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

The Gov are recording all deaths as Covid where there was a previous positive Covid test, whatever the actual cause of death. That, to me doesn't make sense. Someone could die in a car crash or suicide but if they had tested positive for Covid, it's recorded as a Covid related death. Nonsense. How can we possibly believe the figures when this is the case?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Parafox said:

The Gov are recording all deaths as Covid where there was a previous positive Covid test, whatever the actual cause of death. That, to me doesn't make sense. Someone could die in a car crash or suicide but if they had tested positive for Covid, it's recorded as a Covid related death. Nonsense. How can we possibly believe the figures when this is the case?

 

This is root of the problem.

 

The data.

 

It all stems from the testing.  The data is then represented in various ways to show ridiculous predictions (or "worst case scenarios") and is used to be as visually impactful as possible.  Today's graphs were more of the same.  People should note the scaling on the y axis, rather than the curves themselves.

 

They're still banging on about the lockdown reducing numbers, when the lockdown was introduced after the epidemic peak.  If that is the narrative from the outset, then lockdown measures, restrictions etc. will be a forever constant until the data isn't there.

 

This tinkering with the restrictions, tier 1, 2, 3, stage 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or whatever will never disappear until a vaccine arrives.

 

We're in a constant revolving circle of never ending restrictions until then.

Edited by Legend_in_blue
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Izzy said:

Billions and billions of extra support for businesses in restricted areas until at least next spring. The financial cost of this pandemic is eye watering and I dread to think how many decades it will take to pay it all back. Nightmare. 

The hope is that we spread it over generations as hitting this generation will be a economic disaster and unfair to us who have paid debts from the past as is.

 

I've mentioned it on another thread but it took Germany 91 years to pay WW1 debt and it took 61 years for the UK to pay WW2 debt.

 

We'll see the pursestrings tightening but I'm not massively worried on what the government do in the short term, regardless of what party is in power.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Parafox said:

The Gov are recording all deaths as Covid where there was a previous positive Covid test, whatever the actual cause of death. That, to me doesn't make sense. Someone could die in a car crash or suicide but if they had tested positive for Covid, it's recorded as a Covid related death. Nonsense. How can we possibly believe the figures when this is the case?

What is changing?

Two new deaths indicators will now be used by all four nations in the UK to provide a full picture of both recent trends and the longer-term burden of the disease.

The additional indicators which will be used to calculate daily death figures are:

  • the number of deaths in people with COVID-19 that occur within 28 days of a first positive laboratory-confirmed test. This is intended to provide a headline indicator of the immediate impact of recent epidemic activity. Deaths that occur more than 28 days after a positive test will not be included in this count.
  • the number of deaths that occur within 60 days of a first positive test. Deaths that occur after 60 days will also be added to this figure if COVID-19 appears on the death certificate. This will provide a more complete measure of the burden of the disease over time.

Using these new measures, the total number of deaths in people with laboratory-confirmed infection is reduced by 5,377  if only deaths within 28-day of a test are included, and by 1,668 if including only deaths within 60 days or at any time with COVID-19 mentioned on the death certificate.

This approach has been peer reviewed by external statistical experts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Parafox said:

The Gov are recording all deaths as Covid where there was a previous positive Covid test, whatever the actual cause of death. That, to me doesn't make sense. Someone could die in a car crash or suicide but if they had tested positive for Covid, it's recorded as a Covid related death. Nonsense. How can we possibly believe the figures when this is the case?

This has been the problem for several weeks, maybe months, and somewhat negatively manipulates the figures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Parafox said:

The Gov are recording all deaths as Covid where there was a previous positive Covid test, whatever the actual cause of death. That, to me doesn't make sense. Someone could die in a car crash or suicide but if they had tested positive for Covid, it's recorded as a Covid related death. Nonsense. How can we possibly believe the figures when this is the case?

I think the best policy is to just let them get on with it, when you start listening to the media and politicians who all seem a bit Diane Abbotty and confuse themselves with numbers, it’s certainly better for your sanity. When they went from deaths on a graph to cases on a graph, that was the real nail in the coffin. Deaths are what counts, we don’t need to know the rest as it’s pointless information for the layman. What counts is if you know you’ve got it then stay at home and keep your head down till you get better, there’s really nothing else to do apart from pray you don’t take a turn for the worse, and if you do, there’s not a lot you can do about it and you’re in the hands of someone who knows what they’re doing. You’re better off sitting down and watching Man City or Southampton  v Leicester a few times, the numbers are similar, but it’s far more fun.
 

Edited by yorkie1999
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have they actually said how long this is going to last? That's the worst bit for me, what if we haven't got a vaccine by next June/July, do we just keep doing the same thing in the hope of eventually getting one? At what point do we say enough is enough, that's what I'd like to know, an end in sight rather than the prospect of more lockdowns, more businesses shutting down and more of the unknown.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

More headshaking at what is being said at this press conference over here.

 

Adamant the drop in the virus was due to the lockdown (the downwards curve started before the lockdown did) and adamant that cases in the 10-19 age group are pretty much solely down to those not of school age (show us the breakdown of the data then rather than a decade's worth of ages in one block).

 

 

On what measure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

This is root of the problem.

 

The data.

 

It all stems from the testing.  The data is then represented in various ways to show ridiculous predictions (or "worst case scenarios") and is used to be as visually impactful as possible.  Today's graphs were more of the same.  People should note the scaling on the y axis, rather than the curves themselves.

 

They're still banging on about the lockdown reducing numbers, when the lockdown was introduced after the epidemic peak.  If that is the narrative from the outset, then lockdown measures, restrictions etc. will be a forever constant until the data isn't there.

