Jump to content

Have any liveaboard had a positive covid test?


Featured Posts

Having a smaller population we have carried out far more testing per capita than in the UK and we in the West have been locked off from the rest of Australia for months and are approaching level five conditions here which means apart from borders being closed we are nearly back to normal. We are having 50% crowds to football games from Thursday and if there hadn't been a spike in Victoria we would have been at level 5 on Saturday.

I read blogs and watch vlogs and on here of course and until I started this thread I had only heard of one probable(Rich from "Floating Our Boat") so apart from my submition to our "great" leaders I was just curious to hear from forum members.

One of the side effects of all the social distancing, hand sanitizing  etc is even though we are in the middle of our winter our friends and us have seen virtually no colds or flu this year.

Edited by harleyj
  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, roland elsdon said:

The antibody tests are not very reliable. The get more reliable the longer ago you had the infection I believe.

 

From everything I have read, I would agree they are not very reliable which is why they havent been rolled out.

You are right that it seems to be that the antibodies seem to increase in the weeks and months after infection so the longer you leave the test the more responsive -so the more accurate the test is. However I was reading in the Guardian (its free on line) yesterday that a study by the oxford lot (inventing the vacine) say that in a test of 1000 or so, the antibodies then started to decrease to the point where they thought that an individual would be susceptible to the virus again. It quote something like 3 months immunity only - ie similar to the common cold. If true then the antibody test wont work in that case either.

We are all doomed.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dr Bob said:

I was reading in the Guardian (its free on line) yesterday that a study by the oxford lot (inventing the vacine) say that in a test of 1000 or so, the antibodies then started to decrease to the point where they thought that an individual would be susceptible to the virus again. It quote something like 3 months immunity only - ie similar to the common cold. If true then the antibody test wont work in that case either.

This? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/12/immunity-to-covid-19-could-be-lost-in-months-uk-study-suggests

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, George and Dragon said:

Dont go posting the link!!!!! 😄

Everyone will see I was telling porkies!

It was the London lot, not the oxford lot that did the study and it was only 90 peeps in the study not 1000. In my defence I was part way through a 16 year bottle of Lagavulin when I ready it.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dr Bob said:

From everything I have read, I would agree they are not very reliable which is why they havent been rolled out.

You are right that it seems to be that the antibodies seem to increase in the weeks and months after infection so the longer you leave the test the more responsive -so the more accurate the test is. However I was reading in the Guardian (its free on line) yesterday that a study by the oxford lot (inventing the vacine) say that in a test of 1000 or so, the antibodies then started to decrease to the point where they thought that an individual would be susceptible to the virus again. It quote something like 3 months immunity only - ie similar to the common cold. If true then the antibody test wont work in that case either.

We are all doomed.

 

Well if you wear your mask like that you will be.....

Besides there is something called T cell immune response which may assist, if a Past suffer is exposed to covid again.

The vaccines are taking different courses, and it may well be a combination that works.

Failing that find a recovered case and drain their blood...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/07/2020 at 09:45, harleyj said:

We are currently unable to leave our country apart from special circumstances and I am putting together a submission for us to be able to get to our boat. We have not heard of any liveaboards contracting the virus but wanted to let our government know some loose figures.

 

Why would the covid-19 infection rate in the area where you're picking up your boat (plus any route you take from the airport to the boat) be any different to canal boat liveaboards in those areas? We're not some sort of different species separate from the rest of the population. Your govt should have online access to infection rates in the relevant areas of the country you're visiting just like anyone else.

 

I don't really think you're going to get much useful information by getting members of this forum to post unrepresentative anecdotes about people they know who've been infected or died, plus the second hand information some people are posting here may be quite personal to the families concerned.

Edited by blackrose
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/07/2020 at 19:59, Naughty Cal said:

Until a wide spread antibody testing scheme is brought out it will be impossible to say how many people have been infected with Covid 19 already.

 

A lot of people will have had it and not known about it.

More antibody tests would allow the R number to be calculated more accurately. 

 

If the R number turns out to be very low there will be little justification for lock downs and other governmemt controls. With a flaky R number, lock downs are easier to justify as the maximum estimated value can be used.

 

What I find strange is that now we are way past the peak, we are now being told that face masks will be compulsory in supermarkets, whereas they weren't even in the peak. WHO have changed their advice on face masks but where is the data which prompted it?

 

Now we are being told there will be a second wave in September. How flaky is the data that that prediction was based on? It's starting to sound more like a plan to me. How many more vulnerable people will end up being scared to death?

 

I think many people are getting tired of the sensationalist media, hyporcritical leaders and increasing controls. I wonder as time goes on more and more people will just want to get on with their lives and take risk. There are plenty of other risks in life than Covid and leaving the EU!

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rambling Boater said:

More antibody tests would allow the R number to be calculated more accurately. 

 

If the R number turns out to be very low there will be little justification for lock downs and other governmemt controls. With a flaky R number, lock downs are easier to justify as the maximum estimated value can be used.

 

What I find strange is that now we are way past the peak, we are now being told that face masks will be compulsory in supermarkets, whereas they weren't even in the peak. WHO have changed their advice on face masks but where is the data which prompted it?

 

Now we are being told there will be a second wave in September. How flaky is the data that that prediction was based on? It's starting to sound more like a plan to me. How many more vulnerable people will end up being scared to death?

 

I think many people are getting tired of the sensationalist media, hyporcritical leaders and increasing controls. I wonder as time goes on more and more people will just want to get on with their lives and take risk. There are plenty of other risks in life than Covid and leaving the EU!

