The Lemon Fool

redsturgeon wrote:Mrs RS and I seem to be the only people we know who have not had covid.

It must be time for another poll.

Just for clarification I realise that it is nearly impossible for anyone to say for certain they have not had covid but let say to the best of your knowledge.

John

I answered yes. If I'd seen the poll when you first put it up, the answer would've been No. Tested positive on Tuesday, and have had symptoms but nothing serious.

I almost certainly acquired it last Thursday. At the pub after choir rehearsal. A friend who'd sat next to me there texted me on Sunday: she'd tested positive. Two others who'd been at the same end of the table as us tested positive on Monday, and me on Tuesday.

On Sunday, having myself tested negative, I went to another social event and probably spread it. Another friend who gave me a lift there tested positive on Thursday. I feel worse about having very probably given it to her than I do measured in lurgy symptoms.

But this kind-of demonstrates the uselessness of those tests. You test negative, you go and socialise, you spread the lurgy. Test positive a couple of days later, the damage is done: I'm self-isolating now, but wasn't on Sunday. Might be much better to be guided by whether you feel a bit iffy.

Perhaps worst of all, the plumber should've been here **today** doing a job for me. I had to 'fess up to him that he probably should postpone working in my germ-ridden bathroom. **** knows when he'll find me another day.

[edit to add] Oh, and I'm outside the government statistics. I dutifully went to their website to report my test result, but it refused my report!

UncleEbenezer wrote:
But this kind-of demonstrates the uselessness of those tests. .

Not useless - without the tests you (and the others) would go on spreading the virus for a further several days.
The test, and your decision to self quarantine, cuts down the reproduction rate. But with something as infective as the latest variant it would be wise to take additional precautions - especially the elderly. I would have added the choir practice to the attendance at the pub as being a likely infection source.
However with the removal of the LFT kits it looks like the (English) government has decided that it wants everyone to be infected ASAP. And as a sop to the elderly , they will offer a further vaccine booster to the over 75s sometime soon - though with the infectivity of the latest variant that may be too late.

Not had it yet
though 3 who sit near me at work have in the last 2 weeks
Including one who sits next to me and the last time I was in, with he came down with it 2 days later
I tested twice after that - both negative

scotia wrote:

UncleEbenezer wrote:
But this kind-of demonstrates the uselessness of those tests. .

Not useless - without the tests you (and the others) would go on spreading the virus for a further several days.

Without the negative test, I'd have stayed home on Sunday:
(a) I felt a bit iffy and had a cough - though I was inclined to attribute that to having overdone things on Saturday (and been caught out when a cold wind got up on the moors in the afternoon - having gone out dressed for the morning's warm spring weather).
(b) I'd just been pinged that I'd spent that time in the pub next to a now-confirmed case.

Given those two, it was only on the basis of a firmly negative test that I went out and spread it on Sunday (at another choir).

UncleEbenezer wrote:

scotia wrote:

UncleEbenezer wrote:
But this kind-of demonstrates the uselessness of those tests. .

Not useless - without the tests you (and the others) would go on spreading the virus for a further several days.

Without the negative test, I'd have stayed home on Sunday:
(a) I felt a bit iffy and had a cough - though I was inclined to attribute that to having overdone things on Saturday (and been caught out when a cold wind got up on the moors in the afternoon - having gone out dressed for the morning's warm spring weather).
(b) I'd just been pinged that I'd spent that time in the pub next to a now-confirmed case.

Given those two, it was only on the basis of a firmly negative test that I went out and spread it on Sunday (at another choir).

Yes , I appreciate your quandary. But with the current high infectivity rate here in Scotland, I most certainly would have gone nowhere near a choir practice. And without a test, I probably would have gone back to normal activities while I was still infective.
About a month ago, our local GP practice opened up in-person routine consultations, with the intention that these would soon become the norm. This week they are operating under "considerable stress" and are only coping with urgent consultations. Such has been the advance of the latest Omicron BA.2 variant.

scotia wrote:And as a sop to the elderly, they will offer a further vaccine booster to the over 75s sometime soon - though with the infectivity of the latest variant that may be too late.

