Author Topic: Theories on the origin of Coronavirus (split from Is it OK to go Caving)  (Read 3034 times)

Offline RobinGriffiths

  • junky
  • ****
  • Posts: 931
The multi nucleus thing.. Presumably it's only been studied in patients who have died of the disease, or possibly where a biopsy has been done on a living person. Are these multiple cells that have merged, or a cell that has gained multiple nuclei by some mechanism? Do people who have recovered from the disease have cells showing the same features, but maybe at a very low level?  Would having such cells make one prone to cancer a few months or years down the line, or would they get swept up by T cells and the like?

Given the suspicion that the government may still have herd immunity at the back of their mind, I for one would remain cautious.


Offline Jenny P

  • junky
  • ****
  • Posts: 793
I read the same thing but can't find it now. Apparently the virus merges lung cells together into mega-cells with multiple nuclei. Ventillators won't do this.

That's the article I was referring to, not the one which Paul posted.  The point was that it changed the structure of the lung in a fundamental way.

Offline Speleotron

  • forum star
  • ****
  • Posts: 577
  • YUCPC, ULSA
Wh
Given the suspicion that the government may still have herd immunity at the back of their mind, I for one would remain cautious.

That's what's troubling me about the virus, from a selfish perspective. I might have a very small chance of dying from it immediately, but what kind of weird things is it doing to the body? It seems to mess about with the lungs, heart, kidneys, blood, lung cells and possibly the brain (it does reproduce in brain cells but we don't know if it can cross the blood brain barrier).

Perhaps it's best not to think about it too much but who's to say that it won't cause problems years down the line, even if you only got mild symptoms? I don't fancy rolling the dice with it.
In search of taverns measureless to man

Offline RobinGriffiths

  • junky
  • ****
  • Posts: 931
I don't fancy rolling the dice with it.

Absolutely.

Offline RobinGriffiths

  • junky
  • ****
  • Posts: 931
I read the same thing but can't find it now. Apparently the virus merges lung cells together into mega-cells with multiple nuclei. Ventillators won't do this.

That's the article I was referring to, not the one which Paul posted.  The point was that it changed the structure of the lung in a fundamental way.

Ah ok. So merging cells.

Offline Laurie

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
  • ...and then there was one.
At age 77 I recovered from it and I don'feel any different from before.
I didn't have a ventilator but was on oxygen for three weeks.
MNRC

Offline pwhole

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1999
  • TSG, DCA, PDMHS
    • Phil Wolstenholme website
Laurie - You're the only person I know on here that's mentioned having it bad - I'm sorry that your wife didn't survive, and I don't wish for you to relive a bad experience, but I am interested in the actual symptoms different people have suffered as not many discuss it in the media. When you were on oxygen for three weeks was the recovery from that situation fairly swift? It's interesting, as that study I posted recently mentioned that many people enduring it for several weeks suffered severe and irreparable lung damage, but if you don't feel any different from before that's clearly not the case for everyone. Was the need for oxygen something you would say was unique to this disease compared to others you might have had in the past like flu? As in, not the severity of the symptoms but the actual character of them. Presumably you agreed with the decision to go on oxygen? Or was it a case of no other option?

I hope you don't mind me asking but there's not much actual info out there on quick recovery.

Offline pwhole

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1999
  • TSG, DCA, PDMHS
    • Phil Wolstenholme website
Given that the Government are likely to announce in an hour or so that social distancing can be reduced to 1 metre, despite zero scientific evidence being presented to support this relaxation, I wonder what folks think on how it may impact caving, given that we'd already 'suggested' that 2m separation may not be sufficient underground. I just watched an interview with Professor David King of the Independent SAGE group on BBC News, and he was absolutely scathing about the logic behind this - i.e. we seem to be intent on rescuing some parts of the economy versus preserving overall public health. He said that if the current infection rate of 1000 new cases a day were the levels we had in March, we would have gone into full lockdown on that basis alone. As in, we should still be in lockdown. Then another scientist came on who said he was 'very nervous' about it. Probably as they'll get the blame as they're clever.

I then watched another interview with a pub owner in Essex who said that he's hoping the social distancing can be reduced so he can pack people in his pub again. He didn't seem worried about becoming a viral hotspot, but then he possibly doesn't listen to David King either. Given that drinking alcohol in close quarters will have precisely the opposite effect on social distancing that we need (it's even happened to holier-than-thou me, so I know it's true - I touched her knee at least), is this really a practical solution to a health crisis? It's good for breweries perhaps - unless they have another lockdown and have to throw it all away again.

Germany has just closed a meat-packing plant after 1500 employees have tested positive. In one company. So now everything's having to close down again in that state.

Given also that we don't know much about viral deposition within caves, and how long a load might survive (particularly in well-used caves - like Giants Hole in my area which can see dozens a day visit in summer) can anyone be reasonably confident that we aren't possibly in a situation where we might be 'dosing' caves long-term - if asymptomatic but infectious cavers do a long trip and dump it into the further reaches? And that if areas that are SSSIs are involved, Natural England may then feel obliged to permanently close down specific sites on the basis that they are now a 'biohazard'? If eliminating a virus is taken seriously, this may be considered reasoanable. You can't burn a cave like you can burn a contaminated facemask, and you can't clean one down to satisfaction either.

As a practical suggestion for my area, Derbyshire - Suicide Cave at Winnats Pass, Odin Cave just past Treak Cliff and Windy Knoll Cave are probably visited by more people in a year than anywhere else in the area - and nearly all by the general public, who often use these sites as toilets and sex venues. As sport caving hasn't happened since lockdown, it is likely that the only visits these caves have had is from the public. And so it may be worth swabbing common touch areas within these caves to see if any traces of the virus can be picked up? That's no more ridiculous than any other scientific sampling exercise might seem, and it might just give a clue, which is more than we have now, even though we're meant to offer 'advice'.

