Coronavirus Thread (Off Topic, Politics) (121 Viewers)

Nick

Administrator
The bastard, using his medical training to anticipate when things may be more of a struggle than the present.

There are struggles all the time, every single day.

The point is, there's more than fucking COV-ID and it's a pretty clear hint there's another lockdown coming.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
£50 charitable bet that lock downs are introduced again?

I'm just not naive, why is he keen to open everything up ASAP if we are in for a "tough winter" ?

Won’t take the bet as I think there will be future lockdowns for variants that the vaccine doesn’t work with
 

David O'Day

Well-Known Member
Neil Ferguson's projections of deaths without any restrictions look pretty good tbh

It's the same every time. A projection is made about what happen if we don't the action on something and we take action. The action stops the projection from being a reality and then the floofs go "the projections were wrong"
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
We opened up last summer didn't we?
I must have missed the ability to hug a stranger, breathe in their face, and cram onto a packed rush hour train with a load of sweaty people.
 

Nick

Administrator
So you're saying if we are in for a tough winter then we shouldn't open up ASAP?

You're arguing against yourself here!

I'm saying that it is obvious it is being lined up for another lockdown in a couple of months.
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
I'm saying that it is obvious it is being lined up for another lockdown in a couple of months.

I'd say it's just being cautious and saying that there might be another lockdown if things get bad again. Which I think is fair enough.

Better to do it that way than categorically deny the possibility of any future lockdowns and then have to U-turn, again, making them look stupid and just angering the population.

And you seem to be annoyed that he wants to open up now, with the possibility of locking down in the winter. Would you rather we stayed locked down until the winter then?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
I'd say it's just being cautious and saying that there might be another lockdown if things get bad again. Which I think is fair enough.

Better to do it that way than categorically deny the possibility of any future lockdowns and then have to U-turn, again, making them look stