2019/2020 season

Discuss all things Rovers related except...
User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27940
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by Rover the Top » Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:29 pm

No I've only ever been offered the 'flu one, which as far as I understand has to be updated each year because the virus mutates rendering previous versions useless. I'm no biologist, but I'm taking it as a given that existing vaccines won't work against this new corona virus.

stillgrowling
Valued squad member
Posts: 481
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:58 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by stillgrowling » Mon Mar 16, 2020 5:07 pm

It's just that most of the deaths are caused by respiratory complications, ie pneumonia.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 15461
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by mrblackbat » Mon Mar 16, 2020 5:53 pm

Pneumonia is a condition, not a disease. It's caused by viruses like influenza, colds that end up with complications and other illnesses like coronavirus.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pneumonia

So you can't be vaccinated against pneumonia, the "pneumonia vaccination" is actually the pneumococal vaccination, which is for a bacteria that commonly causes pneumonia.

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinati ... ccination/

stillgrowling
Valued squad member
Posts: 481
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 11:58 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by stillgrowling » Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:18 pm

Thanks Mr B -that's interesting. You live and learn!

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 15461
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by mrblackbat » Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:27 pm

Rover the Top wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 8:50 am
mrblackbat wrote:
Sat Mar 14, 2020 6:44 pm
If you think panic buying is humanity at its best, you're clearly an odd chap.
Darth was very obviously being sarcastic, before you get too carried away insulting someone else...
Wee let's ignore that....

There's no vaccine yet for covid-19, but neither is there a fully effective flu vaccination either. There are many strains of flu, which as you say, mutate over time, meaning that you can have the vaccine and still get flu (which is now why I don't bother having the vaccine, cause I got flu after having it). Which in turn means that it can be just as lethal for those people who are vulnerable.

In fact, if you look at the mortality rate in the North West for pneumonia, which is a complication of flu, it's about 14%, so definitely something that is equivalent to COVID-19. According to this 17,000 people die a year in England on average to flu, which is still 10,000 more than have died in total from covid-19. Currently, you're still more likely to die from flu than from coronavirus.

World wide deaths for flu are reported at ~650,000 a year. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza

So yes, I think this is all a huge overreaction, and the real damage is going to be caused by that overreaction in the coming weeks and months when the economy is completely battered, people lose jobs and their homes, people don't receive appropriate care for other illnesses (as with the increase in Lassa fever deaths during the Ebola outbreak), people's pensions are destroyed and so the over 65s will have to carry on working, supply shortages bring about food shortages and starvation. Of course, the poorest branches of society are the ones who will suffer most from this.

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27940
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:08 am

mrblackbat wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:27 pm



Wee let's ignore that....
:shrug:
There's no vaccine yet for covid-19, but neither is there a fully effective flu vaccination either. There are many strains of flu, which as you say, mutate over time, meaning that you can have the vaccine and still get flu (which is now why I don't bother having the vaccine, cause I got flu after having it). Which in turn means that it can be just as lethal for those people who are vulnerable.

In fact, if you look at the mortality rate in the North West for pneumonia, which is a complication of flu, it's about 14%, so definitely something that is equivalent to COVID-19.
There are undoubtedly many comparisons you can draw, but most aren't relevant to why people are asked to self-isolate. The point is a vaccine, even if not 100% effective on an individual by indivdual case, allows the spread of the illness to be slowed and reduces the risk of an epidemic. The issue with Covid-19 isn't that it's more likely to kill you, by all accounts it's less life-threatening. It's that without a vaccine, too many people could become infected at the same time for the health service to deal with, meaning people will die because there isn't the resources to treat them (from this virus and any other illnesses), rather than it being unavoidably lethal for them. When the vaccine is developed, the advice will change to more like what we are told for 'flu.

Of course there are arguments against quarantining the country, the economic impact is going to make worst-case Brexit fears look like boom time. It's why we don't do it for 'flu, even though the vaccine isn't perfect. Maybe it is an overreaction and a few hundred thousand lives aren't worth saving for the long term effect that will cause. I wouldn't like to be the one making that call.

User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 18380
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by Gibbon » Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:21 am

But they’re talking about a properly tested vaccine not being available until the new year. Rushing them out could be very dangerous.


