On 13/04/2021 21:15, Steve Walker wrote:
On 13/04/2021 19:28, ARW wrote:
On 13/04/2021 09:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Gaff (Sofa) formulated the question :
And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.
Its like the January sales.

Yep, it was manic. I kept well away.

The pubs will be the first to be blamed if the infection rate rises.

It will of course have nothing to do with gyms, shoppers or snotty
nosed school kids.

All a part of it. However pubs are the only place that people spend
hours in close proximity, without masks, talking or even shouting over
the noise of other conversations and drinking, which lowers inhibitions
and reduces the chances of following rules.


********.

I visited loads of pubs after the end of the 1st lockdown and only one
of them had no social distancing.

--
Adam

"ARW" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 21:15, Steve Walker wrote:
On 13/04/2021 19:28, ARW wrote:
On 13/04/2021 09:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Gaff (Sofa) formulated the question :
And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.
Its like the January sales.

Yep, it was manic. I kept well away.

The pubs will be the first to be blamed if the infection rate rises.

It will of course have nothing to do with gyms, shoppers or snotty nosed
school kids.

All a part of it. However pubs are the only place that people spend hours
in close proximity, without masks, talking or even shouting over the
noise of other conversations and drinking, which lowers inhibitions and
reduces the chances of following rules.

********.

I visited loads of pubs after the end of the 1st lockdown and only one of
them had no social distancing.

Social distancing doesn't work with aerosols inside.

On 13/04/2021 21:15, Steve Walker wrote:

All a part of it. However pubs are the only place that people spend
hours in close proximity, without masks, talking or even shouting over
the noise of other conversations and drinking, which lowers inhibitions
and reduces the chances of following rules.

In my experience between lockdowns the pubs I visited were far better
than what happened at the local supermarket!

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 17:45, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 17:03, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote

And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.

Its like the January sales.

Maybe lots of infections but few hospitalisations.

That assumes most are vaccinated but that isnt true yet.

But the ones who are vulnerable and most likely to die have.

Thats not true, it still isnt clear who many
of the vulnerable and most likely to die are.

My main concern would be the increased likelihood of mutations from
the increased number of infections.

The mutations come from those with severely compromised
immune systems that take a long time to recover from the
virus or die from it now that treatment is so much better.

That is a thought but I doubt you'll find a cite saying it is directly
caused by a severely compromised immune systems.

Fraid so.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...mmune-systems/

Gives an account the patient showed that the virus evolved rapidly
after being given convalescent plasma.

Thats not something that common at all so isnt
likely to have been the cause of most variants.

This article:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...g-the-pandemic

Highlights it is the number and duration of infection that increase
likelihood of mutation;
"With almost every person it infects, the virus changes very
subtly €“

Thats mindless bull****. There arent that many variants.

That's show your lack of knowledge.

Bull****.

Most mutations will fail in one way or another.

Yes, but if they fail quickly, there would be no way to know that stupid
claim.

The most successful mutation is one that doesn't kill the host and lives
indefinitely in the body.

We havent seen any like that with this virus.

There are coronaviruses that are mere colds. So no reason to create a
vaccine against them and they are free to propagate without lockdowns or
anything sinister.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-o...19-cases-68146

Irrelevant to what we are discussing there.

picking up a letter in its genetic code here, another being deleted
there

Both very rarely happens.

or swapped for something different."

Thats what normally happens.

Just more **** from some arts graduate like that other
steaming turd you waved around from the New Scientist.

Don't you like being shown you're wrong?

You're projecting now given that you never had the balls
to admit that that New Scientist steaming turd you waved
around proved you wrong.

Hardly a turd, it was an example of a mutation that occurred indirectly
through a compromised immune system.

The steaming turd was the New Scientist article
about how the qwerty keyboard came about.

I don't see how one example changes the validity of my post.

That **** you posted does.

We have a choice, accept an article in the New Scientist or a senile phool
in Australia posting to a UK newsgroup. Tough one isn't it?

