Jump to content

Coronavirus


robf

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, leedsvaliant said:




 

 


I don't think anyone is insinuating that you'd be happy if people died from cancer but it is a consequence of supporting draconian actions.


 

 

It is a bit early to be wrong already today isn't it? The post from Eh up Nah has been removed, it was one of the more disgusting posts on this thread and was very personal abuse. I think you are right it wasn't insinuating the point it was a solid accusation that me, Fosse and Tommy Tunstall would be happy people are dying of or with (Seems important these days) cancer 

Edited by WV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


2 hours ago, Fosse69 said:
5 hours ago, geosname said:
The more you test the more you find which increases the number of deaths, of any cause, being included in the covid death rate.
The only thing I have ever expected are accurate statistics to make appropriate decisions.

Covid rules are to test if you have symptoms or are in contact with a Covid. That gives the total with Covid assuming all positives are reported, likely ? The death certificate process I am not familiar with, the main thing is to be consistent. 29 days is the agreed period and the reported figures indicate the state of the pandemic. PMs for all deaths are impractical, what other way would there be?

The reported deaths have little to do with dying from covid or even with covid as a contributing factor...... they are simply a record of people who have died, from any cause whatsoever, within 28 days of a test.

Looked at differently...... there is a good chance that 95%+ of people who died within 28 days had 2 arms and 2 eyes and probably a head...... should we lockdown everyone with the same attributes so as not to overload the NHS?

Just give accurate relevant figures so people actually know what's going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, geosname said:

The reported deaths have little to do with dying from covid or even with covid as a contributing factor...... they are simply a record of people who have died, from any cause whatsoever, within 28 days of a test.

Looked at differently...... there is a good chance that 95%+ of people who died within 28 days had 2 arms and 2 eyes and probably a head...... should we lockdown everyone with the same attributes so as not to overload the NHS?

Just give accurate relevant figures so people actually know what's going on.

Not entirely true, the certificate would include a reference to Covid, otherwise not included. Their  only purpose is to show the trend. Far greater analysis is carried out but as with most things a daily headline figure is used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Fosse69 said:

Not entirely true, the certificate would include a reference to Covid, otherwise not included. Their  only purpose is to show the trend. Far greater analysis is carried out but as with most things a daily headline figure is used.

The only reference needed to count as a covid death is the test within 28 days..... WHO.

Why not simply record the number of people who have actually died because covid had a hand in killing them..... directly or as a contributing factor..... on a daily bases, in arrears if they have to, or weekly. The actual numbers.

Let's screw the modelling and forecast guessing of what might happen or could happen because we said so just for a short while and find out the reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on pre-covid death rates it's easy to estimate quite accurately how much this definition overestimates actual covid deaths, because some people would have died anyway, and that yields an overestimate of 13%. On the flip side, it underestimates because anyone who died from covid but was not tested within 28 days prior to death won't count. This underestimates by about 10%.

So the figure from this definition is a quick and easy method that gives a very reasonable approximation to the true number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


25 minutes ago, Mario said:

Holland going into full lockdown

Yeah, great it is over here in NL. Not. Wait for the riots tonight.  Didn't even manage to get a hair cut before they slammed on the brakes. Even schools shut until mid Jan.  Football behind closed doors. Everything shut. To quote Rutte from his press conference "Netherlands is shut". 

Plus side, we already had our Christmas shopping done.  All the best to you all and your families and as good a Christmas as possible. I suspect you lot have this coming up too... 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, toyahw said:

Yeah, great it is over here in NL. Not. Wait for the riots tonight.  Didn't even manage to get a hair cut before they slammed on the brakes. Even schools shut until mid Jan.  Football behind closed doors. Everything shut. To quote Rutte from his press conference "Netherlands is shut". 

Plus side, we already had our Christmas shopping done.  All the best to you all and your families and as good a Christmas as possible. I suspect you lot have this coming up too... 

Same here.

Turkey ordered,plenty of toilet rolls and car tank full.

Merry Christmas.

