to have the corvid jab or not

[foxdropper 17,092]

Yep ,get that vibe myself mate .If it’s too many words I can probably get  it down to five .

[Neobliviscaris1776 1,998]

Class!

[South hams hunter 8,837]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13709399/doctors-bin-covid-vaccine-doses-appointments/?utm_campaign=suncoronavirusfacebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1610376039

[tatsblisters 7,957]

On 10/01/2021 at 11:31, Arry said:

No I don't mate, if she get a positive on the quick test she has to take a test that the result take two days. 

Cheers Arry

How did your missus go on with that other test mate my granddaughter tested positive with the two day test after testing positive on the quick test.

[sandymere 8,261]

"A follow-up study of COVID-19 consequences in 1,733 patients discharged from the hospital in Wuhan, China after 6 months reported fatigue or muscle weakness (63%), sleep difficulties (26%), and anxiety or depression (23%) were the most common symptoms. Lung function, as measured by CT showing interstitial change and 6-minute walking distance, was less than the lower limit of normal for 22-56% across different severity scales. ^[168]

 

A study of 55 patients from China looked at long-term pulmonary follow-up 3 months after discharge from a symptomatic COVID-19 illness. Patients’ mean age was 47 years, 42% were female, and 85% had moderate disease. Only 9 patients (16.4%) had underlying comorbidities including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular diseases, but none had preexisting pulmonary disease. None of the patients required mechanical ventilation. At 3 months, 71% still had abnormal chest CT scans, most commonly showing interstitial thickening. Spirometry was also checked in all patients. Lung function abnormalities were detected in 25.5%. Anomalies were noted in total lung capacity of 4 patients (7.3%), FEV1 of 6 patients (11%), FVC of 6 patients (11%), DLCO of 9 patients (16%), and small airway function in 7 patients (12%) despite most patients having no respiratory complaints. ^[169]  

 

These data are consistent with the findings of a study of 124 patients recovered from COVID-19 after 6 weeks in the Netherlands. The mean age was 59±14 years and 60% were male; 27 with mild, 51 with moderate, 26 with severe, and 20 with critical disease. Nearly all patients (99%) had improved imaging, but residual parenchymal abnormalities remained in 91% and correlated with reduced lung diffusion capacity in 42%. Twenty-two percent had low exercise capacity, 19% low fat-free mass index, and problems in mental and/or cognitive function were found in 36% of the patients. ^[170]  

 

Public health implications for long-COVID need to be examined, as reviewed by Datta, et al. As with other infections (eg, Lyme disease, syphilis, Ebola), late inflammatory and virologic sequelae may emerge. Accumulation of evidence beyond the acute infection and postacute hyperinflammatory illness is important to evaluate to gain a better understanding of the full spectrum of the disease. ^[171]"

Edited January 12, 2021 by sandymere

[Francie 6,362]

7 minutes ago, sandymere said:

A follow-up study of COVID-19 consequences in 1,733 patients discharged from the hospital in Wuhan, China after 6 months reported fatigue or muscle weakness (63%), sleep difficulties (26%), and anxiety or depression (23%) were the most common symptoms. Lung function, as measured by CT showing interstitial change and 6-minute walking distance, was less than the lower limit of normal for 22-56% across different severity scales. ^[168]

 

A study of 55 patients from China looked at long-term pulmonary follow-up 3 months after discharge from a symptomatic COVID-19 illness. Patients’ mean age was 47 years, 42% were female, and 85% had moderate disease. Only 9 patients (16.4%) had underlying comorbidities including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular diseases, but none had preexisting pulmonary disease. None of the patients required mechanical ventilation. At 3 months, 71% still had abnormal chest CT scans, most commonly showing interstitial thickening. Spirometry was also checked in all patients. Lung function abnormalities were detected in 25.5%. Anomalies were noted in total lung capacity of 4 patients (7.3%), FEV1 of 6 patients (11%), FVC of 6 patients (11%), DLCO of 9 patients (16%), and small airway function in 7 patients (12%) despite most patients having no respiratory complaints. ^[169]  

 

