Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, martyn said:

What's the proof that Fergusons model is so far out? 

There were some criticisms of the code behind the model

 

https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-review-of-fergusons-model/

 

But they seem to fall on how pretty the code is, rather than the accuracy of the predictions 

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01685-y#:~:text=The successful code testing isn,by mathematical epidemiologist Neil Ferguson.&text=When a cleaned-up version,to be repeated by others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Cases will be nowhere near as high as the stats show if false positives are a decent sized number. For example at the start of September we conducted 158k tests, but on September 18th we conducted 233k tests. Those extra 75k tests could account for 600 cases, not a massive number granted but it certainly makes a difference. If the rate is 0.8% and we conducted 233k tests, over 1800 positive tests would be false.

 

Additionally you'll have people isolating with their families, costing them money if they get a false positive.

 

I was just wondering if anyone has raised it as I've only seen it mentioned on LBC but nothing has really been said by Boris or MPs about it.

 

 

 

No, they'll be higher. We're still not in a position where testing is revealing every single case, the ONS's random sample study (which of course will have an element of false positives itself) put daily infections at about 6000 between 04/09 and 10/09, or about double what testing was showing. Thinking about numbers of false positives is a bit daft given actual cases are almost certainly significantly higher than known cases identified through the testing system. The ONS's study remains near enough constant in its sample size and yet showed close to a doubling from the previous week, that can't be attributed to FPR. False positives are just a smokescreen for people in denial trying to sound clever, it can't explain away the direction of travel and there's plenty of other data points which hint towards that direction of travel anyway.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Cases will be nowhere near as high as the stats show if false positives are a decent sized number. For example at the start of September we conducted 158k tests, but on September 18th we conducted 233k tests. Those extra 75k tests could account for 600 cases, not a massive number granted but it certainly makes a difference. If the rate is 0.8% and we conducted 233k tests, over 1800 positive tests would be false.

 

Additionally you'll have people isolating with their families, costing them money if they get a false positive.

 

I was just wondering if anyone has raised it as I've only seen it mentioned on LBC but nothing has really been said by Boris or MPs about it.

 

Just gonna point out I've had about 14 days off since March, so the majority of the population can get to work on time, medical supplies can be delivered, food supplies can be delivered and people can lead a normal life. I've also deferred nearly all of my annual leave until next year to help out. My only freedom at the minute is going to the pub every 4 or so weeks.

 

So in summary:

 

tenor.gif?itemid=14523970

In Melbourne they’re doing around 10k to 15k tests per day and have consistently been showing below 50 positives per day, most recently as low as 11. If there were .8% false positives, the signal would be swamped by noise of typically over 100 per day. Sydney stats are even more pronounced. Either:

 

- There isn’t that high a proportion of false positives generally with PCR tests as being suggested.

- The tests in Australia are different to those in the UK, or administered better.

- They have some way to correct the issue when numbers are low, perhaps by a retest.

Edited by WigstonWanderer
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, simFox said:

Eh? It's an economy and livelihoods of an entire population. If someone's going to make predictions that affect every aspect of our lives then they better be pretty sure about them and be put under intense scrutiny.  

 

Fergusons model has been proven to be so far out, Boris would have been better off asking Vardy.

Here's Ferguson's model so that people can make their own mind up about it 

 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

 

It seems to predict a peak in April followed by a second peak beginning in September followed up by recurring peaks/lockdowns. 

 

In an unmitigated pandemic, 500k would die. So we brought in social distancing to avoid that. 

 

Looks like it was pretty accurate to me.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

 

Why does it matter? If your curve is going upwards at a reasonable pace then, unless you're testing huge amounts more everyday or the test just gets magically less reliable everyday, it's because there's more actual cases. If cases double every week, then even if half your positives are false you only have an extra week to respond.  So what is the relevance of false positives?

One of the issues that has been highlighted with the current test is that it is also picking up minute fragments of ‘dead’ virus, therefore giving a positive test for someone who may have had the virus weeks ago, but is not currently infected or infective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

Here's Ferguson's model so that people can make their own mind up about it 

 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

 

It seems to predict a peak in April followed by a second peak beginning in September followed up by recurring peaks/lockdowns. 

 

In an unmitigated pandemic, 500k would die. So we brought in social distancing to avoid that. 

 

Looks like it was pretty accurate to me.

it was a load of bollocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live in a narrow road near a school. The authorities have placed prominent signs at the entrance stating that parking is for residents and business only due to Covid restrictions. 

 

Why can't school run parents follow simple instructions to protect us all? Just had a confrontation with one outside. :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

I live in a narrow road near a school. The authorities have placed prominent signs at the entrance stating that parking is for residents and business only due to Covid restrictions. 

