On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 12:44:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <t1esuh$olo$2@dont-email.me>, at 10:31:45 on Wed, 23 Mar
>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>On 23/03/2022 09:54, Certes wrote:
>>> On 23/03/2022 08:54, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t1elej$372$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:23:47 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 23/03/2022 08:12, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <t1crcs$4gd$2@dont-email.me>, at 15:53:00 on Tue, 22
>>>>>>Mar 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 22/03/2022 13:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <190dku9sht17s$.dlg@example1357.net>, at 12:06:18 on
>>>>>>>>Tue,  22  Mar 2022, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of
>>>>>>>>>>areas 10%
>>>>>>>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>>>>>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>>>>>>>> extent, but given up on covid.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  It takes a generation (or more) to eradicate a disease. And
>>>>>>>>then you  can  only do the ones which aren't mutating in real time.
>>>>>>>>  There was a TV commercial last night saying that Covid
>>>>>>>>vaccinations  <quote> like all others wear off so need to be boosted.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>  That'll be news to people given HPV which I think they've now
>>>>>>>>decided is  a once-a-lifetime jab.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Quite a few vaccines need topping up, IIRC yellow fever only
>>>>>>>lasts 7 years. Cut yourself on a rusty nail and you'll get a
>>>>>>>tetanus booster and so on.
>>>>
>>>>>>  Yes, not every traditional vaccine lasts a lifetime (or half a
>>>>>>lifetime), but most last more than six months.
>>>>>
>>>>> The operative word being "most".
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but apart from Covid which other ones last only six months? The
>>>>TV adverts are trying to give the impression that "most"
>>>>traditionally only last six months, which is why we need to accept
>>>>the need to "also" get re-jabbed for Covid every six months.
>>> Flu jabs seem to require annual renewal.  That's partly because
>>>variants
>>> emerge quickly but probably indicates time-limited effectiveness:
>>> perhaps as short as six months, as immunity is less important in summer.
>>> Other than its severity, COVID seems to have more in common with colds
>>> and flu than with the more serious diseases.
>>
>>The Flu annual cycle is because they have to try and predict which
>>variant is likely to be the one going round this year. It's quite
>>possible that Covid could end up in a similar position.
>
>That doesn't quite work, because the flu variants they are immunising
>against are already in circulation, they just try to predict which might
>be in the ascendancy six months later.
>
>Covid variants are all brand new.

No, they aren't brand new. They evolve from existing successful variants, so we do have clues about what might come
next.

> Unless anyone thinks that Alpha (or
>whatever) will be making a comeback next year.

No, but next winter's dominant variant is very likely to be a descendant of the current Omicron BA.2 sub-variant. So, a
vaccine designed to combat BA.2 is likely to be much more effective than one designed to combat Alpha.

"Reinfection with BA.2 following infection with BA.1 has been documented, however, initial data from population-level
reinfection studies suggest that infection with BA.1 provides strong protection against reinfection with BA.2, at least
for the limited period for which data are available."

<https://www.who.int/news/item/22-02-2022-statement-on-omicron-sublineage-ba.2>

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 11:57:22 +0000, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 08:54:48 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> Yes, but apart from Covid which other ones last only six months? The TV
>> adverts are trying to give the impression that "most" traditionally only
>> last six months, which is why we need to accept the need to "also" get
>> re-jabbed for Covid every six months.
>
>Maybe the research was a bit rushed, and no-one asked 'do we know
>how long this protection will last?'
>Back to the drawing board I think.

Don't be so ungrateful: the vaccines have saved many millions of lives, and allowed a return to near-normal life in many
countries. That's an astonishing achievement!

And we now have the knowledge to develop new versions of the vaccines that will be better able to combat new variants,
so it may not be necessary to keep tweaking the formula.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 12:40:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <t1eo6q$n80$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:10:50 on Wed, 23 Mar
>2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>>On 23/03/2022 08:54, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t1elej$372$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:23:47 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 23/03/2022 08:12, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <t1crcs$4gd$2@dont-email.me>, at 15:53:00 on Tue, 22 Mar
>>>>>2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 22/03/2022 13:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <190dku9sht17s$.dlg@example1357.net>, at 12:06:18 on
>>>>>>>Tue,  22  Mar 2022, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of
>>>>>>>>>areas 10%
>>>>>>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>>>>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>>>>>>> extent, but given up on covid.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>  It takes a generation (or more) to eradicate a disease. And then
>>>>>>>you  can  only do the ones which aren't mutating in real time.
>>>>>>>  There was a TV commercial last night saying that Covid
>>>>>>>vaccinations  <quote> like all others wear off so need to be boosted.
>>>
>>>>>>>  That'll be news to people given HPV which I think they've now
>>>>>>>decided is  a once-a-lifetime jab.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Quite a few vaccines need topping up, IIRC yellow fever only lasts
>>>>>>7 years. Cut yourself on a rusty nail and you'll get a tetanus
>>>>>>booster and so on.
>>>
>>>>>  Yes, not every traditional vaccine lasts a lifetime (or half a
>>>>>lifetime), but most last more than six months.
>>>>
>>>> The operative word being "most".
>
>>> Yes, but apart from Covid which other ones last only six months? The
>>>TV adverts are trying to give the impression that "most"
>>>traditionally only last six months, which is why we need to accept
>>>the need to "also" get re-jabbed for Covid every six months.
>>
>>I got my booster nearly five months ago and it seems I wont be getting
>>another until "autumn" which will make it ten months.
>
>The publicity I've seen recently for summer-boosters (didn't the booking
>site open yesterday or the day before) was claiming six months. Of
>course that's not necessarily the medically optimal interval, but they
>have logistics to consider as well.
>
>I haven't tried to book a 4th jab (it would be "due" in about six weeks
>time).