These data are consistent with the findings of a study of 124 patients recovered from COVID-19 after 6 weeks in the Netherlands. The mean age was 59±14 years and 60% were male; 27 with mild, 51 with moderate, 26 with severe, and 20 with critical disease. Nearly all patients (99%) had improved imaging, but residual parenchymal abnormalities remained in 91% and correlated with reduced lung diffusion capacity in 42%. Twenty-two percent had low exercise capacity, 19% low fat-free mass index, and problems in mental and/or cognitive function were found in 36% of the patients. ^[170]  

 

Public health implications for long-COVID need to be examined, as reviewed by Datta, et al. As with other infections (eg, Lyme disease, syphilis, Ebola), late inflammatory and virologic sequelae may emerge. Accumulation of evidence beyond the acute infection and postacute hyperinflammatory illness is important to evaluate to gain a better understanding of the full spectrum of the disease. ^[171]

And?

 

[Greyman 25,298]

1 minute ago, Balaur said:

Out of interest how are they doing Wuhan studies? I thought who were booted? Also how can you rely on Chinese data unless you believe their death rates, which seem ludicrous unless Chinese are immune to it....

He just don’t give a damn when it comes to copying and pasting,  which is a shame as he has actually made some good input on the bad back thread when he actually used his own personal experiences and the spoken language

[Francie 6,362]

2 minutes ago, Balaur said:

Out of interest how are they doing Wuhan studies? I thought who were booted? Also how can you rely on Chinese data unless you believe their death rates, which seem ludicrous unless Chinese are immune to it....

Have you ever heard him say a bad word about china?

China is not to be put in a bad light by the left.

Watch this another swerve,sandy do you support communist china?

[sandymere 8,261]

52 minutes ago, Balaur said:

Out of interest how are they doing Wuhan studies? I thought who were booted? Also how can you rely on Chinese data unless you believe their death rates, which seem ludicrous unless Chinese are immune to it....

The studies do correlate to European ones,  such as this one from the Netherland's , and although i do look a little askance at Chinese research in some fields when different institutions from different countries get the same findings it does add weight to the conclusions. 

"All patients discharged after COVID-19 from the Radboud university medical centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, were consecutively invited to a multidisciplinary outpatient facility. Also, non-admitted patients with mild disease but with symptoms persisting >6 weeks could be referred by general practitioners. Patients underwent a standardized assessment including measurements of lung function, chest CT/X-ray, 6-minute walking test, body composition, and questionnaires on mental, cognitive, health status and quality of life (QoL).

Results

124 patients (age 59±14 years, 60% male) were included; 27 with mild, 51 with moderate, 26 with severe and 20 with critical disease. Lung diffusion capacity was below lower limit of normal in 42% of discharged patients. Ninety-nine percent of discharged patients had reduced ground-glass opacification on repeat CT imaging, and normal chest X-rays were found in 93% of patients with mild diseases. Residual pulmonary parenchymal abnormalities were present in 91% of discharged patients, and correlated with reduced lung diffusion capacity. Twenty-two percent had low exercise capacity, 19% low fat-free mass index, and problems in mental and/or cognitive function were found in 36% of the patients. Health status was generally poor, particularly in the domains functional impairment (64%), fatigue (69%) and QoL (72%).

Conclusions

This comprehensive health assessment revealed severe problems in several health domains in a substantial number of ex-COVID-19 patients. Longer follow-up studies are warranted to elucidate natural trajectories and to find predictors of complicated long-term trajectories of recovery."

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7717214/

 

Edited January 12, 2021 by sandymere

[Greyman 25,298]

12 hours ago, South hams hunter said:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13709399/doctors-bin-covid-vaccine-doses-appointments/?utm_campaign=suncoronavirusfacebook&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1610376039

Quite ironic that a lot of people not taking it are nhs staff which is strange, recon you should tell them about the 8 people you know that are absolutely fine after 14 days, should solve the problem and have the crowds gathering in no time

[sandymere 8,261]

Then we have 

"

Reinfection

Clinicians, infectious disease specialists, and public health experts are examining the potential for patient reinfection with the SARS CoV-2 virus. ^[172]

 

Cases of reinfection with SARS CoV-2 have emerged worldwide. ^[173]  Several cases have shown differing viral genomes tested in the patient, which suggests reinfection rather than prolonged viral shedding.  

