Corona Virus

Recent findings regarding belief that VitaminD level is related to SARS infection / illness / mortality are getting more interesting.
Obesity is again in the cross-hairs, this time for it's ability to soak up and hold Vit D out of circulation. Among it's many talents, 'D' is pivotal in Immune System Regulation. This throws light on India's plight, one of the most 'T2 Diabetic' places on the planet. T2Diabetics are associated with excess 'visceral / liver fat', the most dangerous, um, 'variant.' [bigwhistle]
Sub-cutaneous flubber - on it's own - is merely a cosmetic worry. The worst would be normal body but with enourmous visceral fat. Think slim to normal build but with well defined pot-belly.

Another confounder for India is the various States have control over local health systems... and the way mortality tracks some who reverse their choice of drug therapies.... High-end anti-virals such as Remdi$ivir at $several K per pt, and Ivermectin at dollars a week.

Good excuse to re-vamp our diet & lifestyle choices, to reverse 'Metabolic Syndrome & T2 Diabetes.... get some sunlight, exercise to reduce inflammatory markers - and for mental health ![biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][bigsad]

I'll have to stop doing so much bloody night shift.:zzz:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cuppabillytea

I'll have to stop doing so much bloody night shift.:zzz:

---

Night Shift & in a Tunnel? There can't be much sunshine & Vit D there cuppa.[bigrolf]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4bee

We apparently live in a democracy so your comments/tilt are fair imho. So people will disagree, so what?


Assuming they knowingly broke the law then yes why not?

If they had been given a genuine bum steer by an Official that is a different matter & has to be taken into account in their defence but which official will put their hand up?[bighmmm]

Seems to me quite a few folk have taken the **** over borders & are probably laughing all the way to the bank knowing there is a good chance they will not be prosecuted so some penalties must be applied. It also seems to me that if all involved Police Services were reimbursed as they are entitled to be if the cash went back to the States for providing these services, then their annual budget allocation should look pretty damn good. Why should everybody else be required to chip in because some people act like idjits at this time.


The old "Hit 'em in the Hip pocket" makes sense to me.

---

And to think this all started with one person in Adelaide Hotel Quarantine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob10

And to think this all started with one person in Adelaide Hotel Quarantine.

---

Bad and good kinda, didn't the resultant mass testing then pick up the other non adelaide related variants? Glass half full.

My totally uneducated guess is that there are a lot of asymptomatic people out there and if we somehow tested everyone in a short timeframe to get a reliable snapshot we would find it has passed through more of the population than we think, herd immunity would be naturally happening on it's own to some extent.

There have been millions of dollars in COVID fines since this started. Here is a news report from third of August 2020. Even by then Qld had 2,168 infringement notices worth $2,998,872 had been handed out.
Edit. I must point out this was for illegal border crossings when the border was shut.
Earlier in August 2020, a law was passed in Qld Parliament that people found guilty of serious breaches of coronavirus restrictions could be sent to jail for up to six months.

In Western Australia, you get a $1000 fine. By 3rd RD August 2020, fines issued were $ 140,000.

South Australia's first infringement was handed out on March 29, 2020, and a total of $ 503,750 had been issued in fines up to that date.

Tasmania issued $ 6804, in fines up to 3rd August'

The ACT issued one fine of $5,000.

Victoria over $ 1 million in fines issued up to August 2020.

NSW- the Minister declined to comment and said the information was not available . [ no surprise there ]

Remember this is from August 2020, so fines and the threat of jail does not stop people breaking the COVID restrictions. How many of the fines issued have been paid has not been revealed, and expecting any one to pay the full cost of a restriction infringement, while an understandable reaction, just would not work. So , what's the solution? Is there one, common sense is not a common theme in society lately. It would be interesting to see the demographic that is represented in these fines. I'm willing to bet there are no Boomers , so, GEN X , Or Gen Y? The Millennials are my pick. Why then? Do they think the rules don't apply to them? Be interested to see any thoughts.

It's official, AZ works best after the second dose with a 12 week interval. A study found vaccine efficacy reached 82,4 % after a second dose with a dosing interval of 12 weeks or more. If the two doses were given less than six weeks apart the efficacy was only 54,9%. I'm just curious, but those here who declared they were not keen to get vaccinated , have you changed your mind?.

AstraZeneca: 12 weeks still the optimum time between shots (thenewdaily.com.au)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnp38

Bad and good kinda, didn't the resultant mass testing then pick up the other non adelaide related variants? Glass half full.

My totally uneducated guess is that there are a lot of asymptomatic people out there and if we somehow tested everyone in a short timeframe to get a reliable snapshot we would find it has passed through more of the population than we think, herd immunity would be naturally happening on it's own to some extent.

---

That is an interesting theory. I'm not qualified enough to critique it, but looking at overseas locations like India, or even the UK, it seems that if the virus was out there in a large part of our population, we'd have more people in hospital.

I read an interesting article in the New York Times which stated some ' experts 'had done some modelling that showed if you used a vaccine with 90% efficacy against infection you can reach herd immunity if 66% of the population is vaccinated. Using a lower efficacy vaccine, many more people need to be vaccinated. For example if your vaccine efficacy is 60%, you need 100% of the population to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity. The AZ has been said to have an efficacy of 82.4 % after a second dose but only 54.9% with one dose. Some one with better math could work out the percentage of population which needs to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity in Australia .

I'm not sure if the 300 or so people who visited an exposure site at the same time as the positive couple are being made to pay for HQ, but I think probably not as they didn't break any regulations and were just unlucky to be in the wrongplace at the wrong time, plus they tested negative.
Those who do break the rules and are sent into HQ quarantine are charged about $3000 for 14 days, I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob10

Mick, if so, is that quarantine paid by the Government? It would have to be, you would think, but who knows now days.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob10

That is an interesting theory. I'm not qualified enough to critique it, but looking at overseas locations like India, or even the UK, it seems that if the virus was out there in a large part of our population, we'd have more people in hospital.

I read an interesting article in the New York Times which stated some ' experts 'had done some modelling that showed if you used a vaccine with 90% efficacy against infection you can reach herd immunity if 66% of the population is vaccinated. Using a lower efficacy vaccine, many more people need to be vaccinated. For example if your vaccine efficacy is 60%, you need 100% of the population to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity. The AZ has been said to have an efficacy of 82.4 % after a second dose but only 54.9% with one dose. Some one with better math could work out the percentage of population which needs to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity in Australia .

---

All of these calculations depend on the assumed value of R0 for the virus. Unfortunately for these calculations to make any sense, this value is not a constant - it simply represents the average number of infections passed on by one case. As well as depending on the virus (and the particular variant) it depends on how the society involved behaves - to what extent people "on average" observe social distancing etc, how often they engage in high risk social activity etc. In other words, there is no definite answer to the question of how many need to be vaccinated.