Coronavirus Thread

[Guest Lcfc82]

10 hours ago, Soup said:

Over 100 protests worldwide tomorrow including 15 cities in the UK.

Won’t get hardly any coverage though as it doesn’t fit the media’s narrative. Unlike other protests in recent months.

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, Lcfc82 said:

Won’t get hardly any coverage though as it doesn’t fit the media’s narrative. Unlike other protests in recent months.

If these are anti-lockdown or anti-vaxx protests, I'm glad they're getting out there to speak their peace but what exactly makes what they have to say worthy of media attention - or indeed the attention of anyone else, come to that?

[Guest Lcfc82]

Why shouldn’t it get media attention ? Every other type of large protest seems to, BLM, climate change, brexit and the “ vigil “ for the lady that was murdered by the police officer all had massive media coverage. 
or are you saying these shouldn’t get media attention either ?

[leicsmac]

15 minutes ago, Lcfc82 said:

Why shouldn’t it get media attention ? Every other type of large protest seems to, BLM, climate change, brexit and the “ vigil “ for the lady that was murdered by the police officer all had massive media coverage. 
or are you saying these shouldn’t get media attention either ?

...because evidently the media have decided it doesn't merit it.
 

I think that we're approaching this from two different direction tbh, unless I'm mistaken: you believe the media set an agenda for people to follow, I think that the media churn out what people want to see and hear in order to sell itself. Probably the truth is somewhere in between.

 

NB. With respect to the protests themselves, AFAIC both anti-vaxx and anti-lockdown sentiment currently (though hopefully soon enough not on the latter) present a risk to public health so if these protests are about that I'd much rather people not be incentivised to follow in their footsteps, but that's just my take.

[Guest Lcfc82]

25 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

...because evidently the media have decided it doesn't merit it.
 

I think that we're approaching this from two different direction tbh, unless I'm mistaken: you believe the media set an agenda for people to follow, I think that the media churn out what people want to see and hear in order to sell itself. Probably the truth is somewhere in between.

 

NB. With respect to the protests themselves, AFAIC both anti-vaxx and anti-lockdown sentiment currently (though hopefully soon enough not on the latter) present a risk to public health so if these protests are about that I'd much rather people not be incentivised to follow in their footsteps, but that's just my take.

Yes that’s correct, I do believe the media set an agenda that they want people to follow.

 

I don’t really buy the risk to public health argument. A couple of the larger protests that I mentioned previously took place in breach of COVID restrictions when case numbers and deaths were far higher. The protests themselves would of been a risk to public health but the media didn’t seem to mind giving it plenty of coverage. 

For what it’s worth, I’m not anti vax but I am anti lockdown so I’m not bothered if people want to go out doing whatever. I’m just talking about how the media’s coverage of it differs to suit the agenda there trying to push.

Edited 15 May 2021 by Lcfc82

[SpacedX]

8 hours ago, Otis said:

Must have missed that. 

I remember Rishi talking about a cost benefit analysis but that was the last i heard about it.

 

It's regularly acknowledged by the government, but of course they are inclined to sweep the more acute damage and social cost under the carpet - it's the Tories. Remember though, this administration resisted the second lockdown.

8 hours ago, Otis said:

Sorry I understood this those in these fields to be experts.

And indeed they are - but to be clear, I am referring to science which is axiomatic, not scientists. You seem to be alleging that because people that work within these fields are paid to do so, then they must therefore have vested interests or some nefarious agenda. Again, this has been done to death on here. 

 

 

[SpacedX]

4 minutes ago, Lcfc82 said:

 

 

I don’t really buy the risk to public health argument. A couple of the larger protests that I mentioned previously took place in breach of COVID restrictions when case numbers and deaths were far higher. The protests themselves would of been a risk to public health but the media didn’t seem to mind giving it plenty of coverage. 

 

I think you've misunderstood. I think I'm right in saying that @leicsmacis not referring to the gathering per-se, but the rhetoric - in particular, the anti-vax stance. 

[String fellow]

With reference to the calculation of the number 406 with R = 2.5, two things struck me overnight. Firstly, I forgot to include the progenitor (the (2.5)^0 term). Secondly, does 2.5 make any sense? How can half a person be infected? 2.5 is the average between 2 and 3, so if 2 and 3 (or vice versa) alternately replace 2.5 in the calculation, the final figure one gets is considerably smaller or much bigger.

