Jump to content

Barbe bleu

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Barbe bleu last won the day on May 27

Barbe bleu had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

234 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You are starting with a conclusion and working backwards, which is a bit naughty I don't disagree with most of your analysis but the specific thing I was enquiring about was whether or not VWs pointless labour was a sign that the system is broken. I am not sure we have enough data to really tell. To the more general question on track and trace rising infections is a sign of failure if your expectation was of a panacea. If not then success or failure is measured not by counting Infections but by estimating how many infections were averted. Quite honestly I don't know how well it is doing as I have no way of making this estimate.
  2. So there's a triage after which a case (a person who has tested positive) gets assigned to one of three tiers depending on complexity. The case remains with an operator at that tier until one of three things happens: they've exhausted the intelligence and called/messaged everyone they can, the shift has ended and the next guy takes over or it becomes too complex for that tier if it is as described twiddling of thumbs could be either a sign of a poor system or a sign that supply or operators exceeds demand for their services. Do we have any insight into which it is?
  3. Ne interested to know how it works.There's about 1000 cases a day. Does each operator get one of these to follow through on? If so and if there are more than 1000 operators then operator 1001 onwards will stand idle unless there is sharing down the chain. As I said earlier the fact that you have done nothing is a cost (bad) but could be a good thing
  4. why do you think I was writing in the past tense? I had thought I was writing in the future conditional. Can you tell me where I have gone wrong please ?
  5. That could be either good or bad. Hopefully you've not been given any as they had all been Seems like we are all agreed for once! I see Bill posted, he'll probably have argued that no justification is required just for the fight I suppose.
  6. I think that this is fair enough. They should be able to justify their actions retrospectively if time or circumstance do not permit soing so at the time.
  7. I suspect that there is a bit more to it than locking down on the basis of the raw numbers alone. Be interesting to see the rationale behind the two local lockdowns in full but in both cases a hypothesis could be made out that it is not the rate of spread that was the critical factor but the likelihood of spread to vulnerable members of extended family groups. If you do go down the route of full publication though its easy for someone to excuse themselves from measures on the basis that they don't live with granny or whatever it is.
  8. There are those on here that will criticise the government when the sun goes down in the evening and some that will praise it when the sun returns in the morning. Others prefer a different approach bit I am not sure that anyone has given an unqualified defence over the last few pages.
  9. You are probably correct but by March it was probably a little too late. It was the February half term that was the issue I suspect
  10. I have a different take. The two main issues as i see them being (a) not protecting the vulnerable, especially in care homes, correctly and (b) not putting more resources into track and trace immediately (ie jan-feb) as this is where Germany's relative success stemmed from. I could be persuaded on PPE but I would need to see evidence that a deficiency caused disproportionate infection in a hospital environment and I am not sure that this exists. I speak in aggregate terms, each individual case, of course, being a disaster to the individual. Lockdown is the bluntest of instruments. Doing it earlier will probably have saved lives overall but if we had sorted out (a) and (b) it should not have been necessary. We can see some evidence for this in figures throughout Europe where lockdowns have eased but deaths have stayed suppressed or in Sweden.
  11. So sounds possible that at least some of the increase in confirmed cases is due to increased testing
  12. If increased testing is the cause we should see the % positive falling. As to the vitus being weaker, possibly though unlikely I reckon. More likely the disease is not spreading to the most vulnerable groups anymore
  13. This virus is a new beginning. Why would we want to save the less than venerable?
  14. Thats the path that spain is following. Deaths are/appear to be/might be well down at the moment so might not be the worst thing. Can we protect the venerable though?
  15. If only it worked like that. Everyone who refuses a jab is a potential carrier to those for whom the vaccine will not work. And as far as i know although we all have hopes and expectations there is no solid evidence that the vaccine will work in the over 55s Hopefully it won't take much to get to the critical level so herd immunity can be achieved regardless of the anti vaxxers but its not ideal
  • Create New...