User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 15461
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by mrblackbat » Tue Mar 17, 2020 9:03 am

Rover the Top wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 8:08 am
mrblackbat wrote:
Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:27 pm



Wee let's ignore that....
:shrug:
There's no vaccine yet for covid-19, but neither is there a fully effective flu vaccination either. There are many strains of flu, which as you say, mutate over time, meaning that you can have the vaccine and still get flu (which is now why I don't bother having the vaccine, cause I got flu after having it). Which in turn means that it can be just as lethal for those people who are vulnerable.

In fact, if you look at the mortality rate in the North West for pneumonia, which is a complication of flu, it's about 14%, so definitely something that is equivalent to COVID-19.
There are undoubtedly many comparisons you can draw, but most aren't relevant to why people are asked to self-isolate. The point is a vaccine, even if not 100% effective on an individual by indivdual case, allows the spread of the illness to be slowed and reduces the risk of an epidemic. The issue with Covid-19 isn't that it's more likely to kill you, by all accounts it's less life-threatening. It's that without a vaccine, too many people could become infected at the same time for the health service to deal with, meaning people will die because there isn't the resources to treat them (from this virus and any other illnesses), rather than it being unavoidably lethal for them. When the vaccine is developed, the advice will change to more like what we are told for 'flu.

Of course there are arguments against quarantining the country, the economic impact is going to make worst-case Brexit fears look like boom time. It's why we don't do it for 'flu, even though the vaccine isn't perfect. Maybe it is an overreaction and a few hundred thousand lives aren't worth saving for the long term effect that will cause. I wouldn't like to be the one making that call.
I don't think it's going to be a few hundred thousand. I don't think it will be close. The infection rate is something that isn't being considered either - its much lower than flu: just look at the number of people tested negative despite close contact with those who have the virus.

In terms of vaccination, they're already cutting corners in the US and skipping whole segments of testing to get the vaccine: what's betting the side effects end up being worse than the actual virus?

And the whole point about flu as a comparison is one of a risk based approach. We know the vaccine isn't all that effective, and yet nobody panics and nobody calls for mass quarantined on the off chance you'll get flu. We know that flu stretches out healthcare system to breaking each year, yet we don't have the drastic changes in society that we're now calling for. More people die from flu each year than have died full stop from coronavirus: are you saying you're happy for those people to die?

This is hysteria led rather than risk led. The risk is to certain groups: the elderly and those with pre-exisitng respiratory conditions, so actually the advice should be for those people to reduce their social contact, not everybody. It's the exact reason they aren't cutrently closing schools: they don't want grandparents ending up looking after kids. It's far better for everyone else to catch it and develop a herd immunity, and for the vast majority of healthy adults, its not a serious illness that would mean anything other than staying at home for a week, as shown by the article you linked.

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27940
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Mar 17, 2020 9:50 am

mrblackbat wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 9:03 am


I don't think it's going to be a few hundred thousand. I don't think it will be close.
Well, that report says
In total, in an unmitigated epidemic, we would predict approximately 510,000 deaths in GBand 2.2 million in the US, not accounting for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed on mortality.
I'll happily admit my knowledge is insufficient to challenge those figures, but if you're confident they're wrong, can we see your alternative research?
mrblackbat wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 9:03 am
More people die from flu each year than have died full stop from coronavirus: are you saying you're happy for those people to die?
No. Don't be ridiculous. I'll rephrase for you: The aim is not to stop people dying altogether, nor to stop the disease from spreading. People are still going to catch it eventually and some will unfortunately pass away as a result. The aim is to spread the number of cases over a longer time period so that the limited resources we have can treat a greater number.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but you seem to have the attitude that because more die from 'flu, we should do nothing about Covid-19. The point is, even more will die from 'flu than normal if nothing is done about Covid-19, because the resources that are normally there to treat them won't be available. Even more would die from 'flu without the vaccines. Again, I'm not enough of an expert to say there's an overreaction - some argue not enough is being done. But there's a clear logical misstep in comparing to other illnesses based on mortality rates whilst ignoring the means in place to handle them.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 15461
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by mrblackbat » Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:05 am

Now you're doing what you accuse me of. I haven't said "do nothing" anywhere? I've said it's an overreaction, and the response has been disproportionate to any other illness out there. If you're in the vulnerable groups you need to take precautions, but I firmly believe closing everything down will cause more damage, especially to the poor, than the virus would.

