Coronavirus - how is it/has it affected you?

clubchamp98

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
7,836
Location
Liverpool
I started feeling rough last Sunday but had a cough and a few symptoms for a couple of days earlier, although didn't think anything of it at the time. Had test on Monday 11.30 - got results back 9pm Wednesday as positive. Zara's came back negative although her sysmptoms are very similar but with a 39 degree temperature and i was 36.5. We both had very poor taste - vinegar smelt disgusting, like acid!! Zara sent back another self test today.

I am in isolation till next Wednesday. Not feeling too bad now and have worked right through - although i have been pretty rough it was easier to work and keep occupied. I know it affects everyone differently and while by no means pleasant, I have had much worse doses of flu, let along man flu!

My first Peroni at hand right now and it tastes OK!! Can't wait to get back to normal - whatever that is!!
I tested negative on Monday and still feel rough.
Take care.
 

Swinglowandslow

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2018
Messages
1,171
I see John Humphries ( Mastermind) has been spouting again ,clearly coming down on the side of free the restrictions and let things take their natural course.
Part if his argument was that only 1 in 7 of the over seventies who get Covid will die🙄
Last count there are 8,769,122 over seventies in this country. He didn't mention that.
Someone on here will have some statistical evidence as to how many of this number would be likely to contract Covid (if we go back to "ordinary "),
but it still seems it would be a high number.
However, obedience of restrictions and belief in the rationale of them seems to be waning fast.
What if an "about face " were to be the case, together with an early offer of the vaccine, to the elderly and vulnerable?
There are arguments for it worth listening to.
1. Russia and China, apparently, are using it. Before any politically motivated/conspiracy views rail against this, do you think that these nation's scientists etc are going to impose on their populace something that's half baked? Or is it likely to be a balanced risk assessed strategy as a best overall solution?
2. Ethan has earlier said that all medicines/drugs are developed and used on a risk assessment basis, I.e. Their benefits outweigh their risks to justify using them. Which is reasonable and true.
What if it came to the point here, that Oxford and Imperial college vaccines were offered," a bit ahead of normal", as a slightly higher than usual risk timeline, to curtail the virus in order to return to normality.
The offer being- it will prevent you getting the virus, but the long term side effects carry a slightly higher risk than normal.
Would you take it, if you were 70 or over?

I am, and I would.

Comments?
 
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
3,027
I am now more and more moving towards that same view point. A lockdown only delays the virus. Unless everyone in the world totally self-isolates for 14 days, it will always be there. So yes we have to wait for a vaccine, yes we have to let some kind of normality takes it course and yes I would take such a vaccine and I am not close to 70 yet albeit closer than a university student.

But no-one in charge of this or most other countries would dare suggest this because of the fear of the comeback from opportunist opponents.
 

Ethan

Money List Winner
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
8,546
Location
Bearwood Lakes, Berks
I see John Humphries ( Mastermind) has been spouting again ,clearly coming down on the side of free the restrictions and let things take their natural course.
Part if his argument was that only 1 in 7 of the over seventies who get Covid will die🙄
Last count there are 8,769,122 over seventies in this country. He didn't mention that.
Someone on here will have some statistical evidence as to how many of this number would be likely to contract Covid (if we go back to "ordinary "),
but it still seems it would be a high number.
However, obedience of restrictions and belief in the rationale of them seems to be waning fast.
What if an "about face " were to be the case, together with an early offer of the vaccine, to the elderly and vulnerable?
There are arguments for it worth listening to.
1. Russia and China, apparently, are using it. Before any politically motivated/conspiracy views rail against this, do you think that these nation's scientists etc are going to impose on their populace something that's half baked? Or is it likely to be a balanced risk assessed strategy as a best overall solution?
2. Ethan has earlier said that all medicines/drugs are developed and used on a risk assessment basis, I.e. Their benefits outweigh their risks to justify using them. Which is reasonable and true.
What if it came to the point here, that Oxford and Imperial college vaccines were offered," a bit ahead of normal", as a slightly higher than usual risk timeline, to curtail the virus in order to return to normality.
The offer being- it will prevent you getting the virus, but the long term side effects carry a slightly higher risk than normal.
Would you take it, if you were 70 or over?

I am, and I would.

Comments?
Personally, I do not need to see phase III data for a vaccine. If the phase II data has shown that it results in a robust antibody response, and separate studies have shown that the sorts of antibodies generated neutralise virus, than I would accept a vaccine approved by the European Medicines Agency on that data. The UK is not going to approve a vaccine before EMA does. The biggest risk with most vaccines is that they don't work very well. Major safety issues are not unknown but are uncommon. The risks of Covid are becoming well known and are not uncommon.

The likely benefit-risk ration varies for people, mostly on age but also co-morbidities, so as someone who started playing golf when woods were actually made of wood, I think it is worth it.