You won't be able to book a booster shot yet, as you're not eligible. You'll have to wait till the autumn.

In message <t1f5ft$uqe$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:57:33 on Wed, 23 Mar
2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>On 23/03/2022 11:57, mechanic wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 08:54:48 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, but apart from Covid which other ones last only six months? The
>>>TV
>>> adverts are trying to give the impression that "most" traditionally only
>>> last six months, which is why we need to accept the need to "also" get
>>> re-jabbed for Covid every six months.

>> Maybe the research was a bit rushed, and no-one asked 'do we know
>> how long this protection will last?'

>> Back to the drawing board I think.
>
>How are they going to know beforehand?

By extrapolating data from previous very similar infections and
vaccines.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t1d4cr$j2o$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:26:35 on Tue, 22 Mar
> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <5ukj3hlf3a81af4vng89pk243i1j69chve@4ax.com>, at 13:49:13 on
>>> Tue, 22 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:15:14 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <t1afq8$op2$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:23:04 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <1ubh3hpd598esooo4tbc773sr09ira242h@4ax.com>, at 17:03:40 on
>>>>>>> Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:53:42 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In message <t1a7kd$f3s$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:03:25 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>>>>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for
>>>>>>>>>>>> ventilation to reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose
>>>>>>>>>>>> we'll see any movement in this direction.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation
>>>>>>>>>>> when possible. But things have changed with Omicron: we can all
>>>>>>>>>>> expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation, masks,
>>>>>>>>>>> or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn to live with it, or
>>>>>>>>>>> become a
>>>>>>>>>>> recluse.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’
>>>>>>>>>> granddaughter who is on chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented
>>>>>>>>>> from travelling or taking part in normal activities, like
>>>>>>>>>> nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and baby sister
>>>>>>>>>> will also be constrained.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Have already have. But hey, cull the sick, it reduces the demand on the
>>>>>>>>> NHS. The ultra right wing knows it makes sense.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, do you recommend a permanent lockdown, with no meetings, no public
>>>>>>>> transport and no on-site working?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, just sensible precautions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sensible precautions don’t stop the spread of Omicron. If you are
>>>>>> vulnerable take your own precautions, ie wear a proper FFP3 mask.
>>>>>
>>>>> And that is precisely the sort of sensible precaution I had in mind.
>>>>
>>>> I trust your mask has been professionally fitted and adjusted?
>>>
>>> Yes, thanks. Despite being 90% of the way there already due to my
>>> engineering training, I have had a medical professional do a refresher
>>> course.
>>
>> Pre vaccines it was sensible to have a lockdown as death rates were
>> relatively high (especially as you got past normal retirement age) and
>> there was the prospect of vaccines turning up.
>>
>> Post vaccines the death rate is significantly lower. There may be better
>> vaccines soon, however the state we now find ourselves in is that most of
>> us will just get to feel mildly ill.
>
> None of the people I know who have had Omicron would describe it as only
> "Mildly" ill. Although there's some observer bias there because it's
> only the ones laid up in bed for a week who mention it. A work colleague
> tested positive on Monday (we both work from home, so no cross-infection
> issues) and from what he said he was already very poorly.
>
> As for new vaccines, they seem to have dropped off the news cycle. Last
> I heard (and I'm not following it closely) they were declining to play
> "whack a mole" with new variants, on the basis by the time a new vaccine
> was on the streets that variant would have come and gone.
>
>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your own*
>> precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing your contact
>> with others.
>
> Exactly, and there some demographics where perhaps reducing the contact
> is more advisable. A bit like avoiding trains full of drunken football
> supporters. Our local secondary school is having a pretty torrid time,
> and while I used to shop at the store [bigger than a corner shop,
> smaller than a regular supermarket] around the time I realised "must
> find some things to put towards dinner", which is when they were all
> going home for the day and buying stuff on the way home, I've changed my
> schedule. Went at 9am the other day, and the store was literally empty.
>
>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>
> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>
Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are trying to stop
your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they won’t do is
stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it. As one senior
medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.