With respect to the "too late". We will be managing Covid for decades.* At some point we need to stop being mainly reactive and just give people decadal, yearly, quarterly or monthly boosters. Or whatever other frequency the clinical data leads to.

* We've been dealing with the 1918 flu for over a century.

9873210 wrote:

scotia wrote:And as a sop to the elderly, they will offer a further vaccine booster to the over 75s sometime soon - though with the infectivity of the latest variant that may be too late.

With respect to the "too late". We will be managing Covid for decades.* At some point we need to stop being mainly reactive and just give people decadal, yearly, quarterly or monthly boosters. Or whatever other frequency the clinical data leads to.

* We've been dealing with the 1918 flu for over a century.

Indeed.
Possibly also worth pointing out that the "annual" flu jab is only such because the flu season is traditionally quite short
- given how efficiency wanes it's not uncommon for some to get two in the year

-sd

9873210 wrote:

scotia wrote:And as a sop to the elderly, they will offer a further vaccine booster to the over 75s sometime soon - though with the infectivity of the latest variant that may be too late.

With respect to the "too late". We will be managing Covid for decades.* At some point we need to stop being mainly reactive and just give people decadal, yearly, quarterly or monthly boosters. Or whatever other frequency the clinical data leads to.

* We've been dealing with the 1918 flu for over a century.

Perhaps I should have been a bit more specific about the current position. The most infective variant of Covid is now sweeping the country, at a time when all restrictions are being abandoned. For healthy, fully vaccinated, sub 75 year old persons it is likely to be, for most, a mild dose of flu - but for the over 75s it could be significantly worse. Also it will once again overload the NHS. When the current government policy was decided upon, the BA.2 variant was probably not in view, but I would have preferred a more cautious removal of restrictions, at least until after the booster for the over 75s. I.E I consider that the policy should have been to get as much protection in place as possible before restrictions were abandoned.

scotia wrote:When the current government policy was decided upon, the BA.2 variant was probably not in view, but I would have preferred a more cautious removal of restrictions, at least until after the booster for the over 75s.

Yes but now that it IS known about and a million new cases in week
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60872687
why is there still silence from Boris and Co

pje16 wrote:

scotia wrote:When the current government policy was decided upon, the BA.2 variant was probably not in view, but I would have preferred a more cautious removal of restrictions, at least until after the booster for the over 75s.

Yes but now that it IS known about and a million new cases in week
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60872687
why is there still silence from Boris and Co

The answer to your question is in the article you cited:

"the high rates of transmission were fortunately not translating into lots of intensive care cases and deaths."

scotia wrote: Also it will once again overload the NHS.

How confident are you in that assertion? Perhaps "might" is a closer reality than "will".

I would hope, as I have stated before, there is a pragmatic rather than dogmatic, approach being taken, with suitably frequent advice and evidence being taken, such that decisions on restrictions can be amended, or reversed as necessary. (To be clear that applies in both directions).

Lootman wrote:

pje16 wrote:

scotia wrote:When the current government policy was decided upon, the BA.2 variant was probably not in view, but I would have preferred a more cautious removal of restrictions, at least until after the booster for the over 75s.

Yes but now that it IS known about and a million new cases in week
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60872687
why is there still silence from Boris and Co

The answer to your question is in the article you cited:

"the high rates of transmission were fortunately not translating into lots of intensive care cases and deaths."

I really meant Boris, rather than & co
and give it much more publicity that tucking it in a sentence halfway down the page of a web page that's not even on the UK news page of the BBC
It's as if it doesn't warrant much attention
btw please don't trot out "we have to live with it"
I'm so tired of seing that

pje16 wrote:btw please don't trot out "we have to live with it"
I'm so tired of seing that

You're probably tired of it because you know it's true.

It is no longer politically (or financially) viable to NOT live with it.
The public have spoken. They're fed up of Covid and want to get on with it.

absolutezero wrote:

pje16 wrote:btw please don't trot out "we have to live with it"
I'm so tired of seing that

You're probably tired of it because you know it's true.

It is no longer politically (or financially) viable to NOT live with it. The public have spoken. They're fed up of Covid and want to get on with it.

