Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[Kenshin]

You can control (or should) mingling in restaurants and pubs.

You can't control mingling inside a household.

Except it's been proven that you also can't control that either based on the many videos / pictures that's been out over the last few weeks from around the country.

But who can't control it? We can control it no matter where we are.

 

[YoboCopter]

But there isn't a balance there?

None of this is balanced. Infections under 40, deaths average 80.

So where's the balance to justify go anywhere you want except someone's house.

That's not a balance. It's half arsed attempt to control a virus.

The fact you can socialise with people outside of your house but inside another building in groups of 6 makes completely no sense when talking about tighter restrictions


You absolutely do have to test everyone!

That's how this works , you don't know who has got it / had it until you test them. Otherwise you don't know that information.

That is a new one, just guess how many have it rather than test people for it.

Yer i agree loads dont get tested because they cant afford to be off work aswell

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I can see you haven't dealt with young kenshin before, he will scoff at any case study that does not include 100% of the earths population.

I'm expecting to produce a hilarious song once this is all over

 

[Kenshin]

Yer i agree loads dont get tested because they cant afford to be off work aswell

This households are so dangerous part.

I have lost a member of staff this week due to a positive test. I have lost 4 more due to being around said person who may then test positive.

Even with measures in place , I may lose more staff if they have indeed caught it from original said person and just don't have symptoms yet.

None of them went to their house.

Here is a crazy idea , workplaces are also as dangerous at spreading the virus than someone's house? Because potentially I could lose many staff based on one test.

I'm not saying shut workplaces down but perhaps suggesting they are also part of the problem in spreading the virus .

 

[roydo]

This households are so dangerous part.

I have lost a member of staff this week due to a positive test. I have lost 4 more due to being around said person who may then test positive.

Even with measures in place , I may lose more staff if they have indeed caught it from original said person and just don't have symptoms yet.

None of them went to their house.

Here is a crazy idea , workplaces are also as dangerous at spreading the virus than someone's house? Because potentially I could lose many staff based on one test.

I'm not saying shut workplaces down but perhaps suggesting they are also part of the problem in spreading the virus .

What sort of business are you in?

 

[Kenshin]

I can see you haven't dealt with young kenshin before, he will scoff at any case study that does not include 100% of the earths population.

Really?

So guessing numbers is now proven? Just guess how many people have it / had it. Yeah, that makes sense.

 

[Kenshin]

What sort of business are you in?

Admin , so in an office building with around 30-40 staff to look after.

We have a mask policy in place as well.

 

[Woolly Blue]

Preston was put in to lockdown at a rate of 49 infections per 100,000 but since then it has risen to 199 per 100,000 which shows that the restrictions don't work.
All it proves is that people living in the areas with restrictions are more likely to go and get tested which drives the numbers up. It doesn't necessarily mean the numbers are actually any higher, it means perfectly healthy people with no symptoms are getting tests, being positive and boosting the stats.

There's an element of truth in that, but the numbers going into hospital are getting higher, so there's an element of wishful thinking in it as well.

Obviously the following graph is for the north-West as a whole, rather than just Preston*, but it shows the number of people in hospital in the North-West is now at roughly the same number it was at the beginning of July. It also shows that the number is going up faster now than it was going down in July. On the plus side, it's going up much slower than it was in April, but the argument that "it's just because of extra testing" doesn't stack up with what the data is telling us. Or, to put it crudely, the argument that "it's just because of extra testing" is utter, utter bollocks.



*My missus works at the same trust as Preston, and the shape of the graph for Preston is pretty much the same as it is for the NW.

 

[Moomin]

I can see you haven't dealt with young kenshin before, he will scoff at any case study that does not include 100% of the earths population.

And yet he takes his views on American politics from this cat. Maybe Corona virus as well!!!

 

[Nymzee]

Except it's been proven that you also can't control that either based on the many videos / pictures that's been out over the last few weeks from around the country.

But who can't control it? We can control it no matter where we are.

That's why I used the word 'should'.

Pubs and restaurants can throw people out for not following the rules.

 

[Kenshin]

That's why I used the word 'should'.

Pubs and restaurants can throw people out for not following the rules.

But using should means nothing.

At some point using what we should be doing and what we are doing have to be one and the same. If we aren't doing what we should then there is a problem not being addressed by focusing attention on elsewhere. So for every pub not doing as they should so to speak, it makes a joke that someone can't visit someone else now.