<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 23/03/2022 08:52, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <t1d4cr$j2o$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:26:35 on Tue, 22 Mar
>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <5ukj3hlf3a81af4vng89pk243i1j69chve@4ax.com>, at 13:49:13 on
>>>> Tue, 22 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:15:14 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <t1afq8$op2$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:23:04 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>>>>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <1ubh3hpd598esooo4tbc773sr09ira242h@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>>>> 17:03:40 on
>>>>>>>> Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:53:42 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In message <t1a7kd$f3s$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:03:25 on Mon, 21
>>>>>>>>>> Mar
>>>>>>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ventilation to  reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'll see any movement in  this direction.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater
>>>>>>>>>>>> ventilation
>>>>>>>>>>>> when  possible. But things have changed with Omicron:  we can
>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>> expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of
>>>>>>>>>>>> ventilation,  masks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn  to live with it, or
>>>>>>>>>>>> become a
>>>>>>>>>>>> recluse.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’ granddaughter
>>>>>>>>>>> who is on  chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented from
>>>>>>>>>>> travelling or taking part in  normal activities, like nursery
>>>>>>>>>>> for the granddaughter, and her  parents and  baby sister will
>>>>>>>>>>> also be constrained.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have already have. But hey, cull the sick, it reduces the
>>>>>>>>>> demand on the
>>>>>>>>>> NHS. The ultra right wing knows it makes sense.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, do you recommend a permanent lockdown, with no meetings, no
>>>>>>>>> public
>>>>>>>>> transport and no on-site working?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, just sensible precautions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sensible precautions don’t stop the spread of Omicron. If you are
>>>>>>> vulnerable take your own precautions, ie wear a proper FFP3 mask.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And that is precisely the sort of sensible precaution I had in mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> I trust your mask has been professionally fitted and adjusted?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, thanks. Despite being 90% of the way there already due to my
>>>> engineering training, I have had a medical professional do a refresher
>>>> course.
>>>
>>> Pre vaccines it was sensible to have a lockdown as death rates were
>>> relatively high (especially as you got past normal retirement age) and
>>> there was the prospect of vaccines turning up.
>>>
>>> Post vaccines the death rate is significantly lower. There may be better
>>> vaccines soon, however the state we now find ourselves in is that most of
>>> us will just get to feel mildly ill.
>>
>> None of the people I know who have had Omicron would describe it as only
>> "Mildly" ill. Although there's some observer bias there because it's
>> only the ones laid up in bed for a week who mention it. A work colleague
>> tested positive on Monday (we both work from home, so no cross-infection
>> issues) and from what he said he was already very poorly.
>
> A friend of mine was hospitalised overnight so that is not mildly ill as
> some some claim.
>
>>
>> As for new vaccines, they seem to have dropped off the news cycle. Last
>> I heard (and I'm not following it closely) they were declining to play
>> "whack a mole" with new variants, on the basis by the time a new vaccine
>> was on the streets that variant would have come and gone.
>>
>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your own*
>>> precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing your contact
>>> with others.
> What about those who cannot wear FFP3 masks?
>>
They have to hide away. You can’t bring the rest of society to a halt
because of them. We’d run out of money to fund a health service for all the
other illnesses folk suffer from.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1es95$lln$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:21 on Wed, 23 Mar
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>> As for new vaccines, they seem to have dropped off the news cycle. Last
>>>> I heard (and I'm not following it closely) they were declining to play
>>>> "whack a mole" with new variants, on the basis by the time a new vaccine
>>>> was on the streets that variant would have come and gone.
>>>
>>> Not so. In your diligent study of the scientific literature, this must
>>> have escaped you:
>>> <https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/news/pfizer-omicron-vaccine-trial/>
>>
>> Timelines never were your strong point, but good for Pfizer trying.
>
> As always, you're surly and ungrateful when someone educates you. I'm sure
> you were really popular among your colleagues when you were still employed!
> No wonder you had so many, short-lived jobs in your brief period of
> employment.
>
>
>> I wonder if by the time they've completed the trial, got regulatory
>> approval, and manufactured and distributed it at scale, and it's a had a
>> month the become fully effective, Omicron will be old news.
>
> Probably not. It seems that new variants of Omicron have taken over, and a
> vaccine targeted at Omicron may be more effective against them than the
> original vaccines.
>
>>>>
>>>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your own*
>>>>> precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing your contact
>>>>> with others.
>>>>
>>>> Exactly, and there some demographics where perhaps reducing the contact
>>>> is more advisable. A bit like avoiding trains full of drunken football
>>>> supporters. Our local secondary school is having a pretty torrid time,
>>>> and while I used to shop at the store [bigger than a corner shop,
>>>> smaller than a regular supermarket] around the time I realised "must
>>>> find some things to put towards dinner", which is when they were all
>>>> going home for the day and buying stuff on the way home, I've changed my
>>>> schedule. Went at 9am the other day, and the store was literally empty.
>>>>
>>>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>>>
>>>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>>
>>> Because, in the early days, no-one was sure how it spread, and the
>>> assumption it was via droplets and hand contact. Hence all the
>>> well-meaning, but largely pointless, advice about about wearing any sort of
>>> face covering or shield, frequent thorough hand-washing, 2m spacing,
>>
>> The 2m spacing helps, and good face coverings help. The problem was they
>> couldn't recommend general use of the better ones, because they were in
>> short supply and they wanted to reserve them for the medical profession.
>
> True
>
>>
>>> and hand sanitising. What they should have been advocating was much
>>> more fresh air ventilation, HEPA filters and UV lights in aircon ducts.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Might make you feel more secure but basically useless against the
>>>>> highly infectious Omicron variant. It might delay you getting infected,
>>>>> but it will be inevitable.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I'm aware it's still regarded as an aerosol transmitted virus,
>>>> and coughing and sneezing without a mask on, feels like something which
>>>> might spread such aerosols further.
>>>
>>> Masks stop droplets, which is almost irrelevant for Covid.
>>
>> They stop 95% of virus sized particulates, too.
>
> Not most masks. Only a tiny minority of the public, or even hospital staff,
> wear properly fitted N95 respirator masks.
>
>

