WHO's science, mostlyBoth of which were wrong then? So much for following the science? Who's science were we following?
WHO's science, mostlyBoth of which were wrong then? So much for following the science? Who's science were we following?
Its good advice for getting clean hands and killing/removing bacteria. Just four years ago it wasn't known that it was an airborne virus so handwashing was first advice, then once known its airborne the advice switched to masks.
But overall if you are washing hands you should do it for twenty seconds.
When I saw how much dirt we were daily getting off door handles (and surrounds) at work I realised how important it was to wash my hands after using doors not just after going to the loo !. Obviously not feasible but it made me think about what I used to touch frequently touched areas and how to avoid that being what I used to scratch my head/eye etc and eat !. To be fair the amount of dirt on door furniture dropped off dramatically after a week of daily cleans.Personally, it caused skin problems (dry skin/irritation/chapping) during the initial months of lockdown (which I didn't have prior to Covid) so perhaps it was over-the-top.
I would class 20 seconds as excessive personally.
Of course, irritated skin is, I suspect, more likely to permit entry of viruses and the like.
I'd agree that washing hands after you returned home would make sense. BUT, I believe the 20-second advice of Boris and co was excessive. (But Boris, Hancock and the like were of course the classic 'do as I say don't do as I do' types...)
Its not "Boris and co" advice it is standard guidance on how long to wash your hands for to ensure all bacteria is killed or removed. The dry skin is more likely due to the number of times washed than the length of each one. Feel glad you don't work in a kitchen or hospital where regular proper handwashing is needed for hygiene reasons and the 15-30 second guide existed for hospitals before the pandemic.Personally, it caused skin problems (dry skin/irritation/chapping) during the initial months of lockdown (which I didn't have prior to Covid) so perhaps it was over-the-top.
I would class 20 seconds as excessive personally.
Of course, irritated skin is, I suspect, more likely to permit entry of viruses and the like.
I'd agree that washing hands after you returned home would make sense. BUT, I believe the 20-second advice of Boris and co was excessive. (But Boris, Hancock and the like were of course the classic 'do as I say don't do as I do' types...)
Its not "Boris and co" advice it is standard guidance on how long to wash your hands for to ensure all bacteria is killed or removed. The dry skin is more likely due to the number of times washed than the length of each one. Feel glad you don't work in a kitchen or hospital where regular proper handwashing is needed for hygiene reasons and the 15-30 second guide existed for hospitals before the pandemic.
This poster is common in hospitals https://www.hey.nhs.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Hand-washing-1.png and came about due to MRSA.
When I saw how much dirt we were daily getting off door handles (and surrounds) at work I realised how important it was to wash my hands after using doors not just after going to the loo !
The virus, known as GX-P2V, had a 100 per cent kill rate when it was used to infect a special breed of so-called “humanised” mice.
This means their brains had been genetically engineered to express a protein found in humans, to better understand how we might react to the virus.
The sobering findings suggest that if the disease were to spread among people, the effects could potentially be cataclysmic.
Looks like some scaremongering going on here. A virus with 100% kill rate won't last long either as won't transmit to sufficient people, before killing its host, to make it viable. Also likely that there will be some people who's immune systems will deal with it.Chinese lab 'creates' mutant Covid strain with 100% kill rate in 'humanised' mice
Its not just me that thinks this is a very, very bad idea to create this anywhere is it? Makes the original Covid seem relatively benign even though it self-evidently wasn't.
Looks like some scaremongering going on here. A virus with 100% kill rate won't last long either as won't transmit to sufficient people, before killing its host, to make it viable. Also likely that there will be some people who's immune systems will deal with it.
I don't for one minute believe a word of that article. It's pure scaremongering.Weather it infects a couple of people in China or spreads globally like Covid, it's still playing Russian Roulette with peoples lives.
Yes I read it yesterday iirc. It did not quite make sense. Loads bits taken out of context and made into one story most likely.I don't for one minute believe a word of that article. It's pure scaremongering.
But the worry is that if it exists in "lab" conditions, can it get out and into nature?I don't see the point in conducting this research. The very precise virus studied here, with the precise mutation mentioned in the preprint, does not exist in nature. How it affects mice (humanised or otherwise) is therefore not relevant.
