Jump to content
Fuzzar

Corona Virus main thread

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Barbe bleu said:

Well yes all epidemics end when they cannot grow.  Question is does it get to a  steady endemic state (R=1) or is it eliminated completely everywhere.  

It never entirely disappears because new potential victims are born everyday and there are always a few who have not been exposed. It usually remains endemic at a very low level with occasional outbreaks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ricardo said:

It never entirely disappears because new potential victims are born everyday and there are always a few who have not been exposed. It usually remains endemic at a very low level with occasional outbreaks.

Pretty much the same as most, will end up being treated either once off annually or other, as Ricardo says they never go away. It will end up being down graded and a small irritation in the wealthy countries like flu. 
Not sure if other less well off counties will fair the same each year.

With a global population of 7 billion it won’t be the last epidemic.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now . . . Scotland's deputy first minister says there is a "realistic possibility" that students will not be allowed to go home for Christmas.  Some of them may be delighted of course, but it has never been more obvious that power is the crack cocaine of politics - the more they get, the more they crave.  Where will it end? 

Edited by benchwarmer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ricardo said:

i'll say it again just for clarity.

Indeed, the question is how rapidly it develops in the population to the extent that epidemic waves are suppressed. We don’t know how far along that road we have travelled but as I said earlier, it is quite possible for a level of immunity to be developed which does not prevent the spread of infection but that which does reduce the severity of disease.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

321k  tests

20890 - 102         7days ago 18804       14 days ago  13972

positives continue up and down a bit within a small range all much of a muchness

 

Inpatients  7850    no update since Saturday

 

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

Yesterdays European. 

Italy   21273 - 128          positives edging up

France 52010 - 116     yet another record number of positives

Spain             second day of  no report

Germany  9829 - 27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s a report from the icu wards.

A big shout out to those doctors and nurses ensuring less people die. It also seems they have now learnt to develop Covid secure areas so unlike last time more serious operations are still taking place as are many ( but not as many ) non urgent ops. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54690374

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Here’s a report from the icu wards.

A big shout out to those doctors and nurses ensuring less people die. It also seems they have now learnt to develop Covid secure areas so unlike last time more serious operations are still taking place as are many ( but not as many ) non urgent ops. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54690374

Just watched it. Some good news

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Bagster said:

Please watch this, if you want a future for your children or your grand children , please watch this.

I couldn't delete the 2 Nd one but watch the first one.

Thanks Bagster. An absolute must listen for everyone

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Herman said:

It's all about trust. We've had 4 plus years of these people feeding us misinformation. Why should we now listen to them during this time of crisis? 

But you were prepared to believe Professor Fergusson and his data model of 250,000 deaths, even though he had previously been involved in disputed research in 2011 that led to the mass culling of farm animals. He also predicted 150,000 would die from BSE, the actuality was 200. And his modelling methodology was highly criticised as having many flawed assumptions.

We are now in this mess because Ferguson's poor modelling attempts were the 'science' that the government listened to. So now we know how wrong the whole basis was, why still blindly follow it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

But you were prepared to believe Professor Fergusson and his data model of 250,000 deaths, even though he had previously been involved in disputed research in 2011 that led to the mass culling of farm animals. He also predicted 150,000 would die from BSE, the actuality was 200. And his modelling methodology was highly criticised as having many flawed assumptions.

We are now in this mess because Ferguson's poor modelling attempts were the 'science' that the government listened to. So now we know how wrong the whole basis was, why still blindly follow it?

This is unfair. The professor gave an assessment based on disosed criteria.  No one would have understood it as cast iron and they were quite entitled to ask him to re run the figures on alternative assumptions 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

Look at it this way.  As Yellow Fever demonstrated above he supports the government policy, and this is true of most on here,  even Creative Midfielder. It is 'competence' [read balance] that is in question.  

 

 

That appears to be a non-sequitur to me - if you believe a government is totally incompetent, which at the moment I certainly do, then I would suggest that normally means that their incompetence straddles both the formulation and execution of policies.

And all of that assumes that that the aforesaid government has a basic competence to formulate policies in the first place and then attempt to execute them. The current government doesn't even have that primitive level of competence, it is simply winging it and making it up as they go-along - pretty much anything even resembling an announced policy is normally reversed within days, or at most 2-3 weeks, as it becomes obvious that the 'policy' simply won't\can't fly.

The only exception to this that I can recall is the original furlough scheme but even that had to undergo a number of revisions to plug huge gaps in it, and of course its replacement is currently on either its 3rd or 4th revision within in a month - they are making it up as they go along and left hand doesn't have a clue what right hand is doing.