I wouldn't take the Chinese or Russian vaccines until they were shown to have met EMA standards of efficacy, safety and manufacturing quality. I doubt they are there yet.
 
Last edited:

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
15,510
I am now more and more moving towards that same view point. A lockdown only delays the virus. Unless everyone in the world totally self-isolates for 14 days, it will always be there. So yes we have to wait for a vaccine, yes we have to let some kind of normality takes it course and yes I would take such a vaccine and I am not close to 70 yet albeit closer than a university student.

But no-one in charge of this or most other countries would dare suggest this because of the fear of the comeback from opportunist opponents.
There is also the consideration of overwhelming the health service, letting the virus rip would do this very quickly.

I hear a lot of people suggesting we just go back to a normal life but does that mean the vulnerable being locked away, if it does then it's a very selfish attitude in my opinion. Would people hold the same view if it was the young that were vulnerable I think older people would be prepared to do whatever was needed if it protected the young.
 

Hacker Khan

Yurt Dwelling, Yoghurt Knitter
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
9,381
I see the police are going to get access to the data from the test and trace app. Somehow I can't see that encouraging many people to use it to make is successful.

And in unrelated news Serco have told the stock exchange they will exceed their profit targets this year due to coronavirus-related work. Good news for their shareholders in these financially troubled times there. I may buy some myself.
 

SocketRocket

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
15,510
First point I don’t disagree with. Any risk to the NHS should be managed, real or perceived.
this bit above, you’re either being ironic or just speaking nonsense. (Mod Edit)
In general older people are incredibly supportive of their families, they would not sacrifice the lives of the young for their own lifestyles in my opinion. If you believe that to be nonsense then I must disagree.
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
13,876
Location
Seaham
Can someone just clarify this please.

Friend has had a close colleague in work test positive on Friday. Those in close contact at work told to isolate for 14 days.

Friend has had a test today and says he’s been told if his test is negative he can return to work.

Confused bit is incubation period, ie, is it possible to be tested too early as such?
 

Beezerk

Money List Winner
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
8,007
Location
Gateshead, Tyne & Wear
Can someone just clarify this please.

Friend has had a close colleague in work test positive on Friday. Those in close contact at work told to isolate for 14 days.

Friend has had a test today and says he’s been told if his test is negative he can return to work.

Confused bit is incubation period, ie, is it possible to be tested too early as such?
Yes I think it is, my daughter tested negative a couple of days after being in close contact with someone who had tested positive. Three days later she got symptoms and subsequently tested positive.
 

pauldj42

Money List Winner
Joined
Nov 13, 2012
Messages
13,876
Location
Seaham
Yes I think it is, my daughter tested negative a couple of days after being in close contact with someone who had tested positive. Three days later she got symptoms and subsequently tested positive.
Just read up on it again, and if I read it correctly, my friend has to isolate for 14 days even if negative, but anyone he lives with, ie, his wife (who is currently also isolating) can go out if his result is negative as she didn’t come in to contact with initial source.o_O
 

pendodave

Tour Rookie
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
2,291
In general older people are incredibly supportive of their families, they would not sacrifice the lives of the young for their own lifestyles in my opinion. If you believe that to be nonsense then I must disagree.
I can barely remember a single historical event in the 20th century where millions of young people died to advance the interests of rich and powerful old men.......
.... or maybe I can...
 
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
1,041
In general older people are incredibly supportive of their families, they would not sacrifice the lives of the young for their own lifestyles in my opinion. If you believe that to be nonsense then I must disagree.
I would say it’s nonsense. Generally parents and grandparents would want the best for their sons, daughters and grandchildren.

The economic, societal, financial and mental issues with this approach don’t seem to be the offering gift and lasting legacy I’d like to leave for the offspring.

Protecting an age group that won’t see an end to this and won’t see normal again seems pretty nonsensical.

Maybe we should ask them? I imagine they want to live their last years normally.
 

Billysboots

Challenge Tour Pro
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
884
Maybe we should ask them? I imagine they want to live their last years normally.
My 83 year old mum is in that category.

She did her best during lockdown. She’s high risk, lives on her own and I’m her only nearby family. She understood most of the guidance, put her own spin on some of it and, whilst she got through it she found it tough. For the first time I think she feels mortal and understands that time is not on her side.

If we went into another national lockdown she has pretty much said she’ll take her chances. She wants to enjoy what life she has left, and I totally get that.

However, I find it difficult to be fully supportive of her, quite simply because her putting herself at risk because she’s not concerned about her own well being has the clear potential to jeopardise the health of everyone she comes into contact with.

In addition, whilst I want to see her live her life, I am under no illusions. Given her age and underlying health issues, if she catches this virus I’m fairly certain she won’t survive it.
 
Top