Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AcousticallyChallenged

  1. They've had months of 'this is definitely the last time, we're coming out of it now, we're getting back to normal' etc. But actually, it's back to normal despite lockdown in a way that just makes things a bit shit. You're still going to work etc. You just can't see anyone you like, or do anything you like. Plenty of places in the UK still making people go into the office as well as they don't trust WFH.
  2. I think the tides are shifting here too. Just look at the vocal lot after the police said you probably shouldn't be going out to buy that wardrobe on Facebook buy and sell groups.
  3. Well, can't hand out a lovely refurbishment contract for somewhere if you're just using church halls.
  4. Given how loosely the UK has enforced any COVID related measures, aside from the odd fine, I don't think they're any measure to go by.
  5. What about the athletes? Arguably very fit people showing heart inflammation on the back of COVID19? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2772399 It's a nasty virus, and the post-viral syndrome can really screw you up. Plenty of people who are wiped out for months after it. Realistically, once you've got the over 60s, and vulnerable vaccinated, the pressure is off. But I don't think that'll be the end of masks and social distancing if the virus is still in circulation.
  6. Doesn't the age old rule apply of breaking only one law at once? If they've got good reason to lock him up for Covid, and he happened to be up to something dodgy anyway, surely it's an easy win prosecution wise? Much harder to push for going equipped outside of that context.
  7. One of the big issues, that worked well for Ebola is that you can catch it readily from a dead body. In the areas it was rife, the tradition is to prepare bodies for funerals by washing them as a family, passing it on to them. So, to some degree, the mortality wasn't as limiting for it.
  8. Generally, it's not the same bits changing. So you can follow the patterns. So as it passes from A to B to C, it gets A's mutations away from the lineage, B's mutations away from A and C's mutations away from B. Remember it won't likely be mutations at one single point either. They'll be happening across the 30,000 data points. So your likelihood of them being overwritten in a short transmission chain are slim.
  9. That's how the genomics work, every time something divides or replicates, there's a chance something will change. That's what DNA does too. We share a large proportion of our DNA with everything from chimps, to mice, to flies to bananas. RNA viruses mutate incredibly quickly. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6107253/ Though mutating usefully, or beneficially to the virus is a whole different kettle of fish. That's where it mutates to become reliably more infectious, or deadly etc. The genomics are essentially looking at the typos passed between people infected with
  10. If they were the same contact they got it from, yes. My layman's understanding is that the virus is constantly mutating slightly, as RNA does. More like a visitor's book than fundamentally changing how the virus works. When it hops between hosts, the 30,000 letter sequence might change very slightly, but, every subsequent case will be a little more different than the last. The genomics is following the changes, forming what is essentially a family tree of transmission. Much of this data is available for the UK's genome sequencing, so it can probably be correlated to that too, for a b
  11. It can prove a link, as Dr Glover explains here and on her blog, there are about 30,000 unique bits of data associated with the genomics. This isn't looking at the strain, as she explained it, strain is akin to a city. The rest of the data is akin to a house number and post code.
  12. The issues are on MF's end, not yours. The server is sending your device to the insecure version, which is when everything looks broken.
  13. The claim on Dr G's side is that when lawyers were trying to work out an agreement, DHSC was being less than clear. Taxagenomics didn't want to work without a clear agreement in place, DHSC allegedly couldn't articulate what they wanted/were asking for full liability for false positives/negatives to be on Taxagenomics.
  14. I've worked out the answer, Dr G just needs to offer some free genomics on prize Aberdeen Angus herds on the island too.
  15. Well, you see what happens when people are vocal. Japanese proverb, I've quoted here before. "The nail that sticks out gets hammered down".
  16. "Manx solutions to Manx problems" "We'll fuck it up our way thank you"
  17. Accusations of misinformation are mean, you might hurt my feelings. Dr Glover gives figures of 24 hours for everything so far sequenced with a full report in 36.
  18. I think you nail it with the academic and scientific opportunities. As far as I'm aware, when she was at DHSC and proposed the genomics testing, she offered final authorship to Dr Khan. From a broader perspective, opportunities like this don't really come up. Track and trace in the UK is rammed, and there's little value in identifying transmission chains from an epidemiological perspective when everyone has it. Last time when the virus was emerging, it was all hands to the deck to just get PCR testing worldwide, nobody was in a position to study how it emerges.
  19. Genomics is complementary to tracing, that's the point. Most places don't have the ability, capability or capacity, when the outbreak is out of control. We contact trace, but have additional data feeding into that with every case that presents. We're talking not about strains, but identifying those transmission pathways from person-to-person. Pathways match up? Great, our contact tracing team is nailing it. But, everyone is human, people will misremember where they were or who they saw. People might even not admit to who they saw first time, they'd fear jail over here. NZ, as probabl
  20. But we aren't detracting from that testing, isolating and tracing. This is in addition to, not to detract from any of the other processes. It is, at the very least, validation that we are getting it right. How many other small islands have the capability or expertise? Quite simply, and when it's free, what's the downside? The argument for people coming over, is the more people that are coming over and isolating, the higher the odds someone comes over and gets ill enough to need a hospital bed with it. Right or wrong, that's DA MBE's justification.
  21. I have never at any point said it was the only part of the approach. A track and trace app in conjunction would really be a golden ticket to tracking and understanding spread. There is no risk if everyone follows the rules, unfortunately, we know that doesn't always happen. Never mind any false positives etc. Whilst the prevalence of the virus is so high in the UK, surely we should be using every avenue we have available?
  22. Sounds less scary, and I think they were hoping for a best case scenario of no new community cases.
  • Create New...