Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Desabafar said:

 

is there evidence that sweden's strategy was good? their deaths per million people is as high as italy, lower than the counties near them and i don't think their economy has done great. 

 

Just watched Peak Prosperity Guys latest instalment on YouTube.Him,one or two others and this thread are the only ones I take any interest in regarding Covid 19.Some pretty interesting graphs indicating that herd immunity might actually have been the way to go.Sweden is coming to the end of it’s second wave.Though the second wave has been pretty harmless.Places that either went into some sort of lockdown late or opened up a bit to early have now gone through the worst.Caution of course if it comes back.Also caution for the small % who will develop long term complications.Which would still add up to millions worldwide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Monk said:

Just read the last two pages and despair. 
 

@simFox you can’t seem to grasp that the local lockdowns are preemptive - you can’t wait until cases aren’t much higher as the impact on healthcare and the economy would be much worse and the measures would need to be in place much longer. 
 

and of course the more you test the more you find - but what’s your point? That we shouldn’t test or that we shouldn’t be concerned at positive test results. 

No, we shouldn’t compare the cases per 100000 from 3-4 months ago to the cases we have now and then make an assumption that more people are catching  it..

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, simFox said:

I've looked at the graphs, the increase in testing, the various methods deployed by each country, the infection rates, cases in hospital, deaths both covid and non Covid yet we both come to very different conclusions. Your problem is that you have an opinion and you are looking for data to change it. You need to be a bit more open minded, don't start with a conclusion and look for evidence to support it, look at what the data is telling you. I did support lockdown initially, I even started the thread telling you about the killer virus, yet now I'm telling you we have gone to far. Lockdown is not necessary, it never was.

 

I'm sitting here on my phone, it's hard enough downloading a picture, then cropping it, I'm not going to pull all the data together for you because it's readily available, you clearly didn't read any of the links I put up.

 

The problem from the start has been when the government bowed to media and public opinion, instead of following a well thought out epidemic plan like Sweden. That idiot Ferguson put up a worse case scenario and we went balls out. We never were going to hit worst case, because it was just that, the worst that could happen, where was the most likely!

 

What we are seeing now is a small ripple effect as the virus hits isolated areas or groups and more people coming forward for testing. There is no reason at all to assume people are behaving badly or that we need "though measures" to control them.

 

 

I did check the links, they didn't include the kind of peer-reviewed data that I was looking for that would be convincing, sorry about that.

 

You're right in that I do have an opinion based on scientific consensus right now - the evidence has been supplied and a conclusion has been arrived at courtesy of that, the conclusion itself didn't just appear out of thin air or for its own sake. If the evidence changes, then so will my opinion. I don't think that's being difficult.

 

Nothing that has been said here supports the idea that easing lockdown measures in various places around the world will result in less harm than not doing so. And that is what I am interested in. Which leads to...

 

 

8 hours ago, simFox said:

It's amazing watching all this unfold. It's clearly obvious who the lefty's are, because it fits their agenda of control, you can feel their undying support. The problem with this type of experiment is that people favour their freedoms and diverse train of thought. 

 

These methods always ultimately fail, it just takes a while for the blind following idiots to realise they are being duped by public shaming and fearmongering control. In the meantime the controls get stricter and the noose gets tighter until we end up in the gulags.

 

I don't think we'll get to the gulags, I don't think the government is left wing, we are just waiting for a swing in public opinion, because that's basically what this is all about. It's not about saving lives, it's about being seen to do the right thing, in the opinion of a misinformed public.

 

How easy it is to control an entire nation with fear is hugely worrying, it's nothing but extraordinary.

 

You know when you watch those dystopian movies where everyone is being controlled and obedient, but one person breaks the norm and rails against the system, everyone tells them they are wrong, and the chase ensues, but in the end the perceived "hunch" turns out to be fact, it's just no one else realised. Leicsmac, this is your chance! Which one are you going to be? 😁

As always, the one looking for the least harm and suffering for the human race as possible, based on the information that we have. No more, no less.

 

I dislike authoritarian measures purely as a means of exercising power (as is seen in many other circumstances around the world today, China immediately springs to mind), but also I think that people who go around yelling "freedom or death" US Libertarian-style have little knowledge of the former and definitely no experience with the latter and what it really means - because if they did, they wouldn't say it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

The conclusions of the review, which was ordered by Matt Hancock after it emerged officials were "over-exaggerating” deaths from the virus, are expected this week
 

Absolutely scandalous.
 

What's scandalous?

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, simFox said:

Leicsmac, you are so concerned with the virus, that you aren't seeing everything else. Maybe you aren't looking at the right data? Take the binoculars off.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I'm not going to state opinion as fact either way, because I think it honestly all conjecture. I guess we'll find out in due course, when all of this is over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

The conclusions of the review, which was ordered by Matt Hancock after it emerged officials were "over-exaggerating” deaths from the virus, are expected this week
 

Absolutely scandalous.
 

Even so, how can we explain the excess deaths?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

You don’t think that over exaggerating deaths is scandalous?

Duping the general public is scandalous.

If done deliberately yes, same as under reporting numbers that the government did for months.

 

It's not deliberate, the recording method changed to record any death of somebody who had had a positive covid-19 test as covid related. The problem now is people who had Covid 3 months ago and recovered are now dying of other causes, these are being recorded as covid related following the "new" guidelines.

 

It's nothing to get worked up about, but worth reviewing. Even if we have accidentally overestimated some of the death toll we were still, until very recently, having more deaths above expected than could be accounted for by our covid numbers so we are almost definitely still missing some covid related deaths.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been common knowledge for a long time:

 

 

Here, it seems that PHE regularly looks for people on the NHS database who have ever tested positive, and simply checks to see if they are still alive or not. PHE does not appear to consider how long ago the COVID test result was, nor whether the person has been successfully treated in hospital and discharged to the community. Anyone who has tested COVID positive but subsequently died at a later date of any cause will be included on the PHE COVID death figures.