The problem is with the content of that steaming
turd NS quote, not who wrote it, you pathetic
excuse for a bull**** artist.

Same with the virus in Sweden.

That's right, you didn't understand the meaning of 'rate'.

You never could bull**** and lie your way out of a wet paper bag.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:24:29 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

07:24??? And you are STILL up and trolling, you subnormal senile idiot? In
fact, you've been troll since 00:12 (your first troll)! LMAO

--
Marland answering senile Rodent's statement, "I don't leak":
"That¢s because so much **** and ****e emanates from your gob that there is
nothing left to exit normally, your arsehole has clammed shut through disuse
and the end of prick is only clear because you are such a ******."
Message-ID:

On 13/04/2021 22:30, alan_m wrote:
On 13/04/2021 21:15, Steve Walker wrote:

All a part of it. However pubs are the only place that people spend
hours in close proximity, without masks, talking or even shouting over
the noise of other conversations and drinking, which lowers
inhibitions and reduces the chances of following rules.

In my experience between lockdowns the pubs I visited were far better
than what happened at the local supermarket!

But in the supermarket, you are masked and only near someone for seconds.

On 13/04/2021 22:33, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 17:45, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 17:03, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote

And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge
in infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.

Its like the January sales.

Maybe lots of infections but few hospitalisations.

That assumes most are vaccinated but that isnt true yet.

But the ones who are vulnerable and most likely to die have.

Thats not true, it still isnt clear who many
of the vulnerable and most likely to die are.

My main concern would be the increased likelihood of mutations
from the increased number of infections.

The mutations come from those with severely compromised
immune systems that take a long time to recover from the
virus or die from it now that treatment is so much better.

That is a thought but I doubt you'll find a cite saying it is
directly caused by a severely compromised immune systems.

Fraid so.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...mmune-systems/


Gives an account the patient showed that the virus evolved rapidly
after being given convalescent plasma.

Thats not something that common at all so isnt
likely to have been the cause of most variants.

This article:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...g-the-pandemic


Highlights it is the number and duration of infection that
increase likelihood of mutation;
Â* "With almost every person it infects, the virus changes very
subtly €“

Thats mindless bull****. There arent that many variants.

That's show your lack of knowledge.

Bull****.

Most mutations will fail in one way or another.

Yes, but if they fail quickly, there would be no way to know that
stupid claim.

The most successful mutation is one that doesn't kill the host and
lives indefinitely in the body.

We havent seen any like that with this virus.

There are coronaviruses that are mere colds. So no reason to create a
vaccine against them and they are free to propagate without lockdowns
or anything sinister.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-o...19-cases-68146


Irrelevant to what we are discussing there.

picking up a letter in its genetic code here, another being
deleted there

Both very rarely happens.

or swapped for something different."

Thats what normally happens.

Just more **** from some arts graduate like that other
steaming turd you waved around from the New Scientist.

Don't you like being shown you're wrong?

You're projecting now given that you never had the balls
to admit that that New Scientist steaming turd you waved
around proved you wrong.

Hardly a turd, it was an example of a mutation that occurred
indirectly through a compromised immune system.

The steaming turd was the New Scientist article
about how the qwerty keyboard came about.

I don't see how one example changes the validity of my post.

That **** you posted does.

We have a choice, accept an article in the New Scientist or a senile
phool in Australia posting to a UK newsgroup. Tough one isn't it?

The problem is with the content of that steaming
turd NS quote, not who wrote it, you pathetic
excuse for a bull**** artist.

Oh dear, you haven't suffered another lost argument

Same with the virus in Sweden.

That's right, you didn't understand the meaning of 'rate'.

You never could bull**** and lie your way out of a wet paper bag.

Another sign of a lost argument, you're not doing very well these days.

"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 22:33, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 17:45, Rod Speed wrote:


"Fredxx" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 17:03, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Fredxx wrote
Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote

And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.

