Jump to content

Lockdown ? What Lockdown?


Momac

Featured Posts

5 hours ago, The Happy Nomad said:

Does it?

 

I cant see any numbers.

They're at the extreme right of the blue strip at the top of each post. Yours is no. 203. 

Edited by Athy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/04/2020 at 18:16, mrsmelly said:

Im with you on smokes trout, I do like that very occasionaly. Proper lump of cod with batter and chips cant be beaten though.........................................its a close call with KFC though :D

Best salmon ever was poached for the freezer on a croft on the Outer Hebrides, a little packed lunch from a wonderful lady who took me in on a Saturday night, having been refused a bed by the religious lot, I was there for a week, having come down with a cold.

Edited by LadyG
  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Athy said:

They're at the extreme right of the blue strip at the top of each post. Yours is no. 203. 

Im guessing that they only show on a full version of the site? I view it on my phone mainly.

 

I definitely cant see any numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Happy Nomad said:

Im guessing that they only show on a full version of the site? I view it on my phone mainly.

 

I definitely cant see any numbers.

Definitely visible on a phone, at least on mine, yours is 207

Edited by tree monkey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tree monkey said:

Definitely visible on a phone, at least on mine, yours is 207

Think I need new glasses. I can see them now. It just looked like a tiny blob before. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, mrsmelly said:

Yes. Proper diet and its not needed.

I dont need to read it. I dont need any supplements, my NHS dietician says I dont.

Well jolly good for you, but your dietician's advice is for you and not for anyone else, so posting it on here as advice for all of us is irrelevant. Some of us have to take vitamin supplements to counter our body's inability to produce them from food sources,, both of the vitamin supplements I take are being taken upon the advice of doctors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, David Schweizer said:

Well jolly good for you, but your dietician's advice is for you and not for anyone else, so posting it on here as advice for all of us is irrelevant. Some of us have to take vitamin supplements to counter our body's inability to produce them from food sources,, both of the vitamin supplements I take are being taken upon the advice of doctors.

Thanks for confirming everything in my post. You obviously didnt read it !!. I said dont take supplements unless on the advice of your doctors. Keep up at the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ditchcrawler said:

For those that wont touch Facebook, the way this site is going at the moment they will soon be very similar, there is some good info, name calling, misunderstanding as well as insisting black is white and the earth is flat, not forgetting everyone knows best on every subject 

Everybody knows the Earth is flat innitt. You will tell me we put a man on the moon in 1969 next.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Thanks for confirming everything in my post. You obviously didnt read it !!. I said dont take supplements unless on the advice of your doctors. Keep up at the back.

This by MtB earlier bears repeating for those who might have missed it:

 

"The NHS advises everyone to consider taking a vitamin D supplement during winter.

 

From nhs.gov.uk:

 

Advice for adults and children over 5 years old

During the autumn and winter, you need to get vitamin D from your diet because the sun isn't strong enough for the body to make vitamin D.

But since it's difficult for people to get enough vitamin D from food alone, everyone (including pregnant and breastfeeding women) should consider taking a daily supplement containing 10 micrograms of vitamin D during the autumn and winter.

 

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vitamins-and-minerals/vitamin-d/

 

There is reams of stuff on the net by qualified people suggesting  vitamin D is something take great care you get enough of, starting with the NHS above and cascading down from there. "

 

HTH :) 

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

For those that wont touch Facebook, the way this site is going at the moment they will soon be very similar, there is some good info, name calling, misunderstanding as well as insisting black is white and the earth is flat, not forgetting everyone knows best on every subject 

 

Yes I do find it amusing that the narrow minded and bigoted shyte that mrsmelly condemns facebook for is showing up on here on a daily basis these days, and 50% of it is posted by him. 

 

 

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
Clarity
  • Greenie 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Yes I do find it amusing that the very narrow minded and bigoted shyte that make mrsmelly condemns facebook so heavily for is showing up on here on a daily basis these days, and 50% of it is posted by him. 

And the other fifty percent by you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

This by MtB earlier bears repeating for those who might have missed it:

 

"The NHS advises everyone to consider taking a vitamin D supplement during winter.

