Coronavirus

[Champ]

5 minutes ago, Mudface said:

 

 

 

That's an uninspiring line up. They'd get loads more viewers if it was narrated by Danny Baker, with reminiscences from Jonathon Ross, Claudia Winkleman and Andy Flintoff about last March's lockdown.

It was like the Horizons/Panorama of my youth/memory. Proper, detailed scientific explanation 

[Mudface]

2 minutes ago, Champ said:

It was like the Horizons/Panorama of my youth/memory. Proper, detailed scientific explanation 

And no cranks with an 'alternative' viewpoint given equal airtime in a ridiculous attempt at 'balance'?

[Jenson]

One of the things to consider with the spike protein mutating is that it cannot continue indefinitely.

 

The spike protein is the binding protein that the virus uses to latch onto the ACE2 receptor expressed by our cells, allowing the virus to enter the cell and cause infection.

 

The efficiency of binding is what determines how infectious the virus is, and a lot of the mutations we are seeing now are increasing this binding efficiency. These mutations are also changing the genetic code that the vaccines are designed to target and so could reduce vaccine efficacy.

 

However, as soon as the spike protein reaches optimal binding efficiency, any more mutations will, by definition, reduce binding, and these mutations will therefore not propogate in the general viral population.

 

At this point, the spike protein genetic code essentially becomes static, which would (hopefully) remove the problem of the virus becoming resistent to antibodies produced by the vaccine(s).

[Jairzinho]

1 hour ago, Champ said:

It was like the Horizons/Panorama of my youth/memory. Proper, detailed scientific explanation 

What did Nigel Farage have to say? 

[Carvalho Diablo]

2 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

 

Just had my Pfizer jab this morning, this evening I shall be attending the 1977 European Cup Final.

 

Win win.

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, Jenson said:

One of the things to consider with the spike protein mutating is that it cannot continue indefinitely.

 

The spike protein is the binding protein that the virus uses to latch onto the ACE2 receptor expressed by our cells, allowing the virus to enter the cell and cause infection.

 

The efficiency of binding is what determines how infectious the virus is, and a lot of the mutations we are seeing now are increasing this binding efficiency. These mutations are also changing the genetic code that the vaccines are designed to target and so could reduce vaccine efficacy.

 

However, as soon as the spike protein reaches optimal binding efficiency, any more mutations will, by definition, reduce binding, and these mutations will therefore not propogate in the general viral population.

 

At this point, the spike protein genetic code essentially becomes static, which would (hopefully) remove the problem of the virus becoming resistent to antibodies produced by the vaccine(s).

but unless i misunderstand the process, that is not likely to happen any time soon is it? 

[Rico1304]

23 minutes ago, Carvalho Diablo said:

Just had my Pfizer jab this morning, this evening I shall be attending the 1977 European Cup Final.

 

Win win.

Ha ha brilliant. 
 

She’s had to delete it. 

[3 Stacks]

1 hour ago, Jenson said:

One of the things to consider with the spike protein mutating is that it cannot continue indefinitely.

 

The spike protein is the binding protein that the virus uses to latch onto the ACE2 receptor expressed by our cells, allowing the virus to enter the cell and cause infection.

 

The efficiency of binding is what determines how infectious the virus is, and a lot of the mutations we are seeing now are increasing this binding efficiency. These mutations are also changing the genetic code that the vaccines are designed to target and so could reduce vaccine efficacy.

 

However, as soon as the spike protein reaches optimal binding efficiency, any more mutations will, by definition, reduce binding, and these mutations will therefore not propogate in the general viral population.

 

At this point, the spike protein genetic code essentially becomes static, which would (hopefully) remove the problem of the virus becoming resistent to antibodies produced by the vaccine(s).

For Covid to become completely resistant to the current mRNA vaccines, wouldn't the spike protein therefore have to change completely and therefore basically become almost a completely different virus? From my basic understanding, it feels like this fear of variants popping up in the short term that could make the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines obsolete feels very unrealistic. I know Moderna is also making booster shots to increase the efficiency against the South African one.  