I'm not trying to be awkward here, but I'm trying to find out the best practice, based on the best science I can find, in the limited free time I have. Which pretty much means ignoring Government advice, as far as I can tell. Philosophically speaking, is it still right to balance the interests of a consumer-led service economy against long-term public health? Are they of equal weight? Should we be attempting to rebalance the economy back toward manufacturing and innovation (which can be managed with social distancing and creates long-term financial stability) or encouraging more people to eat and drink alcohol in other places than their homes (which can't and probably doesn't)? Is that truly a viable primary industry for the 21st century? Buck Rodgers is meant to be around soon, and it appears he may merely have a job as a waiter in a cafe with a face mask on instead of being  a space superhero, which I would prefer really.

Ah, it's only a quarter of an hour to the announcement now. That went quick. But any thoughts?   :-\

Online JoshW

  • obsessive maniac
  • ***
  • Posts: 425
  • YSS, BCA Youth and Development, BCA Group Rep

Ah, it's only a quarter of an hour to the announcement now. That went quick. But any thoughts?   :-\

my thoughts? what a shower of shit!

how anyone can feel justified having voted these scrotes into power. unbelievable levels of negligence happening all over the place.

Offline MarkS

  • Global Moderator
  • junky
  • *****
  • Posts: 774
  • BBPC, YCC
It's easy to consider the economy and public health as being opposing choices currently, but I'm not sure that's a good way of thinking about it. There is some horribly complicated balance to be struck to ensure that there is sufficient lock-down to minimise deaths associated with covid-19, whilst giving people sufficient freedom/confidence that other medical problems are reported, ensuring excess deaths aren't just shifted to other causes. And of course the impact of an economic downturn on NHS funding is also pretty crucial.

My feeling is that even the most informed decisions on this balance will involve plenty of guesswork, and differing health and economic circumstances across the country will mean there will be wildly differing views on it.

Who knows. :shrug:

Offline mikem

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 3648
  • Mendip Caving Group
There's still a much higher risk of contracting it in your daily life than there is down a cave (the normal summer usage of large numbers of groups underground just isn't happening at the moment)

Offline Bob Mehew

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1346
  • breaking knots is fun
Life is about avoiding many many risks.  Fail and you die.  Covid 19 is a new one and most people have a fairly low risk level, certainly less that the risk of transport to the cave.

I take the point about testing for the presence of the virus in caves.  But it would be useful to start with an infected person so one can be confident that viruses are being shed.  I am not sure how one can achieve that.  Else it points to a massive testing campaign whose primary objective is to get enough samples such that a few will have been visited / contaminated by the virus.  An alternative is a literature search using goggle scholar for virus life times in cold water and also find papers on the science behind the 2m rule.

Offline Duck ditch

  • menacing presence
  • **
  • Posts: 230
For me bubble forming is the answer. Others keep your distance please.  I agree supermarkets etc are far riskier a place than a cave in your bubble. 
We as a country voted for Johnson/Cummings to get the S**tstorm  done.  Johnson is a joker but he can’t joke through covid.  That’s why he seems even more useless  than ever.

Offline Wardy

  • player
  • **
  • Posts: 94
I agree with Duck Ditch
Many people voted for the current government to sort political problem where outcomes are difficult to define as right or wrong and can be claimed as success based on your opinion and or beliefs.
A pandemic such as this is real and getting things right or wrong is more brutal and easier to define.
No surprise then that two game players are clearly out of their depth.

On a separate note at SpanSet we we have a strong safety culture and have used that and a risk management approach to address this situation.
Due to our location no one is able to use public transport so that risk of transmission was absent which may be significant.
We have operated throughout, taken big decisions quickly, focused on staff safety, worked together to solve issues and supported those at home or who needed to isolate.
Every day I see a workforce of 50-60 people all able to distance at 2m+ and still carry out their roles with good levels of personal hygiene and respect for each other - which is probably the most important thing.
In our situation it has paid off so far and our staff feel far safer at work than when they visit the supermarket.
Other examples I have seen in the news seem really gung-ho and so whilst I believe it is possible to operate in some situations or areas I also worry it will not be so for everyone. So measures to ease lockdown could have dramatic effects if the wrong conditions come together.
That balance between protecting peoples living and worrying about their health is not something I take lightly and why I hope the government doesn't throw caution to the wind - Time will tell!

Offline Laurie

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2171
  • ...and then there was one.
how anyone can feel justified having voted these scrotes into power.
Actually, a 'scrote' is an essential and very useful part of the anatomy.
MNRC

Offline AR

  • Black shadow
  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1273
  • PDMHS, ATAC, ANHMS
how anyone can feel justified having voted these scrotes into power.
Actually, a 'scrote' is an essential and very useful part of the anatomy.

Yes, but it's meant for retaining bollocks, not talking it...
Dirty old mines need love too....

Online JoshW

  • obsessive maniac
  • ***
  • Posts: 425
  • YSS, BCA Youth and Development, BCA Group Rep
how anyone can feel justified having voted these scrotes into power.
Actually, a 'scrote' is an essential and very useful part of the anatomy.

I'd have liked to be more explicit, but didn't want to lower the tone of this fine forum  :furious:

Offline droid

  • forum hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2337
  • WMRG
Props to Adam for the best response I've read this year... :lol: :lol: :lol:
No longer 'Exceptionally antagonistic' 'Deliberately inflammatory'

 

Main Menu

Forum Home Help Search