Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

Just now, welshbairn said:

I'm thinking of borrowing my neighbour's caravan and going to somewhere like Embo soon. f**k the polis. 

I'm staying in. Read a couple Coronavirus cancer studies and those with haematology cancers are worse off than those with tumour cancers. Most likely because our ability to fight infection is fucked because of our shite blood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

I'm thinking of borrowing my neighbour's caravan and going to somewhere like Embo soon. f**k the polis. 

Sounds great.  If you need anyone to testify that you are as blind as a bat and need to test your eye sight the whole way there then let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Honest Saints Fan said:

I'm staying in. Read a couple Coronavirus cancer studies and those with haematology cancers are worse off than those with tumour cancers. Most likely because our ability to fight infection is fucked because of our shite blood. 

Was told that 3 weeks after my chemo is finished my immunity should be back to near normal ,in about 6 weeks, so thinking of taking small risks if the infection rate stays low in the Highlands. Also been reading and my continued smoking apparently helps fight the Covid. Lets hope we're both freed within not too long with a vaccine or the bug gets bored and gets hungry for bats again. Most viruses lose steam eventually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Was told that 3 weeks after my chemo is finished my immunity should be back to near normal ,in about 6 weeks, so thinking of taking small risks if the infection rate stays low in the Highlands. Also been reading and my continued smoking apparently helps fight the Covid. Lets hope we're both freed within not too long with a vaccine or the bug gets bored and gets hungry for bats again. Most viruses lose steam eventually.

 

Where did you read that?

https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/q-a-on-tobacco-and-covid-19

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

Can't remember but here's a table. These are only people who ended up in hospital in Italy, most smokers didn't.

28251978-8306781-image-a-1_1589190028198

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I'm thinking of borrowing my neighbour's caravan and going to somewhere like Embo soon. f**k the polis. 

You should go to Airdrie..

 

...sorry, can't tell my arse end of the world from my Embo..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pissed aff that loads of folk are not giving a f**k, fair play it's a sunny day but all those that are shielding or protecting folk that are shielding that have 2 more weeks of brutal lockdown to go can at least take solace in the fact that if we get banged up for another couple o months we can troll through instagram and facebook looking at folks with lovely tans.

Edited by dirty dingus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies if this has been discussed, but this thread's fucking huge and grows like forced rhubarb, and I'm a very busy man, dontchano.

What's the advice for the auld yins? I've had my mother confined to barracks since this started, as she's right in the demographic that will probably cark it if exposed, but is the timescale for the elderly the same as for people who can be trusted not to pish themselves regularly?*

I realise I could have consulted an actual government website or something, but this is the age of refusing to believe so-called "experts", so naturally P&B was my first port of call.

* obligatory ageist comment for Granny Danger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Can't remember but here's a table. These are only people who ended up in hospital in Italy, most smokers didn't.

28251978-8306781-image-a-1_1589190028198

Erm... that's not what it shows. It's just demographical data and the numbers are really small. Without the population rates it's not particularly useful. Note the p-values are well below statistical or clinical significance as well.

Anyway, as someone who works in ICU, my experience is those with smoking related lung damage have worse outcomes. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigFatTabbyDave said:

Apologies if this has been discussed, but this thread's fucking huge and grows like forced rhubarb, and I'm a very busy man, dontchano.

What's the advice for the auld yins? I've had my mother confined to barracks since this started, as she's right in the demographic that will probably cark it if exposed, but is the timescale for the elderly the same as for people who can be trusted not to pish themselves regularly?*

I realise I could have consulted an actual government website or something, but this is the age of refusing to believe so-called "experts", so naturally P&B was my first port of call.

* obligatory ageist comment for Granny Danger

Sorry I can’t help.

Any advice I would give your mother would require access to birth control and a time machine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Durdle door beach yesterday - some fuckers jumped off the rocks and needed to be airlifted to hospital causing more extreme flouting of social distancing rules. Well done to all involved.