Its like the January sales.

Maybe lots of infections but few hospitalisations.

That assumes most are vaccinated but that isnt true yet.

But the ones who are vulnerable and most likely to die have.

Thats not true, it still isnt clear who many
of the vulnerable and most likely to die are.

My main concern would be the increased likelihood of mutations
from the increased number of infections.

The mutations come from those with severely compromised
immune systems that take a long time to recover from the
virus or die from it now that treatment is so much better.

That is a thought but I doubt you'll find a cite saying it is
directly caused by a severely compromised immune systems.

Fraid so.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...mmune-systems/

Gives an account the patient showed that the virus evolved rapidly
after being given convalescent plasma.

Thats not something that common at all so isnt
likely to have been the cause of most variants.

This article:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...g-the-pandemic

Highlights it is the number and duration of infection that increase
likelihood of mutation;
"With almost every person it infects, the virus changes very
subtly €“

Thats mindless bull****. There arent that many variants.

That's show your lack of knowledge.

Bull****.

Most mutations will fail in one way or another.

Yes, but if they fail quickly, there would be no way to know that
stupid claim.

The most successful mutation is one that doesn't kill the host and
lives indefinitely in the body.

We havent seen any like that with this virus.

There are coronaviruses that are mere colds. So no reason to create a
vaccine against them and they are free to propagate without lockdowns or
anything sinister.

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-o...19-cases-68146

Irrelevant to what we are discussing there.

picking up a letter in its genetic code here, another being deleted
there

Both very rarely happens.

or swapped for something different."

Thats what normally happens.

Just more **** from some arts graduate like that other
steaming turd you waved around from the New Scientist.

Don't you like being shown you're wrong?

You're projecting now given that you never had the balls
to admit that that New Scientist steaming turd you waved
around proved you wrong.

Hardly a turd, it was an example of a mutation that occurred indirectly
through a compromised immune system.

The steaming turd was the New Scientist article
about how the qwerty keyboard came about.

I don't see how one example changes the validity of my post.

That **** you posted does.

We have a choice, accept an article in the New Scientist or a senile
phool in Australia posting to a UK newsgroup. Tough one isn't it?

The problem is with the content of that steaming
turd NS quote, not who wrote it, you pathetic
excuse for a bull**** artist.

Oh dear, you haven't suffered another lost argument

You wouldnt know a lost argument if one bit you on
your lard arse you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

Same with the virus in Sweden.

That's right, you didn't understand the meaning of 'rate'.

You never could bull**** and lie your way out of a wet paper bag.

Another sign of a lost argument, you're not doing very well these days.

You wouldnt know a lost argument if one bit you on
your lard arse you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

On 13/04/2021 10:12, Scribbles wrote:
Nah then.... Lincoln? Posh?
By 'eck, duck, things must be bloody rough round your way if yer think this is posh!

Well yes.

Bill

On 13 Apr 2021 at 21:24:09 BST, "ARW" wrote:

On 13/04/2021 21:15, Steve Walker wrote:
On 13/04/2021 19:28, ARW wrote:
On 13/04/2021 09:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Gaff (Sofa) formulated the question :
And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.
Its like the January sales.

Yep, it was manic. I kept well away.

The pubs will be the first to be blamed if the infection rate rises.

It will of course have nothing to do with gyms, shoppers or snotty
nosed school kids.

All a part of it. However pubs are the only place that people spend
hours in close proximity, without masks, talking or even shouting over
the noise of other conversations and drinking, which lowers inhibitions
and reduces the chances of following rules.


********.

I visited loads of pubs after the end of the 1st lockdown and only one
of them had no social distancing.

Between groups, yes, agreed. But within groups very difficult given the
seating arrangements.

--
Cheers, Rob

On 13/04/2021 23:07, Steve Walker wrote:

In my experience between lockdowns the pubs I visited were far better
than what happened at the local supermarket!

But in the supermarket, you are masked and only near someone for seconds.