UTV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


Speaking as a bit of an expert on this. Computer modelling, particularly when done by biologists, is quantitatively worthless mainly. You have to have a decent understanding of the problem (they don't)  a decent model (they don't), reliable code (they don't)  and extensive back testing (they don't). This Ferguson tit - how he gets away it just reminds me why I quit science.

Not to weigh in on any side of the debate.  But data in -> crud model badly programmed not back tested -> garbage out.

Computer modelling is great when you have a well defined problem with smart people dealing with it. An ill defined problem with idiots on the case? 

Edited by toyahw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking as a bit of an expert on this. Computer modelling, particularly when done by biologists, is quantitatively worthless mainly. You have to have a decent understanding of the problem (they don't)  a decent model (they don't), reliable code (they don't)  and extensive back testing (they don't). This Ferguson tit - how he gets away it just reminds me why I quit science.
Not to weigh in on any side of the debate.  But data in -> crud model badly programmed not back tested -> garbage out.
Computer modelling is great when you have a well defined problem with smart people dealing with it. An ill defined problem with idiots on the case? 
Yes, I think you have it right. In this case they don't have that much to go on, so small assumptions can make a big difference. That's why I find it strange that anybody can make a judgement call at this point. Apparently Whitty and Vallance presented data to the cabinet on Saturday which was absolutely trashed.

In my opinion, if Omicron is everywhere by now, then there's little point in restrictions. Guidance maybe, but then some people will take this as gospel and then businesses suffer.

I appreciate that decision makers are stuck between a rock and a hard place but I would be taking into account the previous track record of modelling. It seems some people want to present a gloomy outlook for whatever reason, even if it's not the most likely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, leedsvaliant said:



I appreciate that decision makers are stuck between a rock and a hard place

That is very much the case and on a hiding to nothing.  The English government I think tries to do the bare minimum to keep restrictions minimal.  But when you have SAGE (sic) members screaming doom in the press it is a brave politico who chooses to ignore. And, believe it or not your Gov have largely followed their (often very duff, I've read the SAGE minutes) scientific advice.

Here in NL we without doubt have Omicron all over the place (close links with SA for a start).  Cases and hospital numbers are currently falling. We were already under an effective 17.00 curfew. Then out of the blue Sat they basically shut everything down. Back to everything other than food shops shut. Again.  At the press conference they basically said "we don't know much about Omicron but we've shat our pants anyway". And brought these Draconian restrictions in until 14 Jan minimum.

Only time will tell which approach is best.  I'm no kind of anti-vaccer or covid denier.  I appreciate that these are difficult decisions. And lockdowns do work, bang everyone under essentially house arrest and there won't be much spreading.  But on the other hand people deserve some kind of life even with associated risk. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advert:


Pressure is really ramping up on Boris if the reports of cabinet division are true. Hopefully some of these cowards who have decided to question the data all of a sudden, grow a pair and resign when they get out voted.

 

Political chancers or genuinely interested in the data now? Time will tell although it's positive news for me that the media censorship of anything that goes against the narrative, is seemingly being dismantled. 

 

 

As for the sage admissions yesterday - not surprising as they've said all along they were operating on worst case scenarios, but the sheer incompetence of policy makers to not want a comparison on which to form the decision is mind blowing.

 

Tells me that they have no interest in truly knowing whether their policies work or not. It also makes a bit of a mockery of the people who insist that "the science" tells us what works and what doesn't - how do we know? The only data we have to compare is other countries and that is fraught with risk due to the wildly different definitions being used.

 

The worst part of all this is - if they could publish a relatively sound and open report into covid restrictions, perhaps present models of spikes in a couple of scenarios so we can then improve the modelling as we go - I'd happily support measures that were shown to be a net good. It's not good enough to just say that the public health officials said so. Not when the restrictions are so severe. 

Edited by Regal Beagle
  • Like 1

Share this post


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.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Admin don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking. Please report posts and we'll act on ASAP. If you're logged in use the orange report post button. If you're not logged in, please use the contact form

    If you can't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Follow the link, type in their username and save - Click here

    Check with admin if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first - Contact us here

  • Friends of OVF




×
×
  • Create New...