[Jenson]

28 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

but unless i misunderstand the process, that is not likely to happen any time soon is it? 

 

I don't know enough about it to put any kind of timescale on it but there are only so many changes that can occur in the protein sequence that not only maintain the integrity of the spike protein but also increase it's binding efficiency. In the short term that may mean a fair number of variants appearing as the virus adapts to it's new human hosts, but over the longer term that will dwindle significantly.

 

8 minutes ago, 3 Stacks said:

For Covid to become completely resistant to the current mRNA vaccines, wouldn't the spike protein therefore have to change completely and therefore basically become almost a completely different virus? From my basic understanding, it feels like this fear of variants popping up in the short term that could make the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines obsolete feels very unrealistic. I know Moderna is also making booster shots to increase the efficiency against the South African one.  

 

In the short term it's very realistic that booster shots targeted to new variants will be required but, as I have said, mutations within the spike protein will dwindle significantly over the longer term, meaning the tweaking of the vaccines will become less and less of a requirement.

[Champ]

1 hour ago, Jairzinho said:

What did Nigel Farage have to say? 

Like Mudface said, there wasn’t a single celebrity or ‘alternative’ opinion aired. The van Tulleken brothers are exceptional communicators

[Jairzinho]

3 minutes ago, Champ said:

Like Mudface said, there wasn’t a single celebrity or ‘alternative’ opinion aired. The van Tulleken brothers are exceptional communicators

I wonder how popular it was.

 

You have to think these things are dictated by the numbers. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Just had my OAZ jab. It reminded me of a night with Tony's Ma - just a quick in and out and a little, barely noticeable prick.

[Captain Turdseye]

Hatt Mancock, criminal minister, is about to do the Covid briefing. 

[Section_31]

2 hours ago, Jenson said:

 

I don't know enough about it to put any kind of timescale on it but there are only so many changes that can occur in the protein sequence that not only maintain the integrity of the spike protein but also increase it's binding efficiency. In the short term that may mean a fair number of variants appearing as the virus adapts to it's new human hosts, but over the longer term that will dwindle significantly.

 

 

In the short term it's very realistic that booster shots targeted to new variants will be required but, as I have said, mutations within the spike protein will dwindle significantly over the longer term, meaning the tweaking of the vaccines will become less and less of a requirement.

A coronavirus that mutated into Aids would no longer be a coronavirus, or would it? That's one for the philosophers.

[Scooby Dudek]

1 hour ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Hatt Mancock, criminal minister, is about to do the Covid briefing. 

This is a really good watch, the GLP is only on for the first 30 minutes. Absolute pulls Hancocks reply on Marrs apart;

 

If you can't watch it all, watch from approx 3 mins (when Jones stops talking and shows Hancocks reply on Marrs) to 15 mins where upon the lawyer has presented their current case and also their on going cases.

 

 

[Bruce Spanner]

1 hour ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Hatt Mancock, criminal minister, is about to do the Covid briefing. 

‘The important thing is for the government to act according to the ruling of the court. When you read the [court] documents you see the lesson has been learned and it’s not a matter of the government trying to get away with it,” he added. “If the government carries on ignoring the rulings and breaking the law, that would be unacceptable. I’m not sure that getting something wrong is the same as deliberately flouting the law.”

 

When challenged by the presenters over the fact that many people have been fined for getting the law wrong – with leading lawyers warning of a “concerning trend of police overreach and casual criminalisation, often of young or other potentially vulnerable people” – Buckland said: “The key thing for me is to make sure the government abides by the law and where a court ruling has made, they abide by it and lessons are learnt’

 

 

[Bjornebye]

4 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

‘The important thing is for the government to act according to the ruling of the court. When you read the [court] documents you see the lesson has been learned and it’s not a matter of the government trying to get away with it,” he added. “If the government carries on ignoring the rulings and breaking the law, that would be unacceptable. I’m not sure that getting something wrong is the same as deliberately flouting the law.”