 

08051449-2902-4111-B0E9-F86CC793D465.jpeg

C69A6012-04C1-4307-AFCA-65CA0FB9A5EA.png

Edited by throbber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Can't remember but here's a table. These are only people who ended up in hospital in Italy, most smokers didn't.

28251978-8306781-image-a-1_1589190028198

Numbers are tiny, p values for smokers at least are way above what is acceptable to reject null hypothesis (0.05). Coupled with small sample size means study has limitations at best, and should be cited with care.

 

Edited by sparky88
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Numbers are tiny, p values for smokers at least are way above what is acceptable to reject null hypothesis (0.05). Coupled with small sample size means study has limitations at best, and should be cited with care.
 
Not only that, it shows a higher mortality percentage for smokers anyway - 50% of the (small) total compared to a third of non-smokers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, throbber said:

Durdle door beach yesterday - some fuckers jumped off the rocks and needed to be airlifted to hospital causing more extreme flouting of social distancing rules. Well done to all involved.

 

08051449-2902-4111-B0E9-F86CC793D465.jpeg

C69A6012-04C1-4307-AFCA-65CA0FB9A5EA.png

Second photo. Has everyone there been rounded up into a small space? 

 

Surely if you turn up to a beach and its mobbed, you go elsewhere? As for the cliff jumping,  words fail me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bennett said:

Second photo. Has everyone there been rounded up into a small space? 

 

Surely if you turn up to a beach and its mobbed, you go elsewhere? As for the cliff jumping,  words fail me.

Yeah 2 helicopters arrived so it’s where they have had to assemble to allow this. The guys who got hurt jumping should be absolutely hounded for it anyway, morons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cyclizine said:

Erm... that's not what it shows. It's just demographical data and the numbers are really small. Without the population rates it's not particularly useful. Note the p-values are well below statistical or clinical significance as well.

Anyway, as someone who works in ICU, my experience is those with smoking related lung damage have worse outcomes. Sorry.

But but but, The Mail says smokers are 5 times less likely to be hospitalised at all for Covid, and that has to be the gold standard for evidence! Ok, if you are, you'll probably die, but there's the shakes. And not just in that small Italian study.

27744402-8264635-image-a-8_1588072242587

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8306781/Researchers-uncover-evidence-smokers-protected-deadly-coronavirus.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BigFatTabbyDave said:

Apologies if this has been discussed, but this thread's fucking huge and grows like forced rhubarb, and I'm a very busy man, dontchano.

What's the advice for the auld yins? I've had my mother confined to barracks since this started, as she's right in the demographic that will probably cark it if exposed, but is the timescale for the elderly the same as for people who can be trusted not to pish themselves regularly?*

I realise I could have consulted an actual government website or something, but this is the age of refusing to believe so-called "experts", so naturally P&B was my first port of call.

* obligatory ageist comment for Granny Danger

If she is in the shielding category she shouldn't be seeing anyone outwith her house hold, other than a care provider, until June 12th at the earliest. She should also be limiting the contact she has with non shielding members of her household where possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, 101 said:

If she is in the shielding category she shouldn't be seeing anyone outwith her house hold, other than a care provider, until June 12th at the earliest. She should also be limiting the contact she has with non shielding members of her household where possible.

Thanks. She's seen nobody in two months, except when I drop groceries off at her door. She doesn't have/want a TV and has no interest in the internet, so she's reliant on me for news on what she should be doing, and I might have missed it, but I haven't seen anything specific on the roadmap for people in the high-risk category. Are they still working on the assumption that people who are shielding will be out and about in public around the time we're all in flying cars?

4 hours ago, Granny Danger said:

Sorry I can’t help.

Any advice I would give your mother would require access to birth control and a time machine.

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

But but but, The Mail says smokers are 5 times less likely to be hospitalised at all for Covid, and that has to be the gold standard for evidence! Ok, if you are, you'll probably die, but there's the shakes. And not just in that small Italian study.

Have they said what the COVID death rate is from people who inject bleach as preventative measure?

I think you'll find that's a very important issue that hasn't been covered by the fake news media, so a lot of people are telling me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...