It's should be all or nothing , not half arsed hope for the best

 

[whiteshadow]

But there isn't a balance there?

None of this is balanced. Infections under 40, deaths average 80.

So where's the balance to justify go anywhere you want except someone's house.

That's not a balance. It's half arsed attempt to control a virus.

The fact you can socialise with people outside of your house but inside another building in groups of 6 makes completely no sense when talking about tighter restrictions


You absolutely do have to test everyone!

That's how this works , you don't know who has got it / had it until you test them. Otherwise you don't know that information.

That is a new one, just guess how many have it rather than test people for it.

They use models for COVID-19 and use statistics to estimate numbers, while including random tests from all over the country.

Let's face it, you post a lot of stuff that's just based on your own 'opinion' with no evidence, yet you're convinced your view is right, yet you are trying to mock all the health authorities around the world who have whole teams of epidimiologists and mathematicians, by making out they're just guessing, as if they had no evidence to back up their claims or no way of modelling their figures. Their numbers may not be right to the last person, but their estimates will be accurate to within a margin of error.

A key limitation in our understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic is that we do not know the true number of infections. Instead, we only know of infections that have been confirmed by a test – the confirmed cases. But because many infected people never get tested,2 we know that confirmed cases are only a fraction of true infections. How small a fraction though?
To answer this question, several research groups have developed epidemiological models of COVID-19. These models use the data we have – confirmed cases and deaths, testing rates, and more – plus a range of assumptions and epidemiological knowledge to estimate true infections and other important metrics.



The chart here shows the mean estimates of the true number of daily new infections in the United States from four of the most prominent models.3 For comparison, the number of confirmed cases is also shown.

 

[whiteshadow]

But there isn't a balance there?

None of this is balanced. Infections under 40, deaths average 80.

So where's the balance to justify go anywhere you want except someone's house.

That's not a balance. It's half arsed attempt to control a virus.

A half arsed attempt to control a virus is better than no attempt.

Trying to keep the economy ticking over while saving lives is going to mean conflicting guidance, due to the very nature of trying to get a balance.

The government have made a mess of it but people ignoring guidance because they don't like the government or because they can't be bothered to follow it, will result in more people dying.

Not that these kind of people really care that much because it's all about 'them' and not about how it affects 'others'.

 

[Kenshin]

They use models for COVID-19 and use statistics to estimate numbers, while including random tests from all over the country.

Let's face it, you post a lot of stuff that's just based on your own 'opinion' with no evidence, yet you're convinced your view is right, yet you are trying to mock all the health authorities around the world who have whole teams of epidimiologists and mathematicians, by making out they're just guessing, as if they had no evidence to back up their claims or no way of modelling their figures. Their numbers may not be right to the last person, but their estimates will be accurate to within a margin of error.

Funny you should say that

I've been posting a lot recently based on actual proven figures , opinions based on those actual statistics.

I've even started providing research on former opinions that I can now back up , yet was called out on that front when I posted them.

If you are going to profile me as a poster then at least read my posts first before you do lol

So given I now talk using actual statistics and you offer guessing numbers as the same thing, which one of us is basing opinion on fact? Because it's possible to test everyone , the government were in the news recently as planning on doing just that next year, a mass test initiative to find out the true numbers.

When you have literally the ability to test people and then provide guesses instead, it's not reliable.

Because here is the slight flaw to your argument. I was tested for the antibodies back in June , that was 4 months ago. I could have caught covid-19 at any time since then and my test will remain the same. Given infections are rising , how can you guess how many have had it when that anti body test can change the next day?

That's why you can't just guess , that's why you test.

 

[Moomin]

They use models for COVID-19 and use statistics to estimate numbers, while including random tests from all over the country.

Let's face it, you post a lot of stuff that's just based on your own 'opinion' with no evidence, yet you're convinced your view is right, yet you are trying to mock all the health authorities around the world who have whole teams of epidimiologists and mathematicians, by making out they're just guessing, as if they had no evidence to back up their claims or no way of modelling their figures. Their numbers may not be right to the last person, but their estimates will be accurate to within a margin of error.

Last month i was randomly selected to take part in a random testing by Imperial College London. I heard on the radio 80k took part and the positive results was 1 per 200 people. A slight decline from the previous set of results.

It's just a snapshot but vital in collecting data.