Edited 15 May 2021 by String fellow

[Stivo]

31 minutes ago, String fellow said:

With reference to the calculation of the number 406 with R = 2.5, two things struck me overnight. Firstly, I forgot to include the progenitor (the (2.5)^0 term). Secondly, does 2.5 make any sense? How can half a person be infected? 2.5 is the average between 2 and 3, so if 2 and 3 (or vice versa) alternately replace 2.5 in the calculation, the final figure one gets is considerably small or much bigger.

R is an average so yes it makes sense.  For modelling purposes an average person catching COVID will (if R is 2.5) infect 2.5 people.  
 

But in the real world an actual person catching COVID will infect people based on their lifestyle and behaviour.  So if a hairdresser catches it and doesn’t have symptoms they may go to work and infect 10 people, but other people who live alone, have symptoms and isolate may not pass it on to any.  

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Line-X said:

I think you've misunderstood. I think I'm right in saying that @leicsmacis not referring to the gathering per-se, but the rhetoric - in particular, the anti-vax stance. 

Yeah, this is correct. Thank you for clarifying that for me.

[Jimothy]

First jab done this morning. Hopefully I don't feel drowsy later and sleep through the final 

[FoxesDeb]

Just now, Facecloth said:

First jab done this morning. Hopefully I don't feel drowsy later and sleep through the final 

You probably already know this, but try to have a nap, I've heard many people say it can make a big difference to reducing any side effects. Obviously set an alarm though, just in case 

[Jimothy]

4 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

You probably already know this, but try to have a nap, I've heard many people say it can make a big difference to reducing any side effects. Obviously set an alarm though, just in case 

I'll try and get a nap in early afternoon. Thanks. Feeling fine at the minute, but its only 2 hours ago.

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, Facecloth said:

I'll try and get a nap in early afternoon. Thanks. Feeling fine at the minute, but its only 2 hours ago.

It's ok, you'll have been sent to sleep by 5.30pm. 

[String fellow]

2 hours ago, Stivo said:

R is an average so yes it makes sense.  For modelling purposes an average person catching COVID will (if R is 2.5) infect 2.5 people.  
 

But in the real world an actual person catching COVID will infect people based on their lifestyle and behaviour.  So if a hairdresser catches it and doesn’t have symptoms they may go to work and infect 10 people, but other people who live alone, have symptoms and isolate may not pass it on to any.  

True, although it could be argued that any calculation of averages involving decimal fractions of a discrete variable is fundamentally flawed. What I found slightly odd was that the original calculation of total number of infections per month based on the value of R is entirely dependent on the assumption of a 5-day window of infectiousness. This key bit of information should perhaps be given greater emphasis. I only deduced it by working backwards through the figures!     

[SpacedX]

19 minutes ago, String fellow said:

True, although it could be argued that any calculation of averages involving decimal fractions of a discrete variable is fundamentally flawed. What I found slightly odd was that the original calculation of total number of infections per month based on the value of R is entirely dependent on the assumption of a 5-day window of infectiousness. This key bit of information should perhaps be given greater emphasis. I only deduced it by working backwards through the figures!     

Sorry - I'm responsible for this.

 

One way to kill the nerves over the next five hours I suppose. 

[VLC86]

1 hour ago, Facecloth said:

First jab done this morning. Hopefully I don't feel drowsy later and sleep through the final 

You brave brave man doing that today.

[Jimothy]

1 minute ago, Costock_Fox said:

You brave brave man doing that today.

I got the text on Monday, and just booked it for the first day I wasn't working. Then afterwards thought it might be an issue 

[VLC86]

12 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

I got the text on Monday, and just booked it for the first day I wasn't working. Then afterwards thought it might be an issue 

Hope you feel better than I did after mine mate  

[Jimothy]

Just now, Costock_Fox said:

Hope you feel better than I did after mine mate  

Which one did you have?

[VLC86]

2 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Which one did you have?

AZ, was mega rough for 24 hours.

[Jimothy]

1 minute ago, Costock_Fox said:

AZ, was mega rough for 24 hours.

I've had Pfizer, supposedly less side effects 

[Finnaldo]

9 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

I've had Pfizer, supposedly less side effects 

Had me second Pfizer jab yesterday, no side effects either time besides a sore arm, in fact I’ve just been back from gym. Should be absolutely fine mate 

[Jimothy]

I was tempted to gym after but thought I'd leave it. Might go tomorrow. Unless I'm hungover 

[String fellow]

52 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Sorry - I'm responsible for this.

 

One way to kill the nerves over the next five hours I suppose. 

No worries - tbh I love a mathematical challenge!