There seems to be a lot of people who have medical reasons for not
wearing a mask!

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

alan_m wrote:

There seems to be a lot of people who have medical reasons for not
wearing a mask!

I've not seen many people wearing nothing at all; I regard the 'welding
visors' as a waste of time, and have noticed a few people (kids mainly)
sheepishly pulling a sweatshirt up over their chin as they scurry round
the aisles. Worst I remember was a trio of young mums with pushchairs
and not a mask between them.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 00:10:27 +0100, Fredxx, the notorious, troll-feeding,
senile smartass, blathered again:


You never could bull**** and lie your way out of a wet paper bag.

Another sign of a lost argument, you're not doing very well these days.

Thanks to troll-feeding senile idiots like you he is actually doing very
well these days! You just never get it, do you? BG

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:48:08 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

alan_m wrote:

There seems to be a lot of people who have medical reasons for not
wearing a mask!

I've not seen many people wearing nothing at all; I regard the 'welding
visors' as a waste of time, and have noticed a few people (kids mainly)
sheepishly pulling a sweatshirt up over their chin as they scurry round
the aisles. Worst I remember was a trio of young mums with pushchairs
and not a mask between them.

Yes and no. I think the visors are a useful adjunct, as they provide some
protection for the eyes - a potential entry point.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 13/04/2021 16:06, Fredxx wrote:
On 13/04/2021 15:47, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote

And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.

Its like the January sales.

Maybe lots of infections but few hospitalisations.

That assumes most are vaccinated but that isnt true yet.

But the ones who are vulnerable and most likely to die have.

The ones who are vulnerable *and who have contracted the disease* may
have died, but that leaves a very large group of vulnerable who so far
have managed to avoid infection. Hopefully the vaccination will continue
to protect those from serious illness and death.

My main concern would be the increased likelihood of mutations from
the increased number of infections.

The mutations come from those with severely compromised
immune systems that take a long time to recover from the
virus or die from it now that treatment is so much better.

That is a thought but I doubt you'll find a cite saying it is directly
caused by a severely compromised immune systems.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...mmune-systems/

Mutations occur as a natural part of any reproductive cycle, you may be
able to find situations were more are created, but you can't engineer
one where none at all are.

Gives an account the patient showed that the virus evolved rapidly after
being given convalescent plasma.

This article:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...g-the-pandemic


Highlights it is the number and duration of infection that increase
likelihood of mutation;

Â*"With almost every person it infects, the virus changes very subtly €“
picking up a letter in its genetic code here, another being deleted
there or swapped for something different."

We are also seeing recombinant versions, which is a process likely to
accelerate as there are more genetically diverse species in circulation:

https://www.newscientist.com/article...d-coronavirus/


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:48:08 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

alan_m wrote:

There seems to be a lot of people who have medical reasons for not
wearing a mask!

I've not seen many people wearing nothing at all; I regard the 'welding
visors' as a waste of time, and have noticed a few people (kids mainly)
sheepishly pulling a sweatshirt up over their chin as they scurry round
the aisles. Worst I remember was a trio of young mums with pushchairs
and not a mask between them.

Yes and no. I think the visors are a useful adjunct, as they provide some
protection for the eyes - a potential entry point.


An adjunct yes, not a replacement for a mask though. Before the latest
lockdown a higher rate of COVID was seen amongst hospitality staff using
visors rather than masks.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:15:42 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:48:08 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

alan_m wrote:

There seems to be a lot of people who have medical reasons for not
wearing a mask!

I've not seen many people wearing nothing at all; I regard the
'welding visors' as a waste of time, and have noticed a few people
(kids mainly) sheepishly pulling a sweatshirt up over their chin as
they scurry round the aisles. Worst I remember was a trio of young
mums with pushchairs and not a mask between them.

Yes and no. I think the visors are a useful adjunct, as they provide
some protection for the eyes - a potential entry point.