 

From nhs.gov.uk:

 

Advice for adults and children over 5 years old

During the autumn and winter, you need to get vitamin D from your diet because the sun isn't strong enough for the body to make vitamin D.

But since it's difficult for people to get enough vitamin D from food alone, everyone (including pregnant and breastfeeding women) should consider taking a daily supplement containing 10 micrograms of vitamin D during the autumn and winter.

 

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vitamins-and-minerals/vitamin-d/

 

There is reams of stuff on the net by qualified people suggesting  vitamin D is something take great care you get enough of, starting with the NHS above and cascading down from there. "

 

HTH :) 

Makes me wonder how northern Europe has remained populated for so many thousands of years.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BWM said:

Not in itself, but i have heard many experts saying that density of exposure is a factor affecting the outcome. If you place yourself in an environment where the virus is present, the amount of exposure and time spent acquiring it may have a dramatic effect on the outcome of the illness. 

I suspect that the maths of this is similar to that of the impact of radiation: an individual virus or radiation particle has a statistical probability of causing an effect. It may or may not, in other words. However, the more frequently the event occurs in/to an individual person, then cumulatively the chance of an adverse outcome increases. The rate of increase depends on the frequency of events as well as their virility.

 

It seems to me that this is somewhat analogous to a nuclear chain reaction. At low levels of activity, the particles 'die out' - in a reactor the control rods reduce the 'transmission' rate (ie the number of new particles that each one creates). If the controls are removed then the reaction rate turns from a steady state to a chain reaction and, in the worst case, a nuclear explosion.

 

The fear with COVID-19 was that without controls, the virus would spread quickly - it seems to be perhaps more virulent and faster transmission (the R0 figure) than initially estimated (but always remember that the scientific analyses are still based on not having seen a complete life cycle of the virus through to extinction. If the virus spread uncontrolled, most of the population would get infected in a short period of time. That level of concurrent cases would quickly outstrip the ability of the NHS (or other systems in other countries) to treat serious cases, leading to some patients dying that might otherwise have survived.

 

The more recent data seems to suggest that the virus will remain endemic in the population until around 85% of the population become immune and hence do not (as an infected person) pass on the virus. Until a vaccine is available the only means of gaining immunity is by surviving an attack - which most people do. At present less than 4% of the population have been infected so there is a long way to go. Unless and until a vaccine is implemented, the most likely outcome is that most people will have to get the disease at some time. Hence the statement that some degree of lockdown will be needed for a much longer time than the three week extension indicates.

 

Humans contribute to transmission in two contexts: they may be carriers (symptomatic or not) having been infected. It also seems to be the case that this virus is reasonably capable of transmission by non-infected people, whether immune or not) simply by touch. The virus has a survival period outside human bodies but I have not seen any comparison with other viruses.

 

Hence the need for isolation and social distancing (to reduce transmission by infected people) and also reduced travel and increased hygiene (to reduce transmission by non-infected people). No one measure on its own looks like being sufficient to reduce R0 to a level that will lead to the virus dying out. Hence the need to respect all of them - it is this complexity that leads some people to draw false conclusions (why me? I'm not ill, for example)

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

If the virus spread uncontrolled, most of the population would get infected in a short period of time. That level of concurrent cases would quickly outstrip the ability of the NHS (or other systems in other countries) to treat serious cases, leading to some patients dying that might otherwise have survived.

I think that is how we choose to deal with the various pre-existing diseases that are around.

 

For example, PHE say that, on average since 2014, 17,000 people a year die from influenza. Presumably all of these, (and many more who dont die), are cared for to the best of the ability of the NHS, and nobody dies that would otherwise have survived for want of NHS capacity and capability.

 

These 17,000 die in spite of the vaccine that is given to some each year, in spite of any herd immunity that may, or may not, exist, and without any media hype whatsoever.

 

The concomitant may be that, as long as the NHS capacity can be kept at a level that can cope with admissions and care, and infection can be kept at a level below which hospital admission is kept below capacity, we may choose to accept a number of deaths in return for the return to a level of normal life. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.