 

Why can't school run parents follow simple instructions to protect us all? Just had a confrontation with one outside. :mad:

I live 10 metres from a primary school, the daily battle to park as close as possible to the school is still going on. Is is that f****** difficult to actually park away from the school and walk them in / out? Or just walk to the school, considering 90% of them won't live more than a 10 minute walk away. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Shock. :rolleyes:

 

 

I do understand why to some extent we're just dealing with arbitrary and occasionally contradictory restrictions, given doing something to stop the spread is evidently more likely to save lives than doing nothing. But it's not good enough for the Prime Minister to claim this is evidence-based when it isn't. Then again perhaps he wouldn't feel so inclined to lie about the justification for these measures if he hadn't lost the moral authority to govern this crisis earlier on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Otis said:

Sweden would beg to differ.

 

10 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

Sweden is very different to the UK. People keep socially distant and respectful of space more than us. 

 Deaths is Sweden are far higher than in other Nordic countries. 

 

Also, as UniFox21 says, they are a totally different bunch of people. If you've ever travelled around the Nordic countries you'd see it's a totally different way of life there. They get more freedoms than we do here, but they stick to the rules (mostly) and don't take the piss. 

 

A simple example, go to Copenhagen and watch how people deal with traffic lights, road crossings and cycling. We're amber gamblers, they don't flinch unless the green man / light shows. 

 

You give people in this country an inch and they take a bloody mile. That's exactly why the rules are so rough, they have to be extra strict as so many want to push the boundaries constantly. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I live 10 metres from a primary school, the daily battle to park as close as possible to the school is still going on. Is is that f****** difficult to actually park away from the school and walk them in / out? Or just walk to the school, considering 90% of them won't live more than a 10 minute walk away. 

I feel your pain. I'm in a constant battle with these idiots and can't take my car out during school run times as they gridlock the road. The school authorities constantly send out reminders to parents pointing out that our road is out of bounds for parking but it seems that most either don't think it applies to them or just don't care. They are arriving earlier and earlier to get the best spaces. Why they have to park so close is a mystery. 

 

I will never buy a house near a school again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Came home early from work one day and found someone parked in my drive. They said "I always park here". lol

I’ve had a few of them. I found that when they returned to the car having left it to walk up to the school and found it in the centre of the carriageway blocking traffic due to a handbrake failure they decided not to park on my drive. Also some cars were blocked in to my drive by my car and they had to call the police on me whilst they stood there with crying kids unable to get home (I’d already warned them that I was an essential worker on call the previous day but their needs were apparently greater than mine).
Also I’ve heard writing the words ‘private property’ in Nitromors paint stripper on a car bonnet is also a useful deterrent but that can lead to an all out punch up on the pavement in front of kids which isn’t a good look. “Why is daddy asleep on the pavement?” Isn’t a question you want to be answering...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Nick said:

I’ve had a few of them. I found that when they returned to the car having left it to walk up to the school and found it in the centre of the carriageway blocking traffic due to a handbrake failure they decided not to park on my drive. Also some cars were blocked in to my drive by my car and they had to call the police on me whilst they stood there with crying kids unable to get home (I’d already warned them that I was an essential worker on call the previous day but their needs were apparently greater than mine).
Also I’ve heard writing the words ‘private property’ in Nitromors paint stripper on a car bonnet is also a useful deterrent but that can lead to an all out punch up on the pavement in front of kids which isn’t a good look. “Why is daddy asleep on the pavement?” Isn’t a question you want to be answering...

What did the police do about it? Was the parent fined for trespass? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spudulike said:

What did the police do about it? Was the parent fined for trespass? 

Nope it’s apparently not illegal to park on somebody’s drive however would have been illegal for me to keep my car there preventing them from leaving! 
 

They were actually fine though. They publicly said one thing and privately to me said they didn’t blame me at all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Well he did one for Sweden, and despite them not locking down at all, it didn't get even vaguely close to the numbers his model suggested.

He seems to think differently.

 

Professor Ferguson: 'First of all, they did not use our model. They developed a model of their own. We had no role in parameterising it. Generally, the key aspect of modelling is how well you parameterise it against the available data. But to be absolutely clear they did not use our model, they didn’t adapt our model.'

 

They say they adapted his model. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vast majority of the country have followed the rules though, it's a bit easy to say "oh its the British, they don't give a shit" attitude but Spain and France have just as big problems as we do but you don't seen anyone criticising their people. I've spoken to people who will complain about every rule going, saying they've had enough and don't give a shit anymore but they'll still follow most of the rules. A lot of it is just talk. They'll be exceptions of course, but i think its unfair to just label it a British problem. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Your final paragraph is on the money

I’d always felt, pre-Covid, that British people were, by and large, actually quite stupid vis a vis some of our European cousins 

Covid 19 has just confirmed this. Just look at some of the posts on this very thread. There are still people who feel they can do exactly what they want, when they want and fook everybody else

England stinks with this attitude at the current time

I fully understand people thinking that perhaps we are going about things the wrong way. Attempting to shield the vulnerable and give care homes / NHS everything they need to support keeping them isolated seems a fairly reasonable idea / question to post. I'd like to get a response from the government as to why that's not viable, we seemed to be edging that way opening everything up. 