So to sum up I don't support the government or its policies and its not simply because they are incompetent in implementing their policies but because they are incompetent in every aspect of governance, openly corrupt, utterly untrustworthy and place more importance on their political ideology than expert advice or even common sense in tackling a national emergency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

 

So to sum up I don't support the government or its policies and its not simply because they are incompetent in implementing their policies but because they are incompetent in every aspect of governance, 

I suspect (actually i am sure) that you do support the stated policy but can't bring yourself to say it. Either that or you can't remember what the strategy is.

Its perfectly  fine to say that you support the general approach but believe that it has been badly executed in this or that respect . 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rock The Boat said:

But you were prepared to believe Professor Fergusson and his data model of 250,000 deaths, even though he had previously been involved in disputed research in 2011 that led to the mass culling of farm animals. He also predicted 150,000 would die from BSE, the actuality was 200. And his modelling methodology was highly criticised as having many flawed assumptions.

We are now in this mess because Ferguson's poor modelling attempts were the 'science' that the government listened to. So now we know how wrong the whole basis was, why still blindly follow it?

He has an absolute history of failure, predicted up to 200 million could die from bird flu in 2005, 282 people died worldwide...

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/six-questions-that-neil-ferguson-should-be-asked

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

This is unfair. The professor gave an assessment based on disosed criteria.  No one would have understood it as cast iron and they were quite entitled to ask him to re run the figures on alternative assumptions 

No, it's not unfair because 250,000 deaths is the number that Ferguson first came up with and published to the public domain and that was the figure that was reported in the media and the numbers that the government first ran with in order to justify a lockdown. Whether they asked him to redo his sums to come up with a more palatable number is beside the point because the damage was already done in the first publication. It set the tone for the climate of fear that has surrounded Covid-19 ever since.

We now have several months of data to prove that initial science was wrong and there is a growing body of criticism based upon the analysis of data that is now available. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

No, it's not unfair because 250,000 deaths is the number that Ferguson first came up with and published to the public domain and that was the figure that was reported in the media and the numbers that the government first ran with in order to justify a lockdown. Whether they asked him to redo his sums to come up with a more palatable number is beside the point because the damage was already done in the first publication. It set the tone for the climate of fear that has surrounded Covid-19 ever since.

We now have several months of data to prove that initial science was wrong and there is a growing body of criticism based upon the analysis of data that is now available. 

I dont think he made a prediction, more an analysis of what might happen if certain assumptions about the R number etc are made.  I certainly didn't see it as a prediction more a worst case scenario forecast with a fairly low confidence base.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

No, it's not unfair because 250,000 deaths is the number that Ferguson first came up with and published to the public domain and that was the figure that was reported in the media and the numbers that the government first ran with in order to justify a lockdown. Whether they asked him to redo his sums to come up with a more palatable number is beside the point because the damage was already done in the first publication. It set the tone for the climate of fear that has surrounded Covid-19 ever since.

We now have several months of data to prove that initial science was wrong and there is a growing body of criticism based upon the analysis of data that is now available. 

The first wave killed over 40 thousand people and that was with a lockdown. Maybe 250k was a worst case scenario figure and we wouldn't have got there, but because the figure was so bleak the government finally got its act together. Maybe you be applauding Mr Ferguson for saving over 200k lives??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Herman said:

The first wave killed over 40 thousand people and that was with a lockdown. Maybe 250k was a worst case scenario figure and we wouldn't have got there, but because the figure was so bleak the government finally got its act together. Maybe you be applauding Mr Ferguson for saving over 200k lives??

Given that we now have ten months experience with Covid-19 and all the associated data, do you believe that government measures have saved over 200k lives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ricardo said:

321k  tests

20890 - 102         7days ago 18804       14 days ago  13972

positives continue up and down a bit within a small range all much of a muchness

 

Inpatients  7850    no update since Saturday

 

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

Yesterdays European. 

Italy   21273 - 128          positives edging up

France 52010 - 116     yet another record number of positives

Spain             second day of  no report

Germany  9829 - 27

Likely looking at over 30k positives by Wednesday and maybe deaths above 250 if the steady weekly rise in both stats edges up as it has done these past  few weeks, but some Euro nations like Belgium and Switzerland have produced  much higher  infections per head of pop. in last few days than here at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

Given that we now have ten months experience with Covid-19 and all the associated data, do you believe that government measures have saved over 200k lives?

if the other option is letting it rip then yes, 250k total deaths from covid isn't against the realms of possibilities. Its only 0.3% of the population so it makes sense as a worst case scenario. We have an old population as well which doesn't help our cause

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ricardo said:

Just watched it. Some good news

Yep the TV report had even more good news as you have eluded to in they have now worked out even screening will not be effected.

Fascinating how there are now secure screens to ensure ICU beds can be used deciding wards into 2 but being secure. Was also interesting that they said the delaying of less urgent treatments was only down to staff shortages, rather than you can’t come in anymore.

Hopefully this means they have used the Summer to solve the problems none of us could answer as to how it could be done. Fair play to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Teemu’s right foot said:

He has an absolute history of failure, predicted up to 200 million could die from bird flu in 2005, 282 people died worldwide...

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/six-questions-that-neil-ferguson-should-be-asked

This is an article from the 6/4/2020.
There are now of course real statistics that can actually with some certainty predict how many people based on risk would die if 80 % of the population were infected. 
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3259

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tetteys Jig said:

if the other option is letting it rip then yes, 250k total deaths from covid isn't against the realms of possibilities. Its only 0.3% of the population so it makes sense as a worst case scenario. We have an old population as well which doesn't help our cause

Hi TJ

If it helps I have just put a link with the actual against the predicted, have a look it’s very interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If proved true a vaccine or a cure now becomes a little bit more important. The good news is the phase 2 Oxford results shew that the immune system was still responding well after a period of time even in the older age groups. For those that follow ZOE this does follow their concern a couple of weeks ago that it seemed ( stress seemed ) that a number of people were becoming reinfected.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54696873

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes - but 0.27% of say 60M is of course 162,000 deaths. I suppose that could be called optimistic. Only 100,000 to go.

The figures are 0.23 % of the overall population

It then becomes 0.05% of the under 70's

So your math is completely wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, if we have nearly reached herd immunity, why do we need to roll out the vaccine. 

If you want it , then take it, if you want to lock yourself up then do it, if you want to wear a mask then wear one.STOP ENFORCING YOUR FEARS ON THE POPULATION, YOU ARE MAKING THEM ILL AND DESTROYING THE ECONOMY. 

Why do people want young people to be vaccinated against a virus that has practically no effect on them? You do realise that vaccines are not without risk , don't you?

As for the efficacy, well the seasonal flu vaccine has an efficacy of about 50%, it is far more effective on the young as it is on the old and if your over 75 has little benefit. 

As for , they been developing the vaccine for years, you're right 40 years and counting, still haven't managed it.

You're being taken for a ride by liars , lobbyists and big corporations!

Let's see if Patrick Valence sues Mike Yeadon for liable.....bet he doesn't ( Mike Yeadon is also formerly an employee of Pfizer)

If you still trust him after all of that , you need your head testing.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

This is unfair. The professor gave an assessment based on disosed criteria.  No one would have understood it as cast iron and they were quite entitled to ask him to re run the figures on alternative assumptions 

This is completely fair, the Swedish looked at it and thought it was nonsense, he based the whole thing off of 6 people!!!

The bloke should not be in a job, he's utterly useless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who is sick to death of facts, figures, pie charts and graphs etc. I began to lose interest when all those positive results were lost a few weeks ago because the spreadsheet wasn't big enough. I was glued to them daily before that.

I am now convinced that they fail to give a true figure in any case. If real number of daily new infections is estimated to be around 50, 000 and more, as pronounced by Whittey (?) then what is the point of the daily chart showing around 20, 000?

Their only value, imo, is to assess trends, but they are nevertheless used by the powers that be to impose lockdowns  in various areas despite local objectors claiming that things are improving, not worsening. It's all over the place.

I am also wary of experts. The about turns re: herd immunity, the contradictions over masks, the  disputes over the distancing of social distancing and the length of the quarantine period etc. Amazingly, I read it stated by one expert that our failure to attend to our borders more stringently at the outset has made little difference in the spread of the virus in the UK. Having waltzed through Heathrow, accompanied by a dozen Chinese on my Eva air flight in mid-February, without so much as a temperature check, I consider this view to be nonsense.  

Today we have a survey revealing that immunity might be shorter lived than expected. Tomorrow this might well be contradicted; besides the claim stated that other forces in the body than the immune system might repel the disease in any case.

I realise that Covid 19 is a new and mysterious phenomena providing contradictions worldwide. but this doesn't stop  the pontificating pundits from dishing out their informed advice. It's become an industry. We suffer from a lack of expertise, but no shortage of experts.

Meanwhile the scientists at Oxford carry on steadfastly with their research and their trials. These, and those in the front line of the NHS, are the real heroes, not the army of pundits that is constantly in our faces or the likes of Dr. Whatsit on ITV each morning 

 

 

Edited by BroadstairsR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...