But of course, I've said that, so you're going to try and pick a fight and be contrary.... :shrug:

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27940
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Mar 17, 2020 10:53 am

I apologise, but I did say tell me if I've got it wrong, I didn't just assume. Since we're not at a stage where everything is shut down, and you keep drawing a direct comparison to flu where as you keep pointing out, no social measures are enforced, that gave the impression you think the same should be the approach with Covid-19. So what is your solution? I think this from the Dutch PM sets out the scenarios pretty clearly:
Mark Rutte wrote:Those who have had the virus are usually immune afterwards. Just like in the old days with measles. The larger the group that is immune, the less chance that the virus will jump to vulnerable elderly people and people with poor health. With group immunity you build, as it were, a protective wall around them.

That is the principle. But we have to realize that it can take months or even longer to build up group immunity and during that time we need to shield people who are at greater risk as much as possible.

All in all, there are three possible scenarios. The first scenario is: maximally controlling the virus. This leads to controlled distribution among groups that are least at risk.

That is our scenario of choice. Maximum control means that we try to use measures to level off and smooth the peak in the number of infections and spread it over a longer period.

With this approach in which most people will only get minor complaints, we build immunity and ensure that the healthcare system can handle it. With the aim that nursing homes, in-home care, hospitals, and especially intensive care units are not overloaded. So that there is always sufficient capacity to help the people who are most vulnerable.

The second scenario is that we let the virus run unchecked. This would completely overload our healthcare system at the peak of contamination, leaving insufficient capacity to help vulnerable elderly and other high-risk patients. We must of course prevent that at all costs.

The third scenario is that we endlessly try to stop the virus. That means completely locking down the country. Such a rigorous approach may seem attractive at first sight, but experts point out that it definitely would not be a matter of days or weeks.

In that scenario, we would in fact have to shut down our country for a year or even longer, with all the consequences that entails. And even if it were practically possible – to only let people leave their homes with permission for such a long time – then the virus could immediately resurface if the measures were withdrawn.
Do you think he's wrong and there's a fourth scenario that lies somewhere between the first and second? I think his first point explains quite succinctly why it's not being treated like illnesses that have been around a long time.

Also, still looking forward to your estimated mortality figures.

User avatar
mrblackbat
Promising manager
Posts: 15461
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by mrblackbat » Tue Mar 17, 2020 11:21 am

You can look forward to them then.

As for the comparison to flu: perhaps you should have read what I was saying instead of assuming?

But keep on being antagonistic and trying to have a fight. I'm going to log out now.

User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 18380
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by Gibbon » Tue Mar 17, 2020 12:34 pm

mrblackbat wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 11:21 am
I'm going to log out now.
Image

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27940
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: 2019/2020 season

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Mar 17, 2020 1:05 pm

mrblackbat wrote:
Tue Mar 17, 2020 11:21 am
You can look forward to them then.

As for the comparison to flu: perhaps you should have read what I was saying instead of assuming?

But keep on being antagonistic and trying to have a fight. I'm going to log out now.
What on earth is antagonising you?

You disputed it would be hundreds of thousands of deaths, I provided expert evidence estimating it will be, and politely asked you to back up your own prediction? If you have your own figures that contend with that evidence, then sharing them would be reassuring. Alternatively, if you were just expressing your own personal hunch, that would also be useful to know.

What you said about 'flu was the "whole point" is it is about risk assessment, the vaccine isn't perfect but no one calls for quarantine, and that 'flu stretches the health system but we don't make drastic social changes. You think the best thing is for everyone who is not high risk to catch it. It's not clear from any of that what practical measure you'd put in place that is not quarantine or social changes but would actually be doing more than nothing? I've provided a study and explaination from the Dutch PM as to why things have to be different with Covid-19, given there isn't a vaccine. You think the measures currently in place to protect the vulnerable and control the spread are over the top, you don't think we should go further and close everything down but you agree doing nothing isn't an option. That's all 3 options according to the Dutch PM ruled out. All I'm asking is what is your fourth option?

Why does everything have to be about fighting and making things personal? There are plenty of times I'd argue with mainstream opinion, if I feel I have sufficient knowledge to make my case. Here I don't. As far as I can tell, the stats and the reasoning make sense and the only real objection I can muster is that it's bloody inconvenient. But you disagree with the experts, why are you so prickly about being asked to explain further?

Post Reply