurus’: virologists express concern at new Covid subvariant

Omicron variant BA.2.75 has been detected in India, UK, US, Australia, Germany and Canada

www.theguardian.com

 

[Vavrik]

I'm always happy to change my outlook, however all I ask that it be driven by evidence.

@NaffNaffBobFace, you cause me to laugh frequently, and your post here s not different.
Also, in this sentence above, you have encapsulated one of the most important rules in any science, including computer science, information science, and data science.

 

[Bambooza]

"The thing is we don't how much respiratory droplets play in transmitting infection."
Well... for fomite surface transmission actually yes, we kind of do know repository droplets play a part... Apart from infrequent bowel infection of COVID, the viral sheading is heavily detected in exhalation and where discovered on surfaces it is often contained within repository droplets which can be detected as present on the surface and identified as containing the virus:

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.

www.cdc.gov

So a mask which eliminates or reduces the amount of escaping droplets from the respiratory tract also reduces the viral load received from surfaces regardless of if it's direct from the air or indirect fomite transmission from infected surface to face contact where the droplets have landed or been placed after being coughed on to a hand...

Again I'm not saying it's the only generator of Viral shedding, as said the virus can be detected in the bowel and stools but it's not the corner piece that aerosol is or they'd be detecting fecal matter on all of these surfaces where they are finding respiratory droplets and settled aerosol droplets. It's the biggest transmission driver for COVID-19 because every time it gets better at infecting, generating virus and producing sheading from the lungs, things get worse and in the rare occasions COVID gets a bit worse at deeply infecting the lungs, like original Omicron which kept itself higher up in the trachea and main bronchus, things actually got better for a while in regard to severe illness where it didn't do as much damage to the organs...

Is there some kind of secret arcane factor no one has discovered yet (like the theory of gravity, we know its effects but don't know what causes it yet)...? There may be... There may also be people just coughing droplets on their hands, toucheing a door handle then someone touches that and then their face so anything which reduces that initial exhalation viral load, like a mask, will also reduce fomite viral load as it will reduce the amount of virus exiting the production point before it takes a scenic surface route to the target... and it is possible there may be both.

I do understand and appreciate there are knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns. Focusing on the unknown unknowns at the cost of the knowns is favouring nothing over something, but having something to go on is better than having nothing to go on. Perhaps people are sweating COVID-19 out of the pores in their hands and it's infecting surfaces that way, but if it is it's not infecting them with sweat, it's infecting them with repository droplets. From their hands. Possible? Maybe. Likely? Not very.

Well said. The only thing I would like to add is that we do have to be careful of the unknowns as it has been way to often that we ignore the unknowns or medical research that contradicts established dogma and takes in ordinary efforts to try and convince the establishment on the merits of the research. The best most recent example is ulcers as I had mentioned last year. It was a common assumption that ulcers were caused by stress and nothing more, and so the medical procedure for dealing with ulcers was to tell the patient to reduce their stress. While stress does play a factor in ulcers its no longer believed to be the root cause as it was

Can Stress Cause Stomach Ulcers?

Is stress the reason for your stomach ulcer? That’s a complicated question, but here’s the most simple answer: Probably not.

health.clevelandclinic.org

.

Before the 1950s, there were many microbiological descriptions of bacteria in the stomach and in gastric acid secretions, lending credence to both the infective theory and the hyperacidity theory as being causes of peptic ulcer disease. A single study, conducted in 1954, did not find evidence of bacteria on biopsies of the stomach stained traditionally; this effectively established the acid theory as dogma.

Delayed Gratification: Why it Took Everybody So Long to Acknowledge that Bacteria Cause Ulcers — Journal of Young Investigators

In 1983, Australian doctors J. Robin Warren and Barry Marshall isolated Helicobacter pylori , the bacterial cause of peptic ulcer disease (P.U.D.). However, decades passed before most doctors prescribed antibiotics to their afflicted patients. Why didn't the medical community hit itself on its coll

www.jyi.org

I'm always happy to change my outlook, however all I ask that it be driven by evidence. If something works but is based on flawed or incomplete information, it still works. We still stick to the ground although we don't know how gravity works. It might be there is an invisible Flying Spaghetti Monster pushing us all down on to the ground with its noodely appendages. Until I get the evidence for that though, I'll enjoy the FSM, but not worship it. Much.

Man, now I want to see that rendered.

 

[Vavrik]

Before the 1950s, there were many microbiological descriptions of bacteria in the stomach and in gastric acid secretions, lending credence to both the infective theory and the hyperacidity theory as being causes of peptic ulcer disease. A single study, conducted in 1954, did not find evidence of bacteria on biopsies of the stomach stained traditionally; this effectively established the acid theory as dogma.

Do you realize you're actually making the case for what @NaffNaffBobFace said? Like are you trying to agree or just add more information?

In the case of missing the role H. Pylori has in ulcers, for example, they had a single study that was not replicated, and made it dogma. Back then, that was good enough. Today, that is not even close to enough. It wasn't actually wrong by the way, they just missed the role of the bacteria. It is now important to be able to independently replicate the outcome of a study, at least once but preferably multiple times. And there are elements in the scientific community who still get enamored with an idea, and reject all others.

Related: IMO a worse thing happened during the manufacturing process for Ranitidine (or Zantec) which was one of the most popular miracle medicines for H. Pylori infection. Lookup "FDA Ranitidine 2019" for more information.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Well said. The only thing I would like to add is that we do have to be careful of the unknowns as it has been way to often that we ignore the unknowns or medical research that contradicts established dogma and takes in ordinary efforts to try and convince the establishment on the merits of the research. The best most recent example is ulcers as I had mentioned last year. It was a common assumption that ulcers were caused by stress and nothing more, and so the medical procedure for dealing with ulcers was to tell the patient to reduce their stress. While stress does play a factor in ulcers its no longer believed to be the root cause as it was

Can Stress Cause Stomach Ulcers?