 

A case report showed a 42-year-old male who was infected with SARS CoV-2 on March 21, 2020 following a workplace exposure. The patient had resolution of symptoms after 10 days with continued good health for 51 days. On May 24, 2020, the patient presented with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 following a new household exposure. Upon testing via SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR, the patient had confirmed positive COVID-19 with several potential genetic variations that differed from the SARS-CoV-2 strain sequenced from the patient in March. ^[174]  

 

In another case, a 33-year-old male in Hong Kong had contracted COVID-19 in March 2020, which was confirmed via saliva SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. The patient had resolution of symptoms along with two negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results by April 14, 2020. The patient experienced a second episode of COVID-19 in August 2020 following a trip to Spain. Although asymptomatic, the patient was tested upon returning to Hong Kong and tested positive via SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. Genomic sequencing was performed on both RT-PCR specimens collected in March and August. The genomic analysis showed the two strains of SARS-CoV-2 (from March and August) belonged to different viral lineages, which suggests that the strain from the first episode differed from the strain in the second episode. ^[175]  

 

The Collaborative Study COVID Recurrences (COCOREC) group in France reported 11 virologically-confirmed cases of patients with a second clinically- and virologically confirmed acute COVID-19 episodes between April 6, 2020 and May 14, 2020. Although, the letter does not describe confirmation with viral genomic sequencing to understand if the cases were a relapse of the initial infection or a new infection. ^[176]  

 

Two cases of reinfection have emerged in the United States, a 25-year-old man from Nevada and a 42-year-old man in Virginia. These cases were confirmed by gene testing that showed different strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the 2 infection episodes  in each patient. In these cases, the patients experienced more severe symptoms during their second infections. It is unclear if the symptom severity experienced the second time were related to the virus or the how the patients’ immune systems reacted. Vaccine development may need to take into account circulating viral strains. ^[173, 177]  

 

These case reports give insight to the possibility of reinfection. Further research to determine the prevalence of COVID-19 reinfections is needed, including the frequency at which they occur and longevity of COVID-19 immunity. "

I think that most likely it will be an ongoing virus that needs yearly vaccination to cover new strains as they present.

[Greyman 25,298]

2 minutes ago, sandymere said:

Then we have 

"

Reinfection

Clinicians, infectious disease specialists, and public health experts are examining the potential for patient reinfection with the SARS CoV-2 virus. ^[172]

 

Cases of reinfection with SARS CoV-2 have emerged worldwide. ^[173]  Several cases have shown differing viral genomes tested in the patient, which suggests reinfection rather than prolonged viral shedding.  

 

A case report showed a 42-year-old male who was infected with SARS CoV-2 on March 21, 2020 following a workplace exposure. The patient had resolution of symptoms after 10 days with continued good health for 51 days. On May 24, 2020, the patient presented with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 following a new household exposure. Upon testing via SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR, the patient had confirmed positive COVID-19 with several potential genetic variations that differed from the SARS-CoV-2 strain sequenced from the patient in March. ^[174]  

 

In another case, a 33-year-old male in Hong Kong had contracted COVID-19 in March 2020, which was confirmed via saliva SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. The patient had resolution of symptoms along with two negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results by April 14, 2020. The patient experienced a second episode of COVID-19 in August 2020 following a trip to Spain. Although asymptomatic, the patient was tested upon returning to Hong Kong and tested positive via SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. Genomic sequencing was performed on both RT-PCR specimens collected in March and August. The genomic analysis showed the two strains of SARS-CoV-2 (from March and August) belonged to different viral lineages, which suggests that the strain from the first episode differed from the strain in the second episode. ^[175]  

 

The Collaborative Study COVID Recurrences (COCOREC) group in France reported 11 virologically-confirmed cases of patients with a second clinically- and virologically confirmed acute COVID-19 episodes between April 6, 2020 and May 14, 2020. Although, the letter does not describe confirmation with viral genomic sequencing to understand if the cases were a relapse of the initial infection or a new infection. ^[176]  

 

Two cases of reinfection have emerged in the United States, a 25-year-old man from Nevada and a 42-year-old man in Virginia. These cases were confirmed by gene testing that showed different strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the 2 infection episodes  in each patient. In these cases, the patients experienced more severe symptoms during their second infections. It is unclear if the symptom severity experienced the second time were related to the virus or the how the patients’ immune systems reacted. Vaccine development may need to take into account circulating viral strains. ^[173, 177]  

 

These case reports give insight to the possibility of reinfection. Further research to determine the prevalence of COVID-19 reinfections is needed, including the frequency at which they occur and longevity of COVID-19 immunity. "

I think that most likely it will be an ongoing virus that needs yearly vaccination to cover new strains as they present.