An adjunct yes, not a replacement for a mask though. Before the latest
lockdown a higher rate of COVID was seen amongst hospitality staff using
visors rather than masks.

I wouldn't dream of wearing one without a mask. As I see it, the mask
*primarily* protects others. The visor *primarily* protects me.

(although only one eye is vulnerable in the standard sense; the other one
only via the tear duct)
--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 09:15:42 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:48:08 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

alan_m wrote:

There seems to be a lot of people who have medical reasons for not
wearing a mask!

I've not seen many people wearing nothing at all; I regard the
'welding visors' as a waste of time, and have noticed a few people
(kids mainly) sheepishly pulling a sweatshirt up over their chin as
they scurry round the aisles. Worst I remember was a trio of young
mums with pushchairs and not a mask between them.

Yes and no. I think the visors are a useful adjunct, as they provide
some protection for the eyes - a potential entry point.


An adjunct yes, not a replacement for a mask though. Before the latest
lockdown a higher rate of COVID was seen amongst hospitality staff using
visors rather than masks.

I wouldn't dream of wearing one without a mask. As I see it, the mask
*primarily* protects others. The visor *primarily* protects me.

Thats just plain wrong. The visor is just about preventing the virus
getting in via the eyes and is only useful in addition to the mask.

(although only one eye is vulnerable in the standard sense; the other one
only via the tear duct)

In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 13/04/2021 09:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Gaff (Sofa) formulated the question :
And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.
Its like the January sales.

Yep, it was manic. I kept well away.

The pubs will be the first to be blamed if the infection rate rises.

It will of course have nothing to do with gyms, shoppers or snotty nosed
school kids.

Thing with anything were alcohol is involved is that one of its properties
is to remove inhibitions. Social distancing may well be achieved with
everyone sober, but after a few many won't give a f**k about it. And it's
impossible for staff to control this.

--
*If a thing is worth doing, wouldn't it have been done already?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:51:15 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

I wouldn't dream of wearing one without a mask. As I see it, the mask
*primarily* protects others. The visor *primarily* protects me.

That¢s just plain wrong.

LOL Poor ****ed up auto-contradicting senile sociopath!

--
Kerr-Mudd,John addressing the auto-contradicting senile cretin:
"Auto-contradictor Rod is back! (in the KF)"
MID:

Bob Eager wrote:
I wouldn't dream of wearing one without a mask. As I see it,
the mask *primarily* protects others. The visor *primarily*
protects me.

It seem to me that visors, even if less effective than a
mask, will still disrupt the breathe plumes of wearers
to some degree, and thus provide some help; even if only
to speed up mixing and dispersal of breath aerosols,
reducing the presumably more concentrated aerosols in
a more direct breath. Still, this is only an educated guess,
since I haven't seen any modelling of it.


#Paul

Bob Eager wrote:

I think the visors are a useful adjunct, as they provide some
protection for the eyes - a potential entry point.

Do you wear a mask *plus* visor then?

In article ,
#Paul wrote:
Bob Eager wrote:
I wouldn't dream of wearing one without a mask. As I see it,
the mask *primarily* protects others. The visor *primarily*
protects me.

It seem to me that visors, even if less effective than a
mask, will still disrupt the breathe plumes of wearers
to some degree, and thus provide some help; even if only
to speed up mixing and dispersal of breath aerosols,
reducing the presumably more concentrated aerosols in
a more direct breath. Still, this is only an educated guess,
since I haven't seen any modelling of it.


#Paul

when I had my hair cut on Monday, the haircutters were all wearing visors
and no masks.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 14/04/2021 11:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 13/04/2021 09:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Gaff (Sofa) formulated the question :
And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.
Its like the January sales.

Yep, it was manic. I kept well away.

The pubs will be the first to be blamed if the infection rate rises.

It will of course have nothing to do with gyms, shoppers or snotty nosed
school kids.