 

This tinkering with the restrictions, tier 1, 2, 3, stage 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or whatever will never disappear until a vaccine arrives.

 

We're in a constant revolving circle of never ending restrictions until then.

That just isn't true, you have completely made that up. Lockdown was introduced in March, and the peak was in April. Seriously, where do you get this shit from that you continue to post, day after day?

 

https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/gb

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Have they actually said how long this is going to last? That's the worst bit for me, what if we haven't got a vaccine by next June/July, do we just keep doing the same thing in the hope of eventually getting one? At what point do we say enough is enough, that's what I'd like to know, an end in sight rather than the prospect of more lockdowns, more businesses shutting down and more of the unknown.

What were the scientists saying at the start of all this, it could take 10 to 20 years to develop a vaccine! Now I’m not a scientist but I suspect they based this on previous vaccine development timescales. If a vaccine was in stage 3 of development then the government would know if it was going to work, the very fact that they are coming out with these knew measures and ideas says to me that a vaccine is not just round the corner  to being rolled out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, FoxesDeb said:

That just isn't true, you have completely made that up. Lockdown was introduced in March, and the peak was in April. Seriously, where do you get this shit from that you continue to post, day after day?

 

https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/gb

It’s a football forum, everyone’s brains are pickled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Also, anyone else just have graph-blindness/numbness? Far too many out there and I just switch off a little when you see so many graphs explaining the same problem.

 

(I don't have a solution other than graphs)

I’m more interested in seeing a graph comparing Coronavirus cases of students in halls/std cases of students in halls. I think that would tell a story.

Edited by yorkie1999
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Also, anyone else just have graph-blindness/numbness? Far too many out there and I just switch off a little when you see so many graphs explaining the same problem.

 

(I don't have a solution other than graphs)

Stephanie-Graf.png

Edited by Trav Le Bleu
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Have they actually said how long this is going to last? That's the worst bit for me, what if we haven't got a vaccine by next June/July, do we just keep doing the same thing in the hope of eventually getting one? At what point do we say enough is enough, that's what I'd like to know, an end in sight rather than the prospect of more lockdowns, more businesses shutting down and more of the unknown.

They haven't and there's not a chance even this government would nail their colours to the mast on saying how long it will last. No-one really knows. They all go on about 'beating' the virus but I think this is part of the problem. I don't think it can ever be beaten, at least not for a very long time. I think we have to learn to live with it for now until a vaccine is found. Only then can they perhaps start to consider living in a non-lockdown way. 

 

What would give me more clarity - and I'm not sure it's been publicised/announced - is how cities get out of each tier, or not be in any tier at all. What gives a city/town/county the green light to open up a bit more, be a bit more free? Does it have to reach 0 cases in that area for a certain amount of time? What's the threshold to come out of lockdown? That would give me, and perhaps several others, a bit more hope and positivity about the situation. At the moment it's all a bit doom and gloom still about what happens if it goes the other way and getting up to Tier 3 which no-one at all wants. I'd also like lots more consistency - several towns in the North-East went in to lockdown or tighter restrictions but Nottingham's cases shot up and saw nothing of that ilk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, StanSP said:

 

I'm not entirely sure how true this is.

 

Listened to Steve Rotherham speaking and he seemed to acknowledge that there was an issue with Liverpool, didn't particularly want a lockdown - but if happened, wanted to get the best outcome possible for his area.

 

I don't really think that there anything wrong with anything in that, tbh.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

That just isn't true, you have completely made that up. Lockdown was introduced in March, and the peak was in April. Seriously, where do you get this shit from that you continue to post, day after day?

 

https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/gb

The lockdown was brought in on March 23rd.  Two weeks later the peak had just about passed.  At least, that is what the graph shows here.

 

This doesn't take into account earlier cases pre March.  There is evidence to show this all started back in November so it is perceivable the peak could have happened sooner before lockdown occurred.  We'll never know though, the data isn't there as it wasn't formally recorded until this graph started Feb/March.  At least, I can't find a source for it.

 

I think for my previous point you refer to, perhaps me stating the peak occurred before lockdown began was a little hasty, although not inconceivable considering cases were found to be around as early as November, but it isn't the sole reason for the drop as govt want people to believe.  Certainly they're using similar reasoning now with their restrictions, and they appear not to be working as the seasonal change is against them. 

20201012_203534.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

The lockdown was brought in on March 23rd.  Two weeks later the peak had just about passed.  At least, that is what the graph shows here.

 

This doesn't take into account earlier cases pre March.  There is evidence to show this all started back in November so it is perceivable the peak could have happened sooner before lockdown occurred.  We'll never know though, the data isn't there as it wasn't formally recorded until this graph started Feb/March.  At least, I can't find a source for it.

 

I think for my previous point you refer to, perhaps me stating the peak occurred before lockdown began was a little hasty, although not inconceivable considering cases were found to be around as early as November, but it isn't the sole reason for the drop as govt want people to believe.  Certainly they're using similar reasoning now with their restrictions, and they appear not to be working as the seasonal change is against them. 

20201012_203534.jpg

So you've now moved from 'it happened' to 'it is perceivable'. So, not fact any more, just your opinion... Sigh.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, martyn said:

Been invited to participate in then Stage 3 Imperial College vaccine trial.

 

Got to decide tonight whether to take one for the team in the name of medical science.

Ooh, exciting...

 

What does it involve - what are the risks/possible side effects? How long is it for, and are you let loose, or kept under observation?

 

 

 

Cool thing to say you have done (save mankind)...unless you pop your clogs or grow three heads, or something  

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...