SIGN UP

Coronavirus: Has Anyone Had A Bit Of A Cold In The Past Couple Of Months?

Avatar Image
naomi24 | 15:23 Wed 25th Mar 2020 | News
162 Answers
I have, so here’s hoping.

// The coronavirus could have infected as much as half of the the UK’s population, according to researchers at the University of Oxford. If accurate, the results would mean the country has already acquired substantial “herd immunity” through the unrecognised spread of the illness.

The shutdown across the UK could be removed much sooner expected if the findings are confirmed //

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-half-uk-population-oxford-university-study-finds-a4396721.html

A light on the horizon perhaps?

Answers

81 to 100 of 162rss feed

First Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Jim, having just looked through the statistics of each country... it seems twice as many men are dying of this, than women. Is this the standard oestrogen-protection? Although it seems to go across all ages...
Any ideas?
Karno…

#justsaying #etc
I think it's because you are all chained to the kitchen sink still.
Sorry :-/ x no, this isn't about contracting it, but dying from it x
I'm not sure I am in a position to answer you, Pix. I wouldn't even care to hazard a guess myself. I've seen suggestions that it might be to do with differences in lifestyle between the sexes, but I'm not sure I believe that can account for it.

No, it may account for different people getting it in the first place, although most countries are claiming fairly equally... I just wondered why it seems more fatal to men, generally. But thanks, anyway x
Question Author
Jim, I’ve no idea who Gideon is, but given the disclaimer there, had you posted that in Science, under the new rules instigated by you it would probably have been zapped. As the article says, // If there’s one thing certain about the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s that everything we say now will probably be wrong by next week.//

Before making our minds up one way or another, let’s wait for the results of Oxford’s investigations. In troubled times a little optimism and a modicum of hope never goes amiss.
You do like to continue propagating a misunderstanding of the new guidelines, don't you?
Question Author
No misunderstanding here.
Also, nobody's making their minds up. It's simply that any reasonable evaluation of the Oxford study ought to treat its suggestion that half of the UK has had Covid by now with more than a little scepticism.

In the meantime, I'm saddened to see that my own predictions for where this was going in the UK have been fairly accurate. The good news is that, by their very nature, those predictions won't last too far into April before they break down.
It certainly is special to have to the talent to inform the guy who (allegedly) instigated the new rules that they don't understand them, though.

What you seem to continue to miss is that what determines good science is not the result, it is the method.
Tbh, I think the new "guidelines" are awful. While it is very courageous for a social site to claim "all misleading information will be removed"- and put it on writing... clearly the lawyers are fine with that amount of responsibility, but most would be saying "the views on this site don't represent ours, blah blah".
Silencing people and not allowing people to ever be wrong... is a dangerous move. We have already have accurate posts removed. Maybe inaccurate remaining, I don't know yet. But I would love to see who these full-time experts are...
Question Author
//the Oxford study ought to treat its suggestion that half of the UK has had Covid by now with more than a little scepticism. //

I think Oxford is doing that which is why they've said 'could' rather than 'has'.
Question Author
Jim, And what determines interesting dialogue is the freedom to postulate ideas.
You remain free to postulate ideas. You aren't free to pretend that all ideas are equal, whether it be because of evidence, methodology, or because somebody just doesn't like you*.

*This last is obviously a joke.
Question Author
Jim, //You aren't free to pretend that all ideas are equal//

But you’re free to post something from an anonymous source and claim that research that hasn’t been completed is absolutely wrong simply because you disagree with it. Odd that.
It's not an anonymous source. If you scroll down you'll see who the author is.

Moreover, I was posting it because it offers a counterargument.
Question Author
I know what you were doing.
I wish you could let me know what I was doing -- so that I know.

81 to 100 of 162rss feed

First Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Last

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.