Thing with anything were alcohol is involved is that one of its properties
is to remove inhibitions. Social distancing may well be achieved with
everyone sober, but after a few many won't give a f**k about it. And it's
impossible for staff to control this.


That is why the table service was introduced.

--
Adam

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article ,
#Paul wrote:
Bob Eager wrote:
I wouldn't dream of wearing one without a mask. As I see it,
the mask *primarily* protects others. The visor *primarily*
protects me.

It seem to me that visors, even if less effective than a
mask, will still disrupt the breathe plumes of wearers
to some degree, and thus provide some help; even if only
to speed up mixing and dispersal of breath aerosols,
reducing the presumably more concentrated aerosols in
a more direct breath. Still, this is only an educated guess,
since I haven't seen any modelling of it.

when I had my hair cut on Monday, the haircutters were all wearing visors
and no masks.

Clearly ignorant fools. Tho understandable, wearing a mask
full time is very uncomfortable particularly if you wear glasses.

On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 12:27:18 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:

I think the visors are a useful adjunct, as they provide some
protection for the eyes - a potential entry point.

Do you wear a mask *plus* visor then?

Yes, depending on where I am.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 04:51:38 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
"Who or What is Rod Speed?

Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod Speed
is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered he can
enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the big, hard
man" on the InterNet."
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On 14/04/2021 09:46, John Rumm wrote:
On 13/04/2021 16:06, Fredxx wrote:
On 13/04/2021 15:47, Rod Speed wrote:
Fredxx wrote
Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote

And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.

Its like the January sales.

Maybe lots of infections but few hospitalisations.

That assumes most are vaccinated but that isnt true yet.

But the ones who are vulnerable and most likely to die have.

The ones who are vulnerable *and who have contracted the disease* may
have died, but that leaves a very large group of vulnerable who so far
have managed to avoid infection. Hopefully the vaccination will continue
to protect those from serious illness and death.

My main concern would be the increased likelihood of mutations from
the increased number of infections.

The mutations come from those with severely compromised
immune systems that take a long time to recover from the
virus or die from it now that treatment is so much better.

That is a thought but I doubt you'll find a cite saying it is directly
caused by a severely compromised immune systems.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...mmune-systems/


Mutations occur as a natural part of any reproductive cycle, you may be
able to find situations were more are created, but you can't engineer
one where none at all are.

Yes

Gives an account the patient showed that the virus evolved rapidly
after being given convalescent plasma.

This article:

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...g-the-pandemic


Highlights it is the number and duration of infection that increase
likelihood of mutation;

Â*Â*"With almost every person it infects, the virus changes very subtly
€“ picking up a letter in its genetic code here, another being deleted
there or swapped for something different."

We are also seeing recombinant versions, which is a process likely to
accelerate as there are more genetically diverse species in circulation:

https://www.newscientist.com/article...d-coronavirus/

That is an interesting article. I am aware than bacteria can share DNA
to become antibiotic resistant but wasn't aware of this process with a
virus. I wouldn't like to rule out being a sequential pair of natural
spontaneous mutations.

On 14/04/2021 07:48, Andy Burns wrote:

I've not seen many people wearing nothing at all;

Well, it's very cold for April.

Bill

In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 14/04/2021 11:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 13/04/2021 09:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Gaff (Sofa) formulated the question :
And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.
Its like the January sales.

Yep, it was manic. I kept well away.

The pubs will be the first to be blamed if the infection rate rises.

It will of course have nothing to do with gyms, shoppers or snotty nosed
school kids.

Thing with anything were alcohol is involved is that one of its properties
is to remove inhibitions. Social distancing may well be achieved with
everyone sober, but after a few many won't give a f**k about it. And it's
impossible for staff to control this.


That is why the table service was introduced.

Fines if everyone remains at their tables. But after a few, many won't.