 

 

I think this is already happening. People are realising that you can not just stay locked away at home forever.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Rambling Boater said:

as time goes on more and more people will just want to get on with their lives and take risk. There are plenty of other risks in life than Covid and leaving the EU!

 

 

That's why there will be a second wave. We had visitors to our home for the first time since lockdown at the weekend, my wife's son, his wife and baby. He spent the whole time explaining that he was only social distancing for our sakes and was otherwise going about his life without it and everyone else has had a cuddle of the baby. All this whilst bemoaning the likelihood of a second wave, which it seems he is doing his best to bring about. Lesson learned. We won't be having him in the house again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

I think this is already happening. People are realising that you can not just stay locked away at home forever.

Well, some perhaps. Others are realising (as Mrs. Athy has, and I think you may have too) that they much prefer working from home to going into an office several miles away. We like having our groceries delivered by Tesco and Waitrose and, judging by the difficulty of booking delivery slots, many other people do too. I love supermarkets but I have, to my surprise, adapted to not going round them. Just about the only places we've been in the last month are to the butcher's (next door to our house), the garden centre for plants and barbecue charcoal, and the boat for one weekend.

   It would have been nice to meet my best friend and his wife for a day (we can do so now if we wish, I guess) or to go antiques-hunting, which we enjoy. But most of the time, we've found that being locked away quite suits us, and that it doesn't even feel like being locked away. The garden's in better condition than it has been for years, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

That's why there will be a second wave. We had visitors to our home for the first time since lockdown at the weekend, my wife's son, his wife and baby. He spent the whole time explaining that he was only social distancing for our sakes and was otherwise going about his life without it and everyone else has had a cuddle of the baby. All this whilst bemoaning the likelihood of a second wave, which it seems he is doing his best to bring about. Lesson learned. We won't be having him in the house again.

I've spoken to quite a few people who are at high risk who are sceptical. The point is that the stats show that this virus has had very little impact on the vast majority of the population (especially those under 45). The psycolgical effects on the vast majority however has had an effect.

 

I think some people who are at a very late stage in life are considering whether quality of life is more important than longevity.

 

My elderly mum is literally being scared to death by what she sees on TV and the masks well meaning care workers have to wear. All she wants is a hug.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Athy said:

Well, some perhaps. Others are realising (as Mrs. Athy has, and I think you may have too) that they much prefer working from home to going into an office several miles away. We like having our groceries delivered by Tesco and Waitrose and, judging by the difficulty of booking delivery slots, many other people do too. I love supermarkets but I have, to my surprise, adapted to not going round them. Just about the only places we've been in the last month are to the butcher's (next door to our house), the garden centre for plants and barbecue charcoal, and the boat for one weekend.

   It would have been nice to meet my best friend and his wife for a day (we can do so now if we wish, I guess) or to go antiques-hunting, which we enjoy. But most of the time, we've found that being locked away quite suits us, and that it doesn't even feel like being locked away. The garden's in better condition than it has been for years, too.

Yes, some people like being controlled, others don't.

 

I agree that some good has come out of this, every cloud has a silver lining and all that. Particularly on an environmental level, working from home and home delivery makes a lot of sense. Reducing pollution by reducing the amount of travel overall is obviously good. I just hope everyone at all levels of society will take it on board, not just those being told what to do.

 

If this was natures way of preventing a global environmental catastrophe, then it might just work. Lets hope so.

Edited by Rambling Boater
  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rambling Boater said:

Yes, some people like being controlled, others don't.

 

 

Perhaps so. It was irksome not to be able to go over to our boat for a while, but we haven';t felt "controlled"; "looked after" perhaps, though as I said, it hasn't impinged on our lives much, and has brought positives too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has highlighted for me how different people's experiences vary.  I know dozens of people who have tested postive.  A large proportion of those are work colleagues.  I also know of 4 people who have died, all older relatives of friends.

 

A few weeks back when arguing with my elderly parents about the wisdom of them going out and round the shops on a daily basis, my dad said "well we don't even know anyone who's had it, do you?"  Implying perhaps that the whole thing was some kind of ruse.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Athy said:

Perhaps so. It was irksome not to be able to go over to our boat for a while, but we haven';t felt "controlled"; "looked after" perhaps, though as I said, it hasn't impinged on our lives much, and has brought positives too. 

Being looked after is one thing, a nanny state is another. Let's hope it's the former 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Athy said:

Perhaps so. It was irksome not to be able to go over to our boat for a while, but we haven';t felt "controlled"; "looked after" perhaps, though as I said, it hasn't impinged on our lives much, and has brought positives too. 

We have looked upon lockdown with positivity. It enabled us to get stuff done at home and explore our local area by foot. But that has to come to an end at some point. Things have to get back to some sort of normality. As much as we would have loved Liam to stay home on 80% pay it couldn't last forever.

Edited by Naughty Cal
  • Greenie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rambling Boater said:

Being looked after is one thing, a nanny state is another. Let's hope it's the former 

Yes, it is. A nanny state would smother and over-protect people, which in my view hasn't happened.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, doratheexplorer said:

This thread has highlighted for me how different people's experiences vary.  I know dozens of people who have tested postive.  A large proportion of those are work colleagues.  I also know of 4 people who have died, all older relatives of friends.

 

A few weeks back when arguing with my elderly parents about the wisdom of them going out and round the shops on a daily basis, my dad said "well we don't even know anyone who's had it, do you?"  Implying perhaps that the whole thing was some kind of ruse.

The virus is real. Some say that the risk is similar to previous bouts of flu epidemics, some say it's a ruse, some say it could kill half a million people in the UK.

 

The true risk will be debatable until we look back in hindsight but like any potential crisis people will jump onto it to drive their own agenda. 

Link to post
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.