Is stress the reason for your stomach ulcer? That’s a complicated question, but here’s the most simple answer: Probably not.

health.clevelandclinic.org

.

Before the 1950s, there were many microbiological descriptions of bacteria in the stomach and in gastric acid secretions, lending credence to both the infective theory and the hyperacidity theory as being causes of peptic ulcer disease. A single study, conducted in 1954, did not find evidence of bacteria on biopsies of the stomach stained traditionally; this effectively established the acid theory as dogma.

Delayed Gratification: Why it Took Everybody So Long to Acknowledge that Bacteria Cause Ulcers — Journal of Young Investigators

In 1983, Australian doctors J. Robin Warren and Barry Marshall isolated Helicobacter pylori , the bacterial cause of peptic ulcer disease (P.U.D.). However, decades passed before most doctors prescribed antibiotics to their afflicted patients. Why didn't the medical community hit itself on its coll

www.jyi.org

Certainly, I am one of the first to vilify the Iradiated Water trend of the fifties consumed for that "tingle of health". I'm fortunate to live in the era I do, I probably would have fallen for that one.

Man, now I want to see that rendered.

Look no further than:

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster – The world's fastest growing religion

www.spaghettimonster.org

 

[Bambooza]

Do you realize you're actually making the case for what @NaffNaffBobFace said? Like are you trying to agree or just add more information?

In the case of missing the role H. Pylori has in ulcers, for example, they had a single study that was not replicated, and made it dogma. Back then, that was good enough. Today, that is not even close to enough. It wasn't actually wrong by the way, they just missed the role of the bacteria. It is now important to be able to independently replicate the outcome of a study, at least once but preferably multiple times. And there are elements in the scientific community who still get enamored with an idea, and reject all others.

Related: IMO a worse thing happened during the manufacturing process for Ranitidine (or Zantec) which was one of the most popular miracle medicines for H. Pylori infection. Lookup "FDA Ranitidine 2019" for more information.

Yep, he had valid points. And yes we do tend to still have issues with the scientific process, with p-hacking and published paper gatekeeping. Luckily in time, the truth is found and the boundaries pushed forward.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Suggestion new varients core symptom now sore throat rather than losing taste and smell:

Sore throat and cough top symptoms that could be Covid

That is according to UK data from 17,500 people this week who say they have Covid.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Bambooza]

Suggestion new varients core symptom now sore throat rather than losing taste and smell:

Sore throat and cough top symptoms that could be Covid

That is according to UK data from 17,500 people this week who say they have Covid.

www.bbc.co.uk

Great now everything will be perceived as covid19 first. Been out drinking and yelling a the tv, woke up with a sore throat? Covid. Seasonal allergies getting you down.. or is it covid? If you were a covid test company this is such a jackpot the ads write themselves, just keep the hysteria in regards to the evilness of covid. Luckily it seems the general population on a whole while still getting the cold has a seen a significant reduction in the number of deaths due to it so it's slowly becoming just another seasonal cold.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Great now everything will be perceived as covid19 first. Been out drinking and yelling a the tv, woke up with a sore throat? Covid. Seasonal allergies getting you down.. or is it covid? If you were a covid test company this is such a jackpot the ads write themselves, just keep the hysteria in regards to the evilness of covid. Luckily it seems the general population on a whole while still getting the cold has a seen a significant reduction in the number of deaths due to it so it's slowly becoming just another seasonal cold.

I hope not, or its been going on for half over a year now - this report is from Janurary reporting the hallmark loss of smell and taste was reported in less than 20% of cases back then:

https://news.yahoo.com/loss-taste-smell-arent-common-164540519.html

 

[Vavrik]

I hope not, or its been going on for half over a year now - this report is from Janurary reporting the hallmark loss of smell and taste was reported in less than 20% of cases back then:

Last December, the first time I caught COVID, I had a low grade fever with a small amount of coughing for about 3 hours. This was followed a few days later by constant coughing, a horse voice, asthma attacks every ~ 30 minutes, and I developed a problem staying awake for more than 6 hours at a time.
Some of those symptoms have gotten a bit better with the meds my doctor gave me for it, but they're not cured. I still cough frequently, but not like I'm losing a lung anymore. I often have a horse voice, it happens more often than not. Having to sleep every 6 hours for an hour has become I need an hour rest twice a day.

The second time (last month) I had only a noticeable fever and an increase in the amount of coughing that lasted only a few hours.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Last December, the first time I caught COVID, I had a low grade fever with a small amount of coughing for about 3 hours. This was followed a few days later by constant coughing, a horse voice, asthma attacks every ~ 30 minutes, and I developed a problem staying awake for more than 6 hours at a time.
Some of those symptoms have gotten a bit better with the meds my doctor gave me for it, but they're not cured. I still cough frequently, but not like I'm losing a lung anymore. I often have a horse voice, it happens more often than not. Having to sleep every 6 hours for an hour has become I need an hour rest twice a day.

The second time (last month) I had only a noticeable fever and an increase in the amount of coughing that lasted only a few hours.

Many thanks for sharing your expiriance, not only is the virus evolving, it sounds like immunity is adapting too.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

UK death certificate cerified deaths passes 200,000

UK’s full Covid-19 death toll passes 200,000

The milestone was reached on June 25.

www.independent.co.uk

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

I'm seeing a lot of "I've gone 2.5 years and it's finally got me" posts on my socials from people in the UK - Seems it's ripping through the nation right now and the incumbent runners of the country have sleep-walked right in to another national crisis.