 

By this PHE definition, no one with COVID in England is allowed to ever recover from their illness. A patient who has tested positive, but successfully treated and discharged from hospital, will still be counted as a COVID death even if they had a heart attack or were run over by a bus three months later.

 

So we have over exaggerated covid deaths and evidence that more people are dieing at home due to non Covid illness. So how are those Covid numbers looking now? 

 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/why-no-one-can-ever-recover-from-covid-19-in-england-a-statistical-anomaly/

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

Even so, how can we explain the excess deaths?

Lack of health care, cancelled appointments, people afraid to go to hospital, mental health, suicides from people losing their livelihoods, families suffering, increased poverty.

 

For what? Exactly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to realise that covid is hear to stay, we were told that we need to suppress the curve and not breach NHS capacity, now we appear to be trying to irradicate the virus, something which appears we won't ever be able to do.

 

We need a coherent plan that allows us to live with this problem and restore our economy and living standards, because what we are doing now is going to be much worse and we will STILL have the virus. I'm not sure why people can't understand that.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, simFox said:

Lack of health care, cancelled appointments, people afraid to go to hospital, mental health, suicides from people losing their livelihoods, families suffering, increased poverty.

 

For what? Exactly?

They will all be factors I guess, I won’t jump to conclusions on that until a full review has been published though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

22 minutes ago, simFox said:

So how are those Covid numbers looking now? 

Fvcking horrendous, still one of the worst in the world even if we purely look at above expected deaths.

 

The only reason the deaths are being recorded that way now is because they were being grossly under reported to start with.

Edited by Captain...
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, simFox said:

We need to realise that covid is hear to stay, we were told that we need to suppress the curve and not breach NHS capacity, now we appear to be trying to irradicate the virus, something which appears we won't ever be able to do.

 

We need a coherent plan that allows us to live with this problem and restore our economy and living standards, because what we are doing now is going to be much worse and we will STILL have the virus. I'm not sure why people can't understand that.

We may never get rid of the virus but we may get a vaccine, there are many groups worldwide working on one and if any are successful then that's our way out - the only viable alternative to herd immunity which will cost more lives.  The current strategy appears to be to minimise infections until such a time that a vaccine becomes available, if it doesn't then we will need a Plan B.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

No, we shouldn’t compare the cases per 100000 from 3-4 months ago to the cases we have now and then make an assumption that more people are catching  it..

I’m not making that assumption - but the government has access to way more expertise and data than you, and they’ve made the call that the growth in certain areas is too fast to allow it to continue. 
 

If you dispute that you have to come up with something more concrete and data led that somehow the government hasn’t taken into consideration. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Captain... said:

 

 

Fvcking horrendous, still one of the worst in the world even if we purely look at above expected deaths.

 

The only reason the deaths are being recorded that way now is because they were being grossly under reported to start with.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

 

Above expected deaths can be down to other factors as well as stated in a post above. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, simFox said:

This chap seems to be talking with a bit of sense and  bit of data you might like to look at.

 

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200629/Stanfords-Nobel-Laureate-develops-a-prediction-model-for-SARS-CoV-2.aspx

That's more solid stuff (though not peer reviewed), thank you!

 

I do think it's highly plausible that the outbreak is following the Gompertz function as the paper suggests, however it seems that it's really not certain exactly what factor - whether viral, interventional, or a combination of the two - is responsible for this. That would lead me to think that we really need more information to identify what is the biggest factor in play before issuing policy based on it, just to be sure we're not in fact shooting ourselves in the foot.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Monk said:

I’m not making that assumption - but the government has access to way more expertise and data than you, and they’ve made the call that the growth in certain areas is too fast to allow it to continue. 
 

If you dispute that you have to come up with something more concrete and data led that somehow the government hasn’t taken into consideration. 

You are missing the point about what government are doing, this guy says it better than me.

 

 

Screenshot_20200807-162938__01.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/08/2020 at 10:13, davieG said:

Brighton Beach yesterday

 

Image may contain: one or more people, crowd and outdoor

 

 

 

Looks more acceptable from this angle assuming it's the same section of beach

Image may contain: one or more people, crowd, sky and outdoor

 

 

I wouldn't want to be on a beach that crowded virus or no virus.

.....and this is some of the crap they left behind

 

Image may contain: outdoor

Image may contain: plant, outdoor and water

Image may contain: shoes and outdoor

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

 

Above expected deaths can be down to other factors as well as stated in a post above. 

There is no wrong and right in statistics just transparency. The original reporting of deaths only showed part of the picture, the government were clear in what it was showing, number of deaths in hospitals by people with a positive test. This was partly for comparing with other countries who did similar, but it was misleading because deaths in care homes were not being recorded along with deaths in other settings.

 

They also started off only recording deaths that they could directly link to coronavirus, but there are still a lot of unknowns. One example is the increasing reports of mental health being impacted and long term heart and lung damage. Dying three months after being given the all clear doesn't mean that the virus didn't have a significant cause in your death. This could be a stroke or suicide.

 

The only way to really measure the death toll is deaths above average/expected but that won't be known for a while, at the moment deaths are below average for this time of year because a lot of vulnerable people died of covid related causes earlier than would have been expected. 

 

My main point is it isn't "scandalous" that the reporting method may need refining, that's a very simplistic and sensationalist view of things implying people are deliberately trying to manipulate the stats which is just not true.

Edited by Captain...
  • Like 2
Link to post
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...
×
×
  • Create New...