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
 Share
filbertway

Coronavirus Thread

By filbertway, in General Chat

Recommended Posts

leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lcfc82

Lcfc82

Posted
Posted

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 ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leicsmac

leicsmac

Posted
Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lcfc82

Lcfc82

Posted
Posted (edited)
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 by Lcfc82
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
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. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
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. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
String fellow

String fellow

Posted
Posted (edited)

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 by String fellow
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stivo

Stivo

Posted
Posted
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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FoxesDeb

FoxesDeb

Posted
Posted
Just now, Facecloth said:

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

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 lol

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Facecloth

Facecloth

Posted
Posted
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 lol

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
String fellow

String fellow

Posted
Posted
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!     

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpacedX

SpacedX

Posted
Posted
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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Facecloth

Facecloth

Posted
Posted
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 lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Finnaldo

Finnaldo

Posted
Posted
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 :thumbup:

  • Like 1
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...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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