Only if they're extremely clumsy and only if they don't follow the many rules their lab no doubt has in place. From experience, the regulations are extremely strict for working with this sort of virus (at least in Europe), and I expect it's the same in China. The rules are strict even when you work with non-hazardous viruses. I expect they've gotten lots of criticism from all kinds of sources over these experiments, so I'm hoping they'll make sure they're careful (or better still, destroy the virus).But the worry is that if it exists in "lab" conditions, can it get out and into nature?
That's what you'd hope, but the following suggests that doesn't always happen! https://www.theguardian.com/science...e-uk-lab-staff-to-potentially-lethal-diseasesOnly if they're extremely clumsy and only if they don't follow the many rules their lab no doubt has in place. From experience, the regulations are extremely strict for working with this sort of virus (at least in Europe), and I expect it's the same in China. The rules are strict even when you work with non-hazardous viruses. I expect they've gotten lots of criticism from all kinds of sources over these experiments, so I'm hoping they'll make sure they're careful (or better still, destroy the virus).
That's what you'd hope, but the following suggests that doesn't always happen! https://www.theguardian.com/science...e-uk-lab-staff-to-potentially-lethal-diseases
If the lab in Wuhan is where Covid19 escaped from I wonder how long ago that lab in Wuhan first identified it. It could indicate that the Chinese know a lot more about the long term effects of Covid19 than the rest of the world does ?. Just a question/speculation built on possibility.If it did, this thread wouldn’t exist!
(I appreciate we don’t know for sure that SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a lab in Wuhan, but it’s by far the most plausible explanation IMO).
My guess is long term effects for most people are same as other common viruses, you get it, feel rubbish for a few days then you get over it and on with your life. Why would this one be any different?If the lab in Wuhan is where Covid19 escaped from I wonder how long ago that lab in Wuhan first identified it. It could indicate that the Chinese know a lot more about the long term effects of Covid19 than the rest of the world does ?. Just a question/speculation built on possibility.
For example is long Covid a long term effect that other viruses don't give us.My guess is long term effects for most people are same as other common viruses, you get it, feel rubbish for a few days then you get over it and on with your life. Why would this one be any different?
I have had three "colds" since November. Not one of them was a stinker but I seem to have them for weeks nose to tail. Should try and dig out a Covid test next time but I think you have answered my curiosity.Changing subject slightly, several of my friends and (close) family have recently come down with something thst has all the symptoms of Covid - feeling rotten and notably losing sense of smell - but all tested negative.
New strain that the tests don’t pick up?
Changing subject slightly, several of my friends and (close) family have recently come down with something thst has all the symptoms of Covid - feeling rotten and notably losing sense of smell - but all tested negative.
New strain that the tests don’t pick up?
For example is long Covid a long term effect that other viruses don't give us.
I was mainly thinking of something that pops up as a health issue in years to come that only affects people who previously had Covid19.
I know a lot of people who’ve experienced the same (but haven’t tested). It could be a new variant, or out of date tests?
The tests are fine - they confirmed I had Covid recently.
A less sinister idea is that perhaps I am encountering a back log of evolved colds that I had evaded over the last 3+ years while trying to evade Covid. Maybe its not even worse but my standards might have evolved due to time letting me forget how colds feel ?.
I expect the same conversation took place in every office around the country with similar levels of accuracy. It certainly did in mine.I would also add that my wife predicted, with a high degree of accuracy, which of her employees would be first to contract covid in 2020, and which would subsequently suffer with “long covid” (largely the same individuals). Read into that what you will!
Variants won't evade the tests.I think it’s probably a new variant in that case (or another virus is now causing covid-like symptoms!).
Variants won't evade the tests.
It's more than like a normal cold; I've had many colds over the past 40+ years in which I briefly lost the ability to taste.
Yet another of the many longer term harms induced by lockdowns, which had very dubious and theoretical short term benefits.Dogs bought in the pandemic have high rates of problem behaviours, a Royal Veterinary College study suggests.
It estimates high rates of behaviours such as separation anxiety and aggression towards other dogs
It's annoying that a lot of the subsequent harm caused was called by a number of us very early on.Pandemic puppy owners struggle with bad behaviour say vets
Some owners use methods that distress and confuse their dogs, the Royal Veterinary College warns.www.bbc.co.uk
Yet another of the many longer term harms induced by lockdowns, which had very dubious and theoretical short term benefits.
I hope that all of the longer term drawbacks of lockdowns are properly analyised and considered, so that we can avoid making such rash decisions in future.
There are so many harms caused by lockdowns, which the pro-lockdown lobbyists never predicted or admitted may happen, and more harms seem to be uncovered all the time.