Scary Peer Reviewed Science - Trigger Warning

[ClimbDad]

Taking Mumsnet HQ’s suggestion on board, this thread is for those who want scientific information about COVID-19. It is clearly advertised as scary, and has a trigger warning, so no complaints from anyone complaining they didn’t know what they were stumbling into.

I’ll only be sharing peer reviewed papers from respected journals and would advise anyone else who wants to share anything to use the same criteria.

The thread isn’t actually designed to scare. It’s designed to inform, so that people can make a decent assessment of risk and lobby decision makers when appropriate. Don’t assume government knows more than you. They’ve been behind the curve on everything.

I’ll start. The Guardian wrote a good article about the progress of respiratory viruses through autumn and how we don’t know whether SARS-COV-2 will compete with flu.

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/19/what-happens-when-flu-meets-covid-19

The theory of viral competition suggests COVID19 might be kept at bay by flu. In other words infection by other respiratory viruses might help reduce the impact of a second wave.

However this peer reviewed study published in the Journal of Medical Virology suggests flu and COVID19 don’t compete, and coexist simultaneously.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/jmv.26364

The inference is that having SARS-COV-2 circulating at the same time as influenza will cause more serious infection. It doesn’t seem that viral competition will make things better.

Practically what does this mean? I believe it means it is prudent to be even more cautious during flu season than we were in spring, and to do everything possible to reduce transmission. That is going to be particularly relevant to schools. Even if one refuses to accept schools play a role in COVID19 transmission, it is established science that schools are the engines behind influenza transmission every year, so precautionary measures make sense even if just to reduce spread of flu.

The first thread I saw by ClimbDad posted with authority that the "virus is airborne". I pointed out that it is only being investigated as to whether it is airborne. Later on in the thread ClimbDad seemed to row back on their original statement, but without acknowledging this. So I reserve judgment on their posts.

[quote Jrobhatch29]@nellodee who are the people saying it is a bad flu though? I keep seeing this thrown around, mainly on ClimbDad threads, but I am yet to see anyone actually saying it.[/quote]
You are kidding right?

Read any Covid board and you will see many examples of "people under 40, with no pre existing conditions have nothing to fear from Covid, it's no worse than flu" or variations there of. Anyone claiming to have not seen this is either completely new to MN or is being disingenuous.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras considering I said nobody has said it is just flu on climbdads threads, not any thread ever, that is irrelevant

It's just a bad flu

I couldn't help myself

Serious proper flu isnt just flu either though it is. DD had to have 6 weekly doctor appointments for a year after her flu to solve and manage her post flu symptoms.

We really should be saying it isnt just another cold coronavirus because that is in effect what 'just the flu' means. Because as Climbdad himself pointed out 10% of hospitalised myocardial inflammation came after a positive influenza test.

IMO it is this underestimation of flu itself which has led to a complete underestimation of this

[quote Jrobhatch29]@Hearhoovesthinkzebras considering I said nobody has said it is just flu on climbdads threads, not any thread ever, that is irrelevant[/quote]
No, you said I keep seeing this thrown around, mainly on ClimbDad threads,

Where does that say only on Climbdads threads?

@Quartz2208

Serious proper flu isnt just flu either though it is. DD had to have 6 weekly doctor appointments for a year after her flu to solve and manage her post flu symptoms.

We really should be saying it isnt just another cold coronavirus because that is in effect what 'just the flu' means. Because as Climbdad himself pointed out 10% of hospitalised myocardial inflammation came after a positive influenza test.

IMO it is this underestimation of flu itself which has led to a complete underestimation of this

But then we do have vaccines available to lessen the impact of flu, and some community immunity too. We also don't have 60,000 excess deaths over three months associated with flu.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras you misunderstand. I said I keep seeing people say that anyone who is remotely optimistic is put into the "it is just the flu" club, and this is mainly said on ClimbDad threads. I meant nobody on his threads has said this though!

And of all the things on this thread that is what you pick out? Jeez!

@Jrobhatch29

And of all the things on this thread that is what you pick out? Jeez!

And?

Why do you keep attacking the op rather than discussing the content of the studies they link to? Jeez

Really? Have you read the thread? Think you will find I made plenty of comments about the content of the actual study!

@Jrobhatch29

Fair enough *@ClimbDad* but in the future please consider presenting the studies in a more balanced way, and discuss the actual conclusions of the study, and not your own interpretation.

Actually, I missed this post from the thread police earlier.

Bloody hell, I need to copy "The Rules" from the previous thread.

Seriously, who are you to tell another poster how they must post in future?

Who the hell is the OP to declare he has found evidence for something?
I'm not engaging with you again. Your "I love ClimbDad" tshirt is in the mail!

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras yes exactly we know the flu and we have spent year and still spend millions making sure that it doesnt hit like Coronavirus. That is the difference - how many actually get it.

And a bad flu season can cause excess deaths. The reason is doesnt isnt due to the virus itself but due to the way we handle it with vaccines and the immunity we have. Swine flu in part wasnt such a big deal because of previous immunity

But dont you concede that part of the problem is that we dismiss flu as just the flu when it is one of the top 10 causes of deaths is part of the issue with Coronavirus?

Once you actually get both viruses both can be serious and deadly

@Jrobhatch29

Who the hell is the OP to declare he has found evidence for something? I'm not engaging with you again. Your "I love ClimbDad" tshirt is in the mail!

What has he claimed he's found evidence for (he's linked to studies, he didn't do the research himself) and where has he declared this?

I really don't understand your vitriol. An op finds a study in a reputable source, links it on here. Everyone is then free to read it and make up there own minds. What is there to be so outraged about?