 

My original thought on that was that it would be hard to keep it out of care homes. But, we've not done a bad job of that recently as deaths have plummeted. Is that due to the precautions in place, or is that because the virus isn't fully out there again and when it is, is it just a matter of time before it gets into them again. 

 

But, we aren't doing that and we aren't close to implementing that sort of things. So until we are, take all the precautions that are being asked. I'm going to break a few rules, but I'm also very very cautious when doing so. I can't stop going to see my mum, she's all alone and I can't follow the "bubble" guidelines as my mrs is in the same position and needs to look after her Dad. 

 

So I see her in the garden and sit nowhere near her, drop her shopping off etc. What I don't do is have 20 people round my house having a party, like half of the people on social media seem to happily post pictures of. There is bending and breaking a few rules, which is what the government will expect and they understand. Then there is taking a great big sledgehammer to them and taking the piss. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

What did the police do about it? Was the parent fined for trespass? 

The police wouldn't do crap over someone parking on your drive. It's been discussed on here before. It falls under a civil matter, so the most the police can do is "ask" for the car to be removed. If you want any legal punishments you have to take them to court and faff around for ages to get anything done. 

 

The irony of it all is if you trash someone's car that shouldn't be on your drive it's criminal damage and the police can get involved. 

 

Whole things stupid. :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I fully understand people thinking that perhaps we are going about things the wrong way. Attempting to shield the vulnerable and give care homes / NHS everything they need to support keeping them isolated seems a fairly reasonable idea / question to post. I'd like to get a response from the government as to why that's not viable, we seemed to be edging that way opening everything up. 

 

My original thought on that was that it would be hard to keep it out of care homes. But, we've not done a bad job of that recently as deaths have plummeted. Is that due to the precautions in place, or is that because the virus isn't fully out there again and when it is, is it just a matter of time before it gets into them again. 

 

But, we aren't doing that and we aren't close to implementing that sort of things. So until we are, take all the precautions that are being asked. I'm going to break a few rules, but I'm also very very cautious when doing so. I can't stop going to see my mum, she's all alone and I can't follow the "bubble" guidelines as my mrs is in the same position and needs to look after her Dad. 

 

So I see her in the garden and sit nowhere near her, drop her shopping off etc. What I don't do is have 20 people round my house having a party, like half of the people on social media seem to happily post pictures of. There is bending and breaking a few rules, which is what the government will expect and they understand. Then there is taking a great big sledgehammer to them and taking the piss. 

Great post again and the last paragraph is what it’s about imo

Common sense

Youve taken the decision that you can’t not see your mum so you take precautions when you do, to not (selfishly) put her at any more risk

Why won’t the people who say ‘just do what you want’, not see that the real risk is who they can transmit the bloody virus to. It’s such an incredibly selfish attitude

Well done to you Babs

 

Edited by Col city fan
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

The police wouldn't do crap over someone parking on your drive. It's been discussed on here before. It falls under a civil matter, so the most the police can do is "ask" for the car to be removed. If you want any legal punishments you have to take them to court and faff around for ages to get anything done. 

 

The irony of it all is if you trash someone's car that shouldn't be on your drive it's criminal damage and the police can get involved. 

 

Whole things stupid. :facepalm:

But you can install some bollards in your drive, and then go out for the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I fully understand people thinking that perhaps we are going about things the wrong way. Attempting to shield the vulnerable and give care homes / NHS everything they need to support keeping them isolated seems a fairly reasonable idea / question to post. I'd like to get a response from the government as to why that's not viable, we seemed to be edging that way opening everything up. 

 

My original thought on that was that it would be hard to keep it out of care homes. But, we've not done a bad job of that recently as deaths have plummeted. Is that due to the precautions in place, or is that because the virus isn't fully out there again and when it is, is it just a matter of time before it gets into them again. 

 

But, we aren't doing that and we aren't close to implementing that sort of things. So until we are, take all the precautions that are being asked. I'm going to break a few rules, but I'm also very very cautious when doing so. I can't stop going to see my mum, she's all alone and I can't follow the "bubble" guidelines as my mrs is in the same position and needs to look after her Dad. 

 

So I see her in the garden and sit nowhere near her, drop her shopping off etc. What I don't do is have 20 people round my house having a party, like half of the people on social media seem to happily post pictures of. There is bending and breaking a few rules, which is what the government will expect and they understand. Then there is taking a great big sledgehammer to them and taking the piss. 

Regarding the numbers of deaths in nursing homes, I expect that this will be subject to judicial review

Re lowered numbers in nursing homes, I guess it’s down to both factors (less Covid and clearer guidelines). But I would assume the biggest reason is that local authorities will be being far more careful who they place into long term care and that close checks are done before people become moved.

 

Edited by Col city fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...