 

When challenged by the presenters over the fact that many people have been fined for getting the law wrong – with leading lawyers warning of a “concerning trend of police overreach and casual criminalisation, often of young or other potentially vulnerable people” – Buckland said: “The key thing for me is to make sure the government abides by the law and where a court ruling has made, they abide by it and lessons are learnt’

 

 

 

 

[sir roger]

1 hour ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Hatt Mancock, criminal minister, is about to do the Covid briefing. 

I thought you were on fist bumping terms 

[Captain Turdseye]

4 minutes ago, sir roger said:

I thought you were on fist bumping terms 

Ha. I refused to go to the count on election night because he was clearly gonna win and I didn’t trust myself not to bump my fist into his smug face. 
 

Obviously a mistake on my part.

[Scooby Dudek]

21 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

‘The important thing is for the government to act according to the ruling of the court. When you read the [court] documents you see the lesson has been learned and it’s not a matter of the government trying to get away with it,” he added. “If the government carries on ignoring the rulings and breaking the law, that would be unacceptable. I’m not sure that getting something wrong is the same as deliberately flouting the law.”

 

When challenged by the presenters over the fact that many people have been fined for getting the law wrong – with leading lawyers warning of a “concerning trend of police overreach and casual criminalisation, often of young or other potentially vulnerable people” – Buckland said: “The key thing for me is to make sure the government abides by the law and where a court ruling has made, they abide by it and lessons are learnt’

 

 

Watch the video I posted above, as I said the lawyer completely blows them lies out of the water. 

 

 

[Bjornebye]

8 minutes ago, Captain Turdseye said:

Ha. I refused to go to the count on election night because he was clearly gonna win and I didn’t trust myself not to bump my fist into his smug face. 
 

Obviously a mistake on my part.

Top notch willpower mate.

 

Plus he'd have probably turned you over. 

[Bruce Spanner]

3 minutes ago, Scooby Dudek said:

Watch the video I posted above, as I said the lawyer completely blows them lies out of the water. 

 

 

Oh, yeah, effectively ‘he is guilty of not abiding  by the law, but you caught us, so he’s learned from that and won’t get caught again. I don’t know what the fuss is about, really? Oh, look a squirrel...’

 

Remarkable cuntery.

[Captain Turdseye]

1 minute ago, Bjornebye said:

Top notch willpower mate.

 

Plus he'd have probably turned you over. 

I could have slapped his wife. 
 

On the two occasions he’s been into town he’s had a minder with him. Some of the Labour members went down to a restaurant he was visiting to try and ask him why there’s no GP’s and his goon wouldn’t let them within six feet of him. 
 

I’m not sure where that fella was when Hancock got twatted outside that hospital in Leeds though. 

[Chip Butty]

Just had the Pfizer Vaccination, to say I'm over the moon is an understatement.

 

I've lost me dad and a match going mate in the last 8 weeks, to this bastard virus and getting this vaccination, is as much to give me mam some comfort that she's not going to be left on her own, than it is for me bird and the kids.

 

A well done and a big thank you to the scientists and a gigantic fuck off, to this shitehawk self serving Tory government. 

 

 

 

 

[Scooby Dudek]

7 minutes ago, Bruce Spanner said:

Oh, yeah, effectively ‘he is guilty of not abiding  by the law, but you caught us, so he’s learned from that and won’t get caught again. I don’t know what the fuss is about, really? Oh, look a squirrel...’

 

Remarkable cuntery.

No, that is the government narrative. I thought exactly the same. 

 

The lawyer basically says that is bollocks, they were on "average" 17 days later on releasing reports but some were months late and him and Johnson held them back on purpose to wait until better optics to bury the particularly bad ones. Lawyer gave it, I am a lawyer and know the meaning of the word but what it is is corruption.