Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Coronavirus: The Thread

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Coronavirus: The Thread

Old 8th Apr 2020, 11:46
  #4401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by Effluent Man View Post
Not in The Blitz, or Hamburg, Berlin or Dresden.
Even then. It's obvious. Very simple maths. Your little tiny list is part of a war
Islandlad is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 11:47
  #4402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 2
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator View Post
Don't apply the wisdom of age to the intelligence of youth
Is there much of that?
Islandlad is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 11:56
  #4403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 945
Just go to the RAF cemetery at Heestraße in Berlin. Sadly filled with 19 year olds.

https://www.cwgc.org/find-a-cemetery...-war-cemetery/
Less Hair is online now  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 12:18
  #4404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 917
krismiler is online now  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 12:27
  #4405 (permalink)  
Cunning Artificer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 73
Posts: 3,117
I wonder how many under-40s would accept those odds in order to get back to work or go down the pub for a pint with their mates?
43 in 5000 is 0.86%

When I was discussing my pending bypass surgery with the cardiologist back in '91 he said the procedure was 98% successful. I asked what happened to the other 2% and he didn't answer, he just looked at me in that quizzical way doctors have when you ask an awkward question. I accepted the odds and had the op. Not much choice was there?
Blacksheep is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 12:31
  #4406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by Blacksheep View Post
43 in 5000 is 0.86%

When I was discussing my pending bypass surgery with the cardiologist back in '91 he said the procedure was 98% successful. I asked what happened to the other 2% and he didn't answer, he just looked at me in that quizzical way doctors have when you ask an awkward question. I accepted the odds and had the op. Not much choice was there?

Good example of bias in reporting! The 2% don't get to post about their experience . . .
VP959 is online now  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 12:53
  #4407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Age: 61
Posts: 48
Originally Posted by meadowrun View Post
BBC site is running a little video- "Message from Wuhan - Learn from our mistakes".
Full of vignettes of young people and how they struggled to cope with the lockdown.

Not one word about the causal epicenter of the disease.
Not one word about food safety and dealing decisively with legal and illegal wild animal trade.
Not one word about the dreaded second or third waves.
I've read that China has some new food related law that appears to be a half-baked attempt at solving the problem. Due to come into effect - late 2020.
No hurry there then.
They seem to be incapable of learning.

I have learned from China's repeated, most serious mistakes.
I trust them to do the right thing like I believe I could move the country 6 inches to the north.
If China was an airline, they would be banned from flying anywhere internationally for being unsafe and not fit for purpose.
At the appropriate time I want the international community to pressure China on their unacceptable methods in dealing with disease causing food practices
and for each to present an itemized bill and demand for reparations.
Well said, and I might add, the SARS outbreak of 2003-2004, similar source, same country. So, twice on their patch and on their watch and how many near misses over the years?
Little cloud is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 12:56
  #4408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: 5Y
Posts: 488
Originally Posted by krismiler View Post
​​​​​​​OK. I can comment in detail on that video. I have been involved in exactly the type of research that is described, and that is completely misrepresented by that story.

Screening bats etc for novel viruses is exactly the sort of work that China should be doing and that we have been begging for more funding to do. We want to roll that testing out across hotspots all over the world. Focussing on hotspots like Wuhan is exactly the correct thing to do, I was not aware of that work but I am delighted to see that it was being done. They are NOT working with live coronavirus, there is no chance of a lab virus 'escaping'. They will be immediately inactivating potentially hazardous material and then studying the DNA/RNA in completely safe and dead samples.

Yes, there is a faint chance of poor procedure infecting a lab worker during initial collection, but that would require that a human transmissible virus already exists and is far less likely than to happen to anyone randomly butchering wild animals.

In the past, I have gone on trips to collect samples from bats, the protocols require that we wear full PPE. But we would often be entering a house in which a family lived, in our full PPE, collect bats and leave. All very strange.

Last edited by double_barrel; 8th Apr 2020 at 13:19.
double_barrel is online now  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:14
  #4409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 406
Originally Posted by krismiler View Post
More junk Kris.

”we must keep asking questions of China. And if that takes a lawsuit, why not?”

If there isn’t even enough evidence for proper journalistic sources to verify this, how on earth would you establish the proofs for a legal case?

Blah, blah, blah.
Torquetalk is online now  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:14
  #4410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,594
Originally Posted by SASless View Post
Around these parts it stands for "African Methodist Episcopal Church" which is not the AME Zion Church....and neither are aligned with the Methodist Church that began in England.
Splitters!
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:15
  #4411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 868
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Good example of bias in reporting! The 2% don't get to post about their experience . . .
A bit like those sailors of yore who claimed they were saved by dolphins.
dead_pan is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:17
  #4412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 61
Posts: 5,594
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Does anybody here have any ideas why many patients need multiple tests?
A local doctor explained to me that there is more than one testing method/protocol, each with their own false positive and false negative issues. As I am not clear on the granular distinctions, I'll not comment further beyond this thought: perhaps using more than one protocol/test on a patient is meant to improve the chance that false pos/false neg is eliminated as a result. (Which then gives the medicos better information to work with and thus direct treatment ....)

EDIT:
Hmm, looks like I missed a few pages and that nice graph posted about cancer false pos and false negs helps to explain what my local MD friend was trying to tell me.

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 8th Apr 2020 at 13:31.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:21
  #4413 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 868
Originally Posted by Blacksheep View Post
43 in 5000 is 0.86%

When I was discussing my pending bypass surgery with the cardiologist back in '91 he said the procedure was 98% successful. I asked what happened to the other 2% and he didn't answer, he just looked at me in that quizzical way doctors have when you ask an awkward question. I accepted the odds and had the op. Not much choice was there?
Reminds me of a story a chum told me about his father when he had his heart op. He'd been told it had approx 75% success rate. He was overjoyed when one of the three other blokes in the ward who'd also had similar ops died - "Woohoo! I'm in the clear now!"
dead_pan is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:22
  #4414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 798
double_barrel: Thanks for the sensible response. I was wondering about possible negatives; if a patient is tested in the morning and the result comes up negative, then I assume the re-test would be done perhaps the next day, rather than immediately. Is it possible to re-test immediately following a negative, although the delays reported in getting results back would presumably preclude the idea of same day re-tests? On the day to which I referred, there seems to have been so many re-tests that it must surely call into question the accuracy of the tests with something like 25% of the tests having to be repeated.
KelvinD is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:26
  #4415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 17,684
They're are some good people in this world

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coron...ls/ar-BB12iXyv

TJ Kim can’t play lacrosse -- COVID-19 took the sport away. And at age 16, he can’t drive alone.

But Kim can fly. And he’s turned his flying lessons into missions of mercy, bringing desperately needed supplies to rural hospitals in need.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:28
  #4416 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 868
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 View Post
A local doctor explained to me that there is more than one testing method/protocol, each with their own false positive and false negative issues. As I am not clear on the granular distinctions, I'll not comment further beyond this thought: perhaps using more than one protocol/test on a patient is meant to improve the chance that false pos/false neg is eliminated as a result. (Which then gives the medicos better information to work with and thus direct treatment ....)
In some respects a positive test is a reasonable outcome in that at all this b*ggering around with social distancing, PPE, waiting for vaccines etc is at an end. Just a couple of weeks of dancing with the dragon and you'll be in the clear (or not).
dead_pan is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:31
  #4417 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 390
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
double_barrel: Thanks for the sensible response. I was wondering about possible negatives; if a patient is tested in the morning and the result comes up negative, then I assume the re-test would be done perhaps the next day, rather than immediately. Is it possible to re-test immediately following a negative, although the delays reported in getting results back would presumably preclude the idea of same day re-tests? On the day to which I referred, there seems to have been so many re-tests that it must surely call into question the accuracy of the tests with something like 25% of the tests having to be repeated.

As before, the current UK test can only detect whether or not the virus is present (or more accurately, a small segment of its RNA) at the instant that the swab is taken. If someone is infected, and infective (i.e. actively shedding viral particles) there's a good chance that these will be collected on the swab and then give a positive test result (currently this test seems to be around 95% accurate, from what I've been told).

If someone is infected, but not shedding viral particles there's a good chance they will test negative, and likewise for someone is uninfected.

The current UK test cannot determine whether someone has been infected and recovered to the point where they are no longer infective, as they then won't be shedding viral particles.
VP959 is online now  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 13:39
  #4418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: London
Posts: 422
Originally Posted by double_barrel View Post
​​​​​​​OK. I can comment in detail on that video. I have been involved in exactly the type of research that is described, and that is completely misrepresented by that story.


Screening bats etc for novel viruses is exactly the sort of work that China should be doing and that we have been begging for more funding to do. We want to roll that testing out across hotspots all over the world. Focussing on hotspots like Wuhan is exactly the correct thing to do, I was not aware of that work but I am delighted to see that it was being done. They are NOT working with live coronavirus, there is no chance of a lab virus 'escaping'. They will be immediately inactivating potentially hazardous material and then studying the DNA/RNA in completely safe and dead samples.

Yes, there is a faint chance of poor procedure infecting a lab worker during initial collection, but that would require that a human transmissible virus already exists and is far less likely than to happen to anyone randomly butchering wild animals.

In the past, I have gone on trips to collect samples from bats, the protocols require that we wear full PPE. But we would often be entering a house in which a family lived, in our full PPE, collect bats and leave. All very strange.
I've no idea what sort of research was taking place at those laboratories in Wuhan. However, there are laboratories around the world that house live bats - not necessarily intentionally ones carrying specific viruses. But they may be carrying viruses - and being alive they can of course escape, bite people etc.

Moreover, virology laboratories routinely work with "live" viruses (if you can call viruses alive) and live animals. E.g. if you look at a recent paper "Infection and Rapid Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Ferrets"...

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...31312820301876

You can't do research like this without a "live" infectious virus and a live animal (in this case a ferret). Of course they take strict precautions - but the reason these are needed is because of the small risk that a laboratory worker could become infected. They are doing nasal washes on on infected ferrets - it's not risk free!
stagger is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 14:19
  #4419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 917
krismiler is online now  
Old 8th Apr 2020, 14:27
  #4420 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,913
You could almost get the impression that Sky News Australia have something against China, bit like some on here to be honest.
ATNotts is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.