Your almost singing from the same hymn sheet now I think the governments are looking at 2 jabs a year from now until you die, which really even someone as sold out as you must make you question the effectiveness of this hurried through vaccine that was going to return us to normality by spring, just never put a number on which spring 

[Arry 18,631]

1 hour ago, tatsblisters said:

How did your missus go on with that other test mate my granddaughter tested positive with the two day test after testing positive on the quick test.

No mate she never had a positive. She is going to have the Jab this week.

Cheers Arry

[Francie 6,362]

6 minutes ago, sandymere said:

Then we have 

"

Reinfection

Clinicians, infectious disease specialists, and public health experts are examining the potential for patient reinfection with the SARS CoV-2 virus. ^[172]

 

Cases of reinfection with SARS CoV-2 have emerged worldwide. ^[173]  Several cases have shown differing viral genomes tested in the patient, which suggests reinfection rather than prolonged viral shedding.  

 

A case report showed a 42-year-old male who was infected with SARS CoV-2 on March 21, 2020 following a workplace exposure. The patient had resolution of symptoms after 10 days with continued good health for 51 days. On May 24, 2020, the patient presented with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 following a new household exposure. Upon testing via SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR, the patient had confirmed positive COVID-19 with several potential genetic variations that differed from the SARS-CoV-2 strain sequenced from the patient in March. ^[174]  

 

In another case, a 33-year-old male in Hong Kong had contracted COVID-19 in March 2020, which was confirmed via saliva SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. The patient had resolution of symptoms along with two negative SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR results by April 14, 2020. The patient experienced a second episode of COVID-19 in August 2020 following a trip to Spain. Although asymptomatic, the patient was tested upon returning to Hong Kong and tested positive via SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR. Genomic sequencing was performed on both RT-PCR specimens collected in March and August. The genomic analysis showed the two strains of SARS-CoV-2 (from March and August) belonged to different viral lineages, which suggests that the strain from the first episode differed from the strain in the second episode. ^[175]  

 

The Collaborative Study COVID Recurrences (COCOREC) group in France reported 11 virologically-confirmed cases of patients with a second clinically- and virologically confirmed acute COVID-19 episodes between April 6, 2020 and May 14, 2020. Although, the letter does not describe confirmation with viral genomic sequencing to understand if the cases were a relapse of the initial infection or a new infection. ^[176]  

 

Two cases of reinfection have emerged in the United States, a 25-year-old man from Nevada and a 42-year-old man in Virginia. These cases were confirmed by gene testing that showed different strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus during the 2 infection episodes  in each patient. In these cases, the patients experienced more severe symptoms during their second infections. It is unclear if the symptom severity experienced the second time were related to the virus or the how the patients’ immune systems reacted. Vaccine development may need to take into account circulating viral strains. ^[173, 177]  

 

These case reports give insight to the possibility of reinfection. Further research to determine the prevalence of COVID-19 reinfections is needed, including the frequency at which they occur and longevity of COVID-19 immunity. "

I think that most likely it will be an ongoing virus that needs yearly vaccination to cover new strains as they present.

Ye couldnt make this shit up could you,you could see this coming a country mile away.

So new strains are appearing or mutating,in weeks an mo ths,an there could be recurring different strains every year,so we all need jabbed every year with different strains

Sounds to me like the flu sandy,exactly like it,theres hundreds of flu strains,an they pick which they think most likely that year,an that's your vaccine.

I'm not the brightest an unseen this coming.

So were has all the flu gone sandy?

[South hams hunter 8,837]

12 minutes ago, Greyman said:

Quite ironic that a lot of people not taking it are nhs staff which is strange, recon you should tell them about the 8 people you know that are absolutely fine after 14 days, should solve the problem and have the crowds gathering in no time

How do you know they're NHS staff?