Stom wrote:Haven’t been tested. Is there any point if we had it back in feb?morepork wrote:Do you have antibodies?
Think you had it. Be nice to know if you had a possibly protective immune response to it.
Stom wrote:Haven’t been tested. Is there any point if we had it back in feb?morepork wrote:Do you have antibodies?
Sorry, I thought the if covered that :pmorepork wrote:Stom wrote:Haven’t been tested. Is there any point if we had it back in feb?morepork wrote:Do you have antibodies?
Think you had it. Be nice to know if you had a possibly protective immune response to it.
That's what I was going to ask- our staff wanted antibody tests, so I sorted it, but very unsure of their use other than explaining some previous symptoms....is the immunity a given now?Stom wrote:Sorry, I thought the if covered that :pmorepork wrote:Stom wrote:
Haven’t been tested. Is there any point if we had it back in feb?
Think you had it. Be nice to know if you had a possibly protective immune response to it.
Yeah, but would it show up?
What's the proposal for getting it?morepork wrote:The global biomedical community would like an answer to just that. They need data.
well here's to someone knowing what they are doing, somewhere.....morepork wrote:You would assume following up individuals diagnosed with the virus via PCR for seropositive serum. Taking serum or plasma at regular intervals over time and using it to conduct inactivating antibody assays in vitro. Culture cells that are permissive for coronavirus infection and run dilutions of serum to see if it blocks uptake of the virus by cells. All pretty standard stuff. You can freeze and bank serum so it doesn't have to be done fresh. There are surely such banks around the world at the moment.
morepork wrote:Knowing the muppets over here, Mike Pence has probably directed HR at the CDC to open a position for an exorcist, with preference given to individuals with TV experience.
Maybe, but I'm pretty OK now. Was about a month to 2 that I just didn't feel 100%Banquo wrote:That's what I was going to ask- our staff wanted antibody tests, so I sorted it, but very unsure of their use other than explaining some previous symptoms....is the immunity a given now?Stom wrote:Sorry, I thought the if covered that :pmorepork wrote:
Think you had it. Be nice to know if you had a possibly protective immune response to it.
Yeah, but would it show up?
Stom- you might want to have your sats checked and get some rehab advice.
"There is one outside chance for a cure. I think of it as shock treatment, as I said, it's a very outside chance...Have you ever heard of hydroxychloroquine?"Banquo wrote:morepork wrote:Knowing the muppets over here, Mike Pence has probably directed HR at the CDC to open a position for an exorcist, with preference given to individuals with TV experience.![]()
I shouldn't laugh, I know.
And that's what really hurts...Digby wrote:We voted them in, and they didn't exactly look a competent bunch when we did so. So pretty much we've done it to ourselvesfivepointer wrote:
We deserve better than this.
it wears me outEugene Wrayburn wrote:And that's what really hurts...Digby wrote:We voted them in, and they didn't exactly look a competent bunch when we did so. So pretty much we've done it to ourselvesfivepointer wrote:
We deserve better than this.
I think we now know the way to purest hell.Eugene Wrayburn wrote:And that's what really hurts...Digby wrote:We voted them in, and they didn't exactly look a competent bunch when we did so. So pretty much we've done it to ourselvesfivepointer wrote:
We deserve better than this.
And yet it could have been worse.Digby wrote:it wears me outEugene Wrayburn wrote:And that's what really hurts...Digby wrote:
We voted them in, and they didn't exactly look a competent bunch when we did so. So pretty much we've done it to ourselves
You think Corbyn would've pursued herd immunity, first openly then through the current miasma of government "guidance"?Sandydragon wrote:And yet it could have been worse.Digby wrote:it wears me outEugene Wrayburn wrote:
And that's what really hurts...
I don't for one second think Corbyn and his team would have handled this any better. Here we are taking the piss out of the Americans for their binary choice, but ours wasn't that much different (arguably theirs is a better one).
I doubt that he would have acted decisively and if the herd immunity option was proposed by SAGE then do you think he would have argued for an alternative? This is not an area that anyone would consider to be a strength of Corbyn.Puja wrote:You think Corbyn would've pursued herd immunity, first openly then through the current miasma of government "guidance"?Sandydragon wrote:And yet it could have been worse.Digby wrote:
it wears me out
I don't for one second think Corbyn and his team would have handled this any better. Here we are taking the piss out of the Americans for their binary choice, but ours wasn't that much different (arguably theirs is a better one).
Puja
Coz Corbyn is exactly the same kind of guy as Putin? Not seeing much justification for this one.Digby wrote:Russia denied Covid was a thing in Russia, which is about as much as I've got to go on for how Corbyn would have responded, certainly there's little evidence he relies on evidence even if he might not be quite as crazy as his brother
1) & 2) - Only if he’d ignored SAGE.Son of Mathonwy wrote:Coz Corbyn is exactly the same kind of guy as Putin? Not seeing much justification for this one.Digby wrote:Russia denied Covid was a thing in Russia, which is about as much as I've got to go on for how Corbyn would have responded, certainly there's little evidence he relies on evidence even if he might not be quite as crazy as his brother
Instead, how about Corbyn being less in love with business and capitalism than Boris ... reasonable assumption?
This means he would have probably worried less about impacting business and hence have:
1) Put border controls in place at the outset,
2) Locked down earlier.
Also, he would have naturally have turned to state resources before the private sector, so would probably have:
3) beefed up NHS PPE and ventilator procurement rather than bringing in private sector firms with no experience of such things,
4) utilised local health resources from the start, building contact tracing up from this, rather than using Serco (which has no experience etc etc).
5) Obviously there would only have been a few months since the election, but we can reasonably think that Corbyn would have increased spending on the NHS in that time. So NHS resources would have been a little better by March,
6) Corbyn isn't the world-class bullshitter that Johnson is, so we might have been lied to a little less (whatever value you place on this).
7) We can reasonably think that Brexit would have been put to one side and an extension to article 50 agreed while Covid-19 is the big deal, hence no time wasted on negotiation or business preparation for Brexit.
That is a bizarre take and one which appears directly taken from the Mail or one of Murdoch's ilk. Corbyn advocated investigating and gathering evidence to go through The Hague, instead of just declaring Russia guilty by fiat, which is pretty consistent from him in anything to do with foreign affairs - Iraq, Syria, bin Laden. Whether you agree with him on that or not, it's a long distance from him being in lockstep with Putin on every issue.Digby wrote:Corbyn did his best to side with Russia after their attack on Salisbury, being critical of us and praising what he weirdly thinks Russia (still) represents is on message for the antiquated idiot