--
*Why 'that tie suits you' but 'those shoes suit you'?*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 15/04/2021 01:06, Fredxx wrote:
On 14/04/2021 09:46, John Rumm wrote:

We are also seeing recombinant versions, which is a process likely to
accelerate as there are more genetically diverse species in circulation:

https://www.newscientist.com/article...d-coronavirus/


That is an interesting article. I am aware than bacteria can share DNA
to become antibiotic resistant but wasn't aware of this process with a
virus. I wouldn't like to rule out being a sequential pair of natural
spontaneous mutations.

IIUC, to get a recombinant version you need a host infected with two
strains concurrently - so there is not much scope for them until there
is enough genetic diversity in the strains in circulation to allow
concurrent infections. But once you can get multiple infections, then
you can see newer variants with bigger groups of changes than you would
normally expect just from "normal" mutations - as sections of the
different strains end up being spliced together.

This was quite good:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT5QYq8g9fU


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 15/04/2021 02:34, williamwright wrote:
On 14/04/2021 07:48, Andy Burns wrote:

I've not seen many people wearing nothing at all;

Well, it's very cold for April.


There was a pub in Cawthorne a few years ago that had a notice up
banning topless customers from the bar regardless of their sex.



--
Adam

On 15/04/2021 11:19, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 14/04/2021 11:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
ARW wrote:
On 13/04/2021 09:02, Harry Bloomfield wrote:
Brian Gaff (Sofa) formulated the question :
And judging by the reports in the media, probably a huge surge in
infections as well, despite the pubs and shops best efforts.
Its like the January sales.

Yep, it was manic. I kept well away.

The pubs will be the first to be blamed if the infection rate rises.

It will of course have nothing to do with gyms, shoppers or snotty nosed
school kids.

Thing with anything were alcohol is involved is that one of its properties
is to remove inhibitions. Social distancing may well be achieved with
everyone sober, but after a few many won't give a f**k about it. And it's
impossible for staff to control this.


That is why the table service was introduced.

Fines if everyone remains at their tables. But after a few, many won't.


That has not been a problem I have seen. Only one of the many pubs I
have visited were out of control. That was in Louth.

--
Adam

On 15/04/2021 20:14, ARW wrote:
On 15/04/2021 02:34, williamwright wrote:
On 14/04/2021 07:48, Andy Burns wrote:

There was a pub in Cawthorne a few years ago that had a notice up
banning topless customers from the bar regardless of their sex.



It a posh area though.

Bill

On 15/04/2021 20:24, ARW wrote:

Fines if everyone remains at their tables. But after a few, many won't.


That has not been a problem I have seen. Only one of the many pubs I
have visited were out of control. That was in Louth.


No problems at all at our two local pubs.

Bill

On 13/04/2021 17:03, Rod Speed wrote:
Highlights it is the number and duration of infection that increase
likelihood of mutation;
Â* "With almost every person it infects, the virus changes very subtly €“

Thats mindless bull****. There arent that many variants.

So yer a virologist now as well as a bighead?

Bill

"williamwright" wrote in message
...
On 15/04/2021 20:24, ARW wrote:

Fines if everyone remains at their tables. But after a few, many won't.


That has not been a problem I have seen. Only one of the many pubs I have
visited were out of control. That was in Louth.


No problems at all at our two local pubs.

Corse there is with aerosols.

"williamwright" wrote in message
...
On 13/04/2021 17:03, Rod Speed wrote:
Highlights it is the number and duration of infection that increase
likelihood of mutation;
"With almost every person it infects, the virus changes very subtly €“

Thats mindless bull****. There arent that many variants.

So yer a virologist now

Dont need to be to work out how many variants have been found so far,
****wit.

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 13:42:12 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
Marland answering senile Rodent's statement, "I don't leak":
"That¢s because so much **** and ****e emanates from your gob that there is
nothing left to exit normally, your arsehole has clammed shut through disuse
and the end of prick is only clear because you are such a ******."
Message-ID:

On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 13:43:10 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
The Natural Philosopher about senile Rodent:
"Rod speed is not a Brexiteer. He is an Australian troll and arsehole."
Message-ID: