Coronavirus

[Rui_CostCo]

hmm, you wonder what came first. inaction based on policy or policy to justify inaction. I thought the herd immunity concept (as far as I recall) was thrown out by BJ in some morning show as a train of thought and I saw an I/v with chris whitty early on after the policy sea change that referenced split opinions amongst the advisors, which I read to roughly translate as "it wasn't my idea". I still don't see where the initial containment phase was - it lasted about 5 minutes and didn't seem to involve any containment which tends to suggest, to me at least, it was policy supporting inaction.

I think I'd be prepared to place money on which SPAD first floated the idea

 

[Johnny75]

https://www.galwayventshare.com/

My friend has helped develop a way to safely share an ICU ventilator between two patients!

That's great stuff. I hope somebody manufacturers that on a larger scale.

 

[Rui_CostCo]

https://www.galwayventshare.com/

My friend has helped develop a way to safely share an ICU ventilator between two patients!

That's fantastic news. Leo's doing some great stuff, but a lot of areas are still struggling for kit. Most smaller regional hospitals have been cleared of non cv-19 patients and moved them up to Dublin to create capacity with Dublin Hospitals now being rammed full apparently

 

[Kenny]

Can I just double check. Do footballers pay a shit load of tax from their pay at clubs?

I have to ask as it's now coming across that this particular group seemingly earn high wages and pay nothing back and also stick their fingers up at local charities and the like.

 

[Paul]

Ahh welcome to the world were its your privilege to tell other people what to do with their money, especially if they have more than you

 

[Papper]

I suppose I've never been part of a clique on here, I've never really been part of anything on here, maybe if I knew whose opinions I should be echoing instead of my own I might have had more interactions over the years, but hey ho, every Pandemic has a silver lining I guess

Some of the stuff is thought provoking and generally the debate is quite healthy. No point having discourse with people you always agree with. Just wish at times it was less acidic.

 

[Keef]

I suppose I've never been part of a clique on here, I've never really been part of anything on here, maybe if I knew whose opinions I should be echoing instead of my own I might have had more interactions over the years, but hey ho, every Pandemic has a silver lining I guess

I've never been part of a clique on here either(if there is one),but I've been in the pub with a few members on a match day,and it couldn't be less cliquey if it tried,everyone talks to everyone and are just great,it's a public forum,you have to be prepared to back your opinions up,if you spout nonsense be prepared to get called out on it

 

[Papper]

Ahh welcome to the world were its your privilege to tell other people what to do with their money, especially if they have more than you

But we can stop giving them the money if we are all too skint to buy ST's and pay to watch it on TV. Same with people like Philip Green. Given what may lie ahead this is a possibility. Time some people invested in the average Joe.

 

[Tredman]

I don’t think there is a clique is there? It’s a just a convenient reason thing to say when the majority don’t agree with you.

 

[Papper]

,you have to be prepared to back your opinions up,if you spout nonsense be prepared to get called out on it

Absolutely.

 

[Paul]

Yeh but I like you Tredman ??

 

[Tony Towner]

Perhaps we can agree that everyone who posts on here is a cunt, it'll save time and we can move on.

 

[Tredman]

Except Paul. He has clearly shown that he is absolutely not a cunt.

 

[Rui_CostCo]

And as it turns out:

+621 deaths, total 4,934.

So we're only going to get another 2,000 or so deaths? Despite not even hitting peak yet? It just seems wildly out of kilter with what we know.

There is a Global problem with the data being used within models to predict future events. Ferguson's ' if policies are working, then we can expect....' is great, but when you've got incorrect data you get incorrect assumptions.

In Spain, where we are told it's getting better, and they just recorded their smallest increase to date, their official figures state that just under 12,000 people have died from CV-19. But in Spain's most sparsely populated area, in March they would expect to have a seasonal average of well under 100 deaths. They have reported 30 CV-19 deaths, but the total for March is 250 from a population of 90k.

Madrid's average care home deaths have tripled for the same period to 3k from 52k, a majority of which are not attributed to CV-19 as there wasn't time to test them.

You start multiplying those numbers and margins of error in calculation on a National level and then whats perceived as a problem becomes a disaster.

We don't record any home and care home deaths as being CV-19 as we don't test them. I don't know if we test everyone who dies in Hospital for CV-19 but Germany tests EVERY person they lose and no matter what underlying causes the patient had, or what the cause of death is recorded as, if they yest positive for V-19 they are added to their Coronavirus victim numbers.

Just within Soria that takes around a 33% increase up to around a 165% increase

No ones using the same criteria, so I'm not sure how you can compare effects of policies and strategies in place on a like for like for basis. But I suppose you can prove anything with facts if you try hard enough.

 

[Tredman]

There is a Global problem with the data being used within models to predict future events. Ferguson's ' if policies are working, then we can expect....' is great, but when you've got incorrect data you get incorrect assumptions.

In Spain, where we are told it's getting better, their official figures state that just under 12,000 people have died from CV-19. But in Spain's most sparsely populated area, in March they would expect to have a seasonal average of well under 100 deaths. They have reported 30 CV-19 deaths, but the total for March is 250 from a population of 90k.

Madrid's average care home deaths have tripled for the same period to 3k from 52k, a majority of which are not attributed to CV-19 as there wasn't time to test them.

You start multiplying those numbers and margins of error in calculation on a National level and then whats perceived as a problem becomes a disaster.

We don't record any home and care home deaths as being CV-19 as we don;t test them. Germany tests EVERY person they lose and no matter what underlying causes the patient had, or what the cause of death is recorded as, if they yest positive for V-19 they are added to their Coronavirus victim numbers.

No ones using the same criteria, so I'm not sure how you can compare effects of policies and strategies in place on a like for like for basis

Any decent model will be self learning though and correct itself based on actual data.

 

[Rui_CostCo]

Any decent model will be self learning though and correct itself based on actual data.

Just within Soria that takes around a 33% increase up to around a 165% increase

start putting data into any model that is incorrect to the tune of 130% and youre wasting your time

 

[Tredman]

Just within Soria that takes around a 33% increase up to around a 165% increase

start putting data into any model that is incorrect to the tune of 130% and youre wasting your time

You’ve got to think the data scientists working on the problem are familiar with GIGO.

 

[Papper]

Just within Soria that takes around a 33% increase up to around a 165% increase

start putting data into any model that is incorrect to the tune of 130% and youre wasting your time

Unless everybody is tested the data will always be skewed. Unless they know the percentage immune it will always be skewed. All they know for certainty is hospital admissions and mortality rates of admissions.

 

[Rui_CostCo]

You’ve got to think the data scientists working on the problem are familiar with GIGO.

My initial response was to DW who was questioning Ferguson's range of 7k - 20k, given the current rate of losses reported daily, based on his modelling that does take into account potential errors in numbers reported and also varying effectiveness of different combinations of suppression policies and how well the NHS is coping.

I posted a link to it earlier, and as I said previously, when you get it THAT wrong a problem becomes a disaster

 

[AndyWolves]

Two interesting things I've found on my journey round cyberspace this afternoon

An article from the bmj suggesting 4/5 of people with covid19 are asymptomatic and questioning the value of lockdown if the virus is already out

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj...ampaign=usage&utm_content=daily&utm_term=text

And this data based on self reporting

https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

Stick the two together and we end up in a position where a significant portion of the population have either got it or already had it, say 30% in some areas. If that's true then achieving 60% in those areas seems possible in not much time.

Again, antibody tests are vital but more thinking that we're much further on than we think.