The paper from one of the Cambridge hospitals showed that staff kept
falling ill despite everyone wearing surgical masks. When they swapped to
routine use of FFP3 masks nobody on the medical staff fell sick.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 13:45:45 -0000 (UTC), Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1d4cr$j2o$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:26:35 on Tue, 22 Mar
>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <5ukj3hlf3a81af4vng89pk243i1j69chve@4ax.com>, at 13:49:13 on
>>>> Tue, 22 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:15:14 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <t1afq8$op2$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:23:04 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>>>>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <1ubh3hpd598esooo4tbc773sr09ira242h@4ax.com>, at 17:03:40 on
>>>>>>>> Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:53:42 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In message <t1a7kd$f3s$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:03:25 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>>>>>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ventilation to reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose
>>>>>>>>>>>>> we'll see any movement in this direction.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation
>>>>>>>>>>>> when possible. But things have changed with Omicron: we can all
>>>>>>>>>>>> expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation, masks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn to live with it, or
>>>>>>>>>>>> become a
>>>>>>>>>>>> recluse.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’
>>>>>>>>>>> granddaughter who is on chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented
>>>>>>>>>>> from travelling or taking part in normal activities, like
>>>>>>>>>>> nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and baby sister
>>>>>>>>>>> will also be constrained.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have already have. But hey, cull the sick, it reduces the demand on the
>>>>>>>>>> NHS. The ultra right wing knows it makes sense.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, do you recommend a permanent lockdown, with no meetings, no public
>>>>>>>>> transport and no on-site working?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, just sensible precautions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sensible precautions don’t stop the spread of Omicron. If you are
>>>>>>> vulnerable take your own precautions, ie wear a proper FFP3 mask.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And that is precisely the sort of sensible precaution I had in mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> I trust your mask has been professionally fitted and adjusted?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, thanks. Despite being 90% of the way there already due to my
>>>> engineering training, I have had a medical professional do a refresher
>>>> course.
>>>
>>> Pre vaccines it was sensible to have a lockdown as death rates were
>>> relatively high (especially as you got past normal retirement age) and
>>> there was the prospect of vaccines turning up.
>>>
>>> Post vaccines the death rate is significantly lower. There may be better
>>> vaccines soon, however the state we now find ourselves in is that most of
>>> us will just get to feel mildly ill.
>>
>> None of the people I know who have had Omicron would describe it as only
>> "Mildly" ill. Although there's some observer bias there because it's
>> only the ones laid up in bed for a week who mention it. A work colleague
>> tested positive on Monday (we both work from home, so no cross-infection
>> issues) and from what he said he was already very poorly.
>>
>> As for new vaccines, they seem to have dropped off the news cycle. Last
>> I heard (and I'm not following it closely) they were declining to play
>> "whack a mole" with new variants, on the basis by the time a new vaccine
>> was on the streets that variant would have come and gone.
>>
>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your own*
>>> precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing your contact
>>> with others.
>>
>> Exactly, and there some demographics where perhaps reducing the contact
>> is more advisable. A bit like avoiding trains full of drunken football
>> supporters. Our local secondary school is having a pretty torrid time,
>> and while I used to shop at the store [bigger than a corner shop,
>> smaller than a regular supermarket] around the time I realised "must
>> find some things to put towards dinner", which is when they were all
>> going home for the day and buying stuff on the way home, I've changed my
>> schedule. Went at 9am the other day, and the store was literally empty.
>>
>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>
>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>
>Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are trying to stop
>your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they won’t do is
>stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it.

That's a very important point: mask wearing helped slow the spread of the virus, which helped limit the peak load on the
health service. It didn't prevent the spread, or prevent mask wearers from catching it.

> As one senior
>medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
>those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.
>

Yup, and like many others, I don't know which of those two groups I'm in. I hope I'm in the former, as it means that it
was so mild that I didn't even notice it, and any future infections will be milder still.

In message <t1f8a9$me7$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:45:45 on Wed, 23 Mar
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:

>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>
>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>
>Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are trying to stop
>your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they won’t do is
>stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it. As one senior
>medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
>those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.

The advice in question was long before any variants had been identified.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t1f91i$rv9$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:10 on Wed, 23 Mar
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t1es95$lln$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:21 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> As for new vaccines, they seem to have dropped off the news cycle. Last
>>>>> I heard (and I'm not following it closely) they were declining to play
>>>>> "whack a mole" with new variants, on the basis by the time a new vaccine
>>>>> was on the streets that variant would have come and gone.
>>>>
>>>> Not so. In your diligent study of the scientific literature, this must
>>>> have escaped you:
>>>> <https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/news/pfizer-omicron-vaccine-trial/>
>>>
>>> Timelines never were your strong point, but good for Pfizer trying.
>>
>> As always, you're surly and ungrateful when someone educates you. I'm sure
>> you were really popular among your colleagues when you were still employed!
>> No wonder you had so many, short-lived jobs in your brief period of
>> employment.
>>
>>
>>> I wonder if by the time they've completed the trial, got regulatory
>>> approval, and manufactured and distributed it at scale, and it's a had a
>>> month the become fully effective, Omicron will be old news.
>>
>> Probably not. It seems that new variants of Omicron have taken over, and a
>> vaccine targeted at Omicron may be more effective against them than the
>> original vaccines.
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your own*
>>>>>> precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing your contact
>>>>>> with others.
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly, and there some demographics where perhaps reducing the contact
>>>>> is more advisable. A bit like avoiding trains full of drunken football
>>>>> supporters. Our local secondary school is having a pretty torrid time,
>>>>> and while I used to shop at the store [bigger than a corner shop,
>>>>> smaller than a regular supermarket] around the time I realised "must
>>>>> find some things to put towards dinner", which is when they were all
>>>>> going home for the day and buying stuff on the way home, I've changed my
>>>>> schedule. Went at 9am the other day, and the store was literally empty.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>>>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>>>>
>>>>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>>>
>>>> Because, in the early days, no-one was sure how it spread, and the
>>>> assumption it was via droplets and hand contact. Hence all the
>>>> well-meaning, but largely pointless, advice about about wearing any sort of
>>>> face covering or shield, frequent thorough hand-washing, 2m spacing,
>>>
>>> The 2m spacing helps, and good face coverings help. The problem was they
>>> couldn't recommend general use of the better ones, because they were in
>>> short supply and they wanted to reserve them for the medical profession.
>>
>> True
>>
>>>
>>>> and hand sanitising. What they should have been advocating was much
>>>> more fresh air ventilation, HEPA filters and UV lights in aircon ducts.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Might make you feel more secure but basically useless against the
>>>>>> highly infectious Omicron variant. It might delay you getting infected,
>>>>>> but it will be inevitable.
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as I'm aware it's still regarded as an aerosol transmitted virus,
>>>>> and coughing and sneezing without a mask on, feels like something which
>>>>> might spread such aerosols further.
>>>>
>>>> Masks stop droplets, which is almost irrelevant for Covid.
>>>
>>> They stop 95% of virus sized particulates, too.
>>
>> Not most masks. Only a tiny minority of the public, or even hospital staff,
>> wear properly fitted N95 respirator masks.