Yeah, sometimes I think there are some Lemons who actually enjoy Covid, and all the opportunities it gives them to proselyte, pontificate and project. They resent the fact that the people have now decided to just live with it. Perhaps emotionally they just need to find a new obsession.

absolutezero wrote:

pje16 wrote:btw please don't trot out "we have to live with it"
I'm so tired of seing that

You're probably tired of it because you know it's true.

It is no longer politically (or financially) viable to NOT live with it.
The public have spoken. They're fed up of Covid and want to get on with it.

Ok please lend me a crystal ball
If I get it it will be
a) asymptomactic
b) mild symptoms
c) severe symptoms
d) long covid or
e) die
and I do not know which option would apply to me

pje16 wrote:

absolutezero wrote:

pje16 wrote:btw please don't trot out "we have to live with it"
I'm so tired of seing that

You're probably tired of it because you know it's true.

It is no longer politically (or financially) viable to NOT live with it.
The public have spoken. They're fed up of Covid and want to get on with it.

Ok please lend me a crystal ball
If I get it it will be
a) asymptomactic
b) mild symptoms
c) severe symptoms
d) long covid or
e) die
and I do not know which option would apply to me

What matters is surely the probability of (c) through (e)?

Currently the indications are that they are very low, perhaps no more than things like flu or the common cold which, presumably, do not drive you to paroxysms of hypochondria, paranoia and despair?

Lootman wrote:

absolutezero wrote:

pje16 wrote:btw please don't trot out "we have to live with it"
I'm so tired of seing that

You're probably tired of it because you know it's true.

It is no longer politically (or financially) viable to NOT live with it. The public have spoken. They're fed up of Covid and want to get on with it.

Yeah, sometimes I think there are some Lemons who actually enjoy Covid, and all the opportunities it gives them to proselyte, pontificate and project. They resent the fact that the people have now decided to just live with it. Perhaps emotionally they just need to find a new obsession.

Maybe they will move onto a wine 'party' in the office garden after work....

pje16 wrote:

absolutezero wrote:

pje16 wrote:btw please don't trot out "we have to live with it"
I'm so tired of seing that

You're probably tired of it because you know it's true.

It is no longer politically (or financially) viable to NOT live with it.
The public have spoken. They're fed up of Covid and want to get on with it.

Ok please lend me a crystal ball
If I get it it will be
a) asymptomactic
b) mild symptoms
c) severe symptoms
d) long covid or
e) die
and I do not know which option would apply to me

No. But you can attribute reasonably accurate probabilities based on your own circumstances.

In my own case:
A and B are extremely likely.
C is less likely.
A risk of D has always existed after any viral infection, it's just been renamed from Post Viral Syndrome.
E is very unlikely.

Lootman wrote:

pje16 wrote:

scotia wrote:When the current government policy was decided upon, the BA.2 variant was probably not in view, but I would have preferred a more cautious removal of restrictions, at least until after the booster for the over 75s.

Yes but now that it IS known about and a million new cases in week
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60872687
why is there still silence from Boris and Co

The answer to your question is in the article you cited:

"the high rates of transmission were fortunately not translating into lots of intensive care cases and deaths."

Given the above I'm dead curious about why the Chinese are still taking it so seriously. BBC tonight is reporting 25m people in Shanghai are to be locked down, and not a wussy UK type lockdown where there is a list of excuses long as your arm allowing you to go out anyway. What ARE they are so worried about?

Mike4 wrote:

Lootman wrote:

pje16 wrote:

scotia wrote:When the current government policy was decided upon, the BA.2 variant was probably not in view, but I would have preferred a more cautious removal of restrictions, at least until after the booster for the over 75s.

Yes but now that it IS known about and a million new cases in week
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60872687
why is there still silence from Boris and Co

The answer to your question is in the article you cited:

"the high rates of transmission were fortunately not translating into lots of intensive care cases and deaths."

Given the above I'm dead curious about why the Chinese are still taking it so seriously. BBC tonight is reporting 25m people in Shanghai are to be locked down, and not a wussy UK type lockdown where there is a list of excuses long as your arm allowing you to go out anyway. What ARE they are so worried about?

If I had to speculate on why China is out of sync right now with most of the rest of the world then I would suggest two factors:

1) They are riddled with guilt and shame because . . they started it.

2) Their approach throughout has been overkill, predicated no doubt on how docile their population is.