Honestly, it's like no one is allowed to have a view on Covid unless it's "it's ok. All better now. Nothing to see here, all back to normal, let's get back to the pub".

[quote Quartz2208]@Hearhoovesthinkzebras yes exactly we know the flu and we have spent year and still spend millions making sure that it doesnt hit like Coronavirus. That is the difference - how many actually get it.

And a bad flu season can cause excess deaths. The reason is doesnt isnt due to the virus itself but due to the way we handle it with vaccines and the immunity we have. Swine flu in part wasnt such a big deal because of previous immunity

But dont you concede that part of the problem is that we dismiss flu as just the flu when it is one of the top 10 causes of deaths is part of the issue with Coronavirus?

Once you actually get both viruses both can be serious and deadly[/quote]
I really don't think the problem is how we minimise flu. I think the problem is in how people are seeking to minimise Covid, and it's effects on a susceptible global population, and likening it to the flu.

The fact is that for a significant number of people it can have serious effects, possibly long term, or it can kill. The overwhelming effect it will have on a population with no immunity to it is serious just given the numbers involved. On that basis, I don't think we can afford to liken it or compare it with any other illness. We have nothing that is similar. It's a novel virus and requires novel methods to control it.

I do think that we need to accept this in the short term in order to try and maintain some semblance of a functioning society and economy going forward.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras see post below:

00ClimbDad

Peer reviewed, published in the gold standard of journals: Nature.

A scientific report proving SARS-CoV-2 is airborne.

www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-69286-3

Not sure how anyone can rationally argue against masks in schools or any setting after this.

I commented on the study itself, like you just suggested.
Plenty others have shared their opinion on the OP on this thread!

*Honestly, it's like no one is allowed to have a view on Covid unless it's "it's ok. All better now. Nothing to see here, all back to normal, let's get back to the pub".

Also unfair comment. Nobody has said anything of the sort!

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras yes but if your starting comparison is believing the flu is just the flu (and I mean influenza not a cold) and then compares Covid to it is a problem with minimizing

The fact is that for a significant number of people it can have serious effects, possibly long term, or it can kill.

But what do you mean by significant. Its true meaning which is that enough so it is noteworthy and needs to be followed up. Which I agree entirely with. Or the incorrect meaning that a large number of people which we simply dont know because we dont know how widespread this is/

It is a novel and new virus and there is a lot we dont know about it. But why does that make it worse than a lot of other viruses we do know about. Apart from its scale.
The overwhelming effect it will have on a population with no immunity to it is serious just given the numbers involved. On that basis, I don't think we can afford to liken it or compare it with any other illness. We have nothing that is similar. It's a novel virus and requires novel methods to control it.

1% of 10 is 1. 1% of 1million is 10000. Its problem is that we have no immunity.

But ultimately it is just another virus. We are having a virgin soil epidemic

Apart from its scale.

That's a bit "Apart from that (was it Mrs Jefferson?), how was the play?"

[quote Quartz2208]@Hearhoovesthinkzebras yes but if your starting comparison is believing the flu is just the flu (and I mean influenza not a cold) and then compares Covid to it is a problem with minimizing

The fact is that for a significant number of people it can have serious effects, possibly long term, or it can kill.

But what do you mean by significant. Its true meaning which is that enough so it is noteworthy and needs to be followed up. Which I agree entirely with. Or the incorrect meaning that a large number of people which we simply dont know because we dont know how widespread this is/

It is a novel and new virus and there is a lot we dont know about it. But why does that make it worse than a lot of other viruses we do know about. Apart from its scale.
The overwhelming effect it will have on a population with no immunity to it is serious just given the numbers involved. On that basis, I don't think we can afford to liken it or compare it with any other illness. We have nothing that is similar. It's a novel virus and requires novel methods to control it.

1% of 10 is 1. 1% of 1million is 10000. Its problem is that we have no immunity.

But ultimately it is just another virus. We are having a virgin soil epidemic[/quote]
Only apart from the scale?

That's what I meant by a significant number - potentially everyone in the country is susceptible to catching it and if even a small percentage have complications or die then that's a significant number of people.

You're acknowledging that we still don't know much about it which is why I cannot understand anyone arguing that we shouldn't proceed with caution. That just makes no sense to me, neither does the plans for re opening the schools. Just tonight swathes of the north of England are having restrictions tightened and separate households now can't meet again and Matt Hancock blames the rising numbers on people not socially distancing, yet schools will re open with no SD, students mixing in large numbers and no masks either - completely illogical.

I can't read the whole thread because I'm shattered but re schools - Scottish schools go back in less than 2 weeks which is probably about 3 weeks before England? watch and see what happens there - it'll depend on community prevalence and transmission obviously but will be a good viewpoint I think.

Also kids under 12 haven't been social distancing all month and as things stand there haven't been problems resulting from that.

I dont see how anyone could for a second think your cant have two distinct viruses at the same time? That's always been the fear with HN15 that if you that and another flu and it mutated we would all be in deeper shit that we are now with covid.

HN15 is much, much more lethal. It just needs to spread as well as Covid. Then you might seeing a overall impact on the human population numbers.

This is who viruses evole and mutate. Theres nothing new or scary. Its nature. It always has been and always will. Viruses have to evolve to adapt and survive.

Please dont be scared of nature. Viruses predate the human race. It's all perfectly normal and nothing new

Peer reviewed study in JAMA Paediatrics demonstrating children have the same viral load as adults. Presented here without comment so people can make up their own minds.

jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2768952