Here we go again "properly fitted". Maybe you don't know how to
properly fit one, but others do. Presumably you are one of the
chin-guard brigade.

>The paper from one of the Cambridge hospitals showed that staff kept
>falling ill despite everyone wearing surgical masks. When they swapped to
>routine use of FFP3 masks nobody on the medical staff fell sick.

There's only one big hospital in Cambridge, and the other two are next
door, and connected by corridors.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:18:53 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <t1f91i$rv9$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:10 on Wed, 23 Mar
>2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t1es95$lln$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:20:21 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> As for new vaccines, they seem to have dropped off the news cycle. Last
>>>>>> I heard (and I'm not following it closely) they were declining to play
>>>>>> "whack a mole" with new variants, on the basis by the time a new vaccine
>>>>>> was on the streets that variant would have come and gone.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not so. In your diligent study of the scientific literature, this must
>>>>> have escaped you:
>>>>> <https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/news/pfizer-omicron-vaccine-trial/>
>>>>
>>>> Timelines never were your strong point, but good for Pfizer trying.
>>>
>>> As always, you're surly and ungrateful when someone educates you. I'm sure
>>> you were really popular among your colleagues when you were still employed!
>>> No wonder you had so many, short-lived jobs in your brief period of
>>> employment.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I wonder if by the time they've completed the trial, got regulatory
>>>> approval, and manufactured and distributed it at scale, and it's a had a
>>>> month the become fully effective, Omicron will be old news.
>>>
>>> Probably not. It seems that new variants of Omicron have taken over, and a
>>> vaccine targeted at Omicron may be more effective against them than the
>>> original vaccines.
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your own*
>>>>>>> precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing your contact
>>>>>>> with others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Exactly, and there some demographics where perhaps reducing the contact
>>>>>> is more advisable. A bit like avoiding trains full of drunken football
>>>>>> supporters. Our local secondary school is having a pretty torrid time,
>>>>>> and while I used to shop at the store [bigger than a corner shop,
>>>>>> smaller than a regular supermarket] around the time I realised "must
>>>>>> find some things to put towards dinner", which is when they were all
>>>>>> going home for the day and buying stuff on the way home, I've changed my
>>>>>> schedule. Went at 9am the other day, and the store was literally empty.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>>>>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>>>>
>>>>> Because, in the early days, no-one was sure how it spread, and the
>>>>> assumption it was via droplets and hand contact. Hence all the
>>>>> well-meaning, but largely pointless, advice about about wearing any sort of
>>>>> face covering or shield, frequent thorough hand-washing, 2m spacing,
>>>>
>>>> The 2m spacing helps, and good face coverings help. The problem was they
>>>> couldn't recommend general use of the better ones, because they were in
>>>> short supply and they wanted to reserve them for the medical profession.
>>>
>>> True
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> and hand sanitising. What they should have been advocating was much
>>>>> more fresh air ventilation, HEPA filters and UV lights in aircon ducts.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Might make you feel more secure but basically useless against the
>>>>>>> highly infectious Omicron variant. It might delay you getting infected,
>>>>>>> but it will be inevitable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As far as I'm aware it's still regarded as an aerosol transmitted virus,
>>>>>> and coughing and sneezing without a mask on, feels like something which
>>>>>> might spread such aerosols further.
>>>>>
>>>>> Masks stop droplets, which is almost irrelevant for Covid.
>>>>
>>>> They stop 95% of virus sized particulates, too.
>>>
>>> Not most masks. Only a tiny minority of the public, or even hospital staff,
>>> wear properly fitted N95 respirator masks.
>
>Here we go again "properly fitted". Maybe you don't know how to
>properly fit one, but others do.

Really? It's not in evidence.

No doubt you rigorously follow this advice every time you leave your hermitage:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/use-n95-respirator.html

1. Wash Your Hands. It is best to put on your N95 with clean, dry hands.

2. Check Your N95. Always inspect the N95 for damage before use. If it appears damaged, dirty, or damp, do not use it.

3. Put on the N95. Hold the N95 in your hand with the nose piece bar (or foam) at your fingertips. If yours does not
have a nose piece, use the text written on it to be sure the top end is at your fingertips.

Place the N95 under your chin with the nose piece bar at the top.

Pull the top strap over your head, placing it near the crown. Then, pull the bottom strap over and place it at the back
of your neck, below your ears. Do not crisscross the straps. Make sure the straps lay flat and are not twisted.

Place your fingertips from both hands at the top of the nose piece. Press down on both sides of the nose piece to mould
it to the shape of your nose.

4. Keep Your N95 Snug. Your N95 must form a seal to your face to work properly. Your breath must pass through the N95
and not around its edges. Jewellery, glasses, and facial hair can cause gaps between your face and the edge of the mask.
The N95 works better if you are clean shaven. Gaps can also occur if your N95 is too big, too small, or it was not put
on correctly.

To check for gaps, gently place your hands on the N95, covering as much of it as possible, then breathe out. If you feel
air leaking out from the edges of the N95, or if you are wearing glasses and they fog up, it is not snug. Adjust the N95
and try again.

If you cannot get a tight seal, try a different size or style. Even if you cannot get the N95 sealed against your face,
it will provide protection that is likely better than a cloth mask. Check for gaps every time you put on your N95.

5. Remove the N95. After you remove your N95, wash your hands with soap and water, or hand sanitiser containing at least
60% alcohol if soap is not available.

_____

And, even if *you* rigorously follow all these steps, what proportion of the general public do you think did so?

> Presumably you are one of the
>chin-guard brigade.

Personal insults again. It's not how I wear a mask, but lots of people failed to cover their noses while they still wore
masks.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t1f8a9$me7$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:45:45 on Wed, 23 Mar
> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>>
>>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>>
>> Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are trying to stop
>> your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they won’t do is
>> stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it. As one senior
>> medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
>> those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.
>
> The advice in question was long before any variants had been identified.

My point was the original advice was issued to smooth out the load on
hospitals. Nothing to do with variants.

My second point is Omicron is sufficiently infectious that you will get it
at some point.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>
>> The paper from one of the Cambridge hospitals showed that staff kept
>> falling ill despite everyone wearing surgical masks. When they swapped to
>> routine use of FFP3 masks nobody on the medical staff fell sick.
>
> There's only one big hospital in Cambridge, and the other two are next
> door, and connected by corridors.
Your point being…?

In message <t1fd2r$t3e$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:07:07 on Wed, 23 Mar
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1f8a9$me7$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:45:45 on Wed, 23 Mar
>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>>>
>>>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>>>
>>> Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are trying to stop
>>> your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they won’t do is
>>> stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it. As one senior
>>> medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
>>> those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.
>>
>> The advice in question was long before any variants had been identified.
>
>My point was the original advice was issued to smooth out the load on
>hospitals. Nothing to do with variants.
>
>My second point is Omicron is sufficiently infectious that you will get it
>at some point.

Indeed, but you've been conflating the two somewhat.

Back at the start, masks were thought (and I happen to think with some
justification) to assist in not-overwhelming hospitals. So apart from
preventing people randomly snogging each other, there was probably some
useful amount of virus particle filtering going on.
--
Roland Perry

In message <t1fd5c$u15$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:08:28 on Wed, 23 Mar
2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> The paper from one of the Cambridge hospitals showed that staff kept
>>> falling ill despite everyone wearing surgical masks. When they swapped to
>>> routine use of FFP3 masks nobody on the medical staff fell sick.
>>
>> There's only one big hospital in Cambridge, and the other two are next
>> door, and connected by corridors.

>Your point being…?

Which one of the hospitals? If it's the big one, then why avoid naming
it (we all know what it's called of course). Unless of course it was the
tiny Nuffield hospital which isn't on the bio-campus.

(Apologies, that's a fourth one).
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t1fd5c$u15$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:08:28 on Wed, 23 Mar
> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> The paper from one of the Cambridge hospitals showed that staff kept
>>>> falling ill despite everyone wearing surgical masks. When they swapped to
>>>> routine use of FFP3 masks nobody on the medical staff fell sick.
>>>
>>> There's only one big hospital in Cambridge, and the other two are next
>>> door, and connected by corridors.
>
>> Your point being…?
>
> Which one of the hospitals? If it's the big one, then why avoid naming
> it (we all know what it's called of course). Unless of course it was the
> tiny Nuffield hospital which isn't on the bio-campus.
>
> (Apologies, that's a fourth one).

Mainly because I can’t remember the name, and I’m not overly familiar with
the hospitals in Cambridge. It was a paper I read in the BMJ.

I suspect it was a cunning circumvention of the local administration.
Hospital staff have been forced to only wear surgical masks unless engaged
in certain highly hazardous procedures because “guidance” says so. (And we
know guidance is taken as law by those unable to think). So devise a
scientific trial where everyone has to wear an FFP3 mask and hey presto the
guidance is marched around.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 13:45:45 -0000 (UTC), Tweed wrote:

[snip]
>>>
>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>
>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>
> Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are trying to stop
> your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they won’t do is
> stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it. As one senior
> medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
> those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2022/3/11/two-years-of-covid-the-battle-to-accept-airborne-transmission

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t1fd2r$t3e$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:07:07 on Wed, 23 Mar
> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t1f8a9$me7$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:45:45 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>>>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>>>>
>>>>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>>>>
>>>> Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are trying to stop
>>>> your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they won’t do is
>>>> stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it. As one senior
>>>> medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
>>>> those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.
>>>
>>> The advice in question was long before any variants had been identified.
>>
>> My point was the original advice was issued to smooth out the load on
>> hospitals. Nothing to do with variants.
>>
>> My second point is Omicron is sufficiently infectious that you will get it
>> at some point.
>
> Indeed, but you've been conflating the two somewhat.
>
> Back at the start, masks were thought (and I happen to think with some
> justification) to assist in not-overwhelming hospitals. So apart from
> preventing people randomly snogging each other, there was probably some
> useful amount of virus particle filtering going on.

At that early stage, it was thought Covid would be like flu, and mainly
transmitted through droplets. If that were the case, then almost any mask
would significantly reduce transmission. Later, it was found that Covid was
mainly airborne, so most ordinary masks and shields do little to reduce
transmission, and that includes surgical masks. Better ventilation and
strong UV lights would be much more useful.

So it now turns out that the early, well-meaning advice was largely wrong.
But the authorities were very slow to acknowledge the error.

mechanic <mechanic@example.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 13:45:45 -0000 (UTC), Tweed wrote:
>
> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> Expecting others to go round wearing non FFP3 masks to save
>>>> you is basically just like relying on a lucky rabbit’s foot.
>>>
>>> If that's the situation, why were people ever told to wear masks?
>>>
>> Because it slows the rate of infection a bit, and if you are trying to stop
>> your hospitals from being overwhelmed it is helpful. What they won’t do is
>> stop you from ultimately getting infected, just delaying it. As one senior
>> medic put it (I forget which), there are two groups in the population,
>> those who have had omicron and those who are going to get it.
>
> https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2022/3/11/two-years-of-covid-the-battle-to-accept-airborne-transmission
>

Thanks, that's a very good article.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:08:08 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t1elej$372$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:23:47 on Wed, 23 Mar
>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 23/03/2022 08:12, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <t1crcs$4gd$2@dont-email.me>, at 15:53:00 on Tue, 22 Mar
>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 22/03/2022 13:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <190dku9sht17s$.dlg@example1357.net>, at 12:06:18 on
>>>>>> Tue, 22  Mar 2022, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> remarked:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of areas 10%
>>>>>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>>>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>>>>>> extent, but given up on covid.
>>>>
>>>>>>  It takes a generation (or more) to eradicate a disease. And then
>>>>>> you can  only do the ones which aren't mutating in real time.
>>>>>>  There was a TV commercial last night saying that Covid
>>>>>> vaccinations <quote> like all others wear off so need to be boosted.
>>
>>>>>>  That'll be news to people given HPV which I think they've now
>>>>>> decided is  a once-a-lifetime jab.
>>>>
>>>>> Quite a few vaccines need topping up, IIRC yellow fever only lasts 7
>>>>> years. Cut yourself on a rusty nail and you'll get a tetanus booster
>>>>> and so on.
>>
>>>> Yes, not every traditional vaccine lasts a lifetime (or half a
>>>> lifetime), but most last more than six months.
>>>
>>> The operative word being "most".
>>
>> Yes, but apart from Covid which other ones last only six months? The TV
>> adverts are trying to give the impression that "most" traditionally only
>> last six months, which is why we need to accept the need to "also" get
>> re-jabbed for Covid every six months.
>
>That's only for over-75s.
>
And (in England)
Immunosuppressed over 12y old.
Residents of care homes.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 08:14:11 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <7ngk3h5es46mh8k60l4rjoimcrvfes4o88@4ax.com>, at 22:01:57 on
>Tue, 22 Mar 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>remarked:
>>On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 13:57:59 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In message <190dku9sht17s$.dlg@example1357.net>, at 12:06:18 on Tue, 22
>>>Mar 2022, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> remarked:
>>>>On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of areas 10%
>>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>>
>>>>Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>>>extent, but given up on covid.
>>>
>>>It takes a generation (or more) to eradicate a disease. And then you can
>>>only do the ones which aren't mutating in real time.
>>>
>>>There was a TV commercial last night saying that Covid vaccinations
>>><quote> like all others wear off so need to be boosted.
>>>
>>>That'll be news to people given HPV which I think they've now decided is
>>>a once-a-lifetime jab.
>>>
>>The vaccine for schoolchildren is geared toward the HPV varieties most
>>likely to be encountered but is not equally effective against others.
>
>But would agree that for those it *is* effective against, it is now
>considered a lifetime vaccine?
>
Yes, with the apparent presumption that the variety distribution
doesn't change in future decades such that those varieties currently
excluded from the vaccines haven't become a significant risk.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 08:52:57 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <t1d4cr$j2o$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:26:35 on Tue, 22 Mar
>2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <5ukj3hlf3a81af4vng89pk243i1j69chve@4ax.com>, at 13:49:13 on
>>> Tue, 22 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:15:14 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <t1afq8$op2$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:23:04 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <1ubh3hpd598esooo4tbc773sr09ira242h@4ax.com>, at 17:03:40 on
>>>>>>> Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:53:42 +0000, Roland Perry
>>>>>>>> <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In message <t1a7kd$f3s$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:03:25 on Mon, 21 Mar
>>>>>>>>> 2022, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think the government understands the need for
>>>>>>>>>>>>ventilation to reduce covid transmission so I don't suppose
>>>>>>>>>>>>we'll see any movement in this direction.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They do understand the need, and do encourage greater ventilation
>>>>>>>>>>> when possible. But things have changed with Omicron: we can all
>>>>>>>>>>> expect to encounter it repeatedly, regardless of ventilation, masks,
>>>>>>>>>>> or incessant hand cleaning. Either learn to live with it, or
>>>>>>>>>>>become a
>>>>>>>>>>> recluse.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So my elderly and frail friends, and my friends’
>>>>>>>>>>granddaughter who is on chemo for leukaemia, will be prevented
>>>>>>>>>>from travelling or taking part in normal activities, like
>>>>>>>>>>nursery for the granddaughter, and her parents and baby sister will also be constrained.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Don’t underestimate the effect removing precautions will have.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Have already have. But hey, cull the sick, it reduces the demand on the
>>>>>>>>> NHS. The ultra right wing knows it makes sense.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, do you recommend a permanent lockdown, with no meetings, no public
>>>>>>>> transport and no on-site working?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, just sensible precautions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sensible precautions don’t stop the spread of Omicron. If you are
>>>>>> vulnerable take your own precautions, ie wear a proper FFP3 mask.
>>>>>
>>>>> And that is precisely the sort of sensible precaution I had in mind.
>>>>
>>>> I trust your mask has been professionally fitted and adjusted?
>>>
>>> Yes, thanks. Despite being 90% of the way there already due to my
>>> engineering training, I have had a medical professional do a refresher
>>> course.
>>
>>Pre vaccines it was sensible to have a lockdown as death rates were
>>relatively high (especially as you got past normal retirement age) and
>>there was the prospect of vaccines turning up.
>>
>>Post vaccines the death rate is significantly lower. There may be better
>>vaccines soon, however the state we now find ourselves in is that most of
>>us will just get to feel mildly ill.
>
>None of the people I know who have had Omicron would describe it as only
>"Mildly" ill. Although there's some observer bias there because it's
>only the ones laid up in bed for a week who mention it. A work colleague
>tested positive on Monday (we both work from home, so no cross-infection
>issues) and from what he said he was already very poorly.
>
I had what was presumably Omicron a week or so ago. I felt a bit
rotten for about a day but otherwise it was nowhere near as bad as a
couple of doses of flu which I have had previously, the most recent of
which had symptoms which I later found I should have called an
ambulance for.
<snip>

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 11:05:52 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <t1eoci$p61$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:13:53 on Wed, 23 Mar
>2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>
>>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your
>>>>own* precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing
>>>>your contact with others.
>
>>What about those who cannot wear FFP3 masks?
>
>It's not clear to me who that set comprises. In the early days there
>were some issues with FFP2 masks popping off people's ears all the time,
>but now you can get a gadget that pulls the strings round the back of
>you head instead.
>
The usual reasons for a poor FFP3 fit are facial hair (see also
firemen and breathing apparatus) or your head/face not matching the
shape of the mask. In the latter case that can vary between different
makes of mask so simply cured by using a supply of the right ones.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t1eoci$p61$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:13:53 on Wed, 23 Mar
> 2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>
>>>> If you are susceptible for whatever reason you need to take *your
>>>> own* precautions, wearing proper FFP3 masks and probably reducing
>>>> your contact with others.
>
>> What about those who cannot wear FFP3 masks?
>
> It's not clear to me who that set comprises. In the early days there
> were some issues with FFP2 masks popping off people's ears all the time,
> but now you can get a gadget that pulls the strings round the back of
> you head instead.

One which I read in a comment on FB today was autistic people who are
hypersensitive to things touching their face.

Presumably they also don't work so well for people with facial hair?

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t1eo6q$n80$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:10:50 on Wed, 23 Mar
> 2022, martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk remarked:
>> On 23/03/2022 08:54, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <t1elej$372$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:23:47 on Wed, 23 Mar
>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 23/03/2022 08:12, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <t1crcs$4gd$2@dont-email.me>, at 15:53:00 on Tue, 22 Mar
>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 22/03/2022 13:57, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <190dku9sht17s$.dlg@example1357.net>, at 12:06:18 on
>>>>>>> Tue,  22  Mar 2022, mechanic <mechanic@example.net> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 07:13:01 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mainly because it's the only such disease where in plenty of
>>>>>>>>> areas 10%
>>>>>>>>> of the population have it during any one week (it's 11% here). Also
>>>>>>>>> apparently the second most infectious one, behind measles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Strange that we've eliminated smallpox, ebola, even measles to some
>>>>>>>> extent, but given up on covid.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>  It takes a generation (or more) to eradicate a disease. And then
>>>>>>> you  can  only do the ones which aren't mutating in real time.
>>>>>>>  There was a TV commercial last night saying that Covid
>>>>>>> vaccinations  <quote> like all others wear off so need to be boosted.
>>>
>>>>>>>  That'll be news to people given HPV which I think they've now
>>>>>>> decided is  a once-a-lifetime jab.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Quite a few vaccines need topping up, IIRC yellow fever only lasts
>>>>>> 7 years. Cut yourself on a rusty nail and you'll get a tetanus
>>>>>> booster and so on.
>>>
>>>>>  Yes, not every traditional vaccine lasts a lifetime (or half a
>>>>> lifetime), but most last more than six months.
>>>>
>>>> The operative word being "most".
>
>>> Yes, but apart from Covid which other ones last only six months? The
>>> TV adverts are trying to give the impression that "most"
>>> traditionally only last six months, which is why we need to accept
>>> the need to "also" get re-jabbed for Covid every six months.
>>
>> I got my booster nearly five months ago and it seems I wont be getting
>> another until "autumn" which will make it ten months.
>
> The publicity I've seen recently for summer-boosters (didn't the booking
> site open yesterday or the day before) was claiming six months. Of
> course that's not necessarily the medically optimal interval, but they
> have logistics to consider as well.
>
> I haven't tried to book a 4th jab (it would be "due" in about six weeks
> time).

Entry to some countries is dependent on having had a booster within the
previous 270 days, which doesn't conveniently fit a programme of annual
autumn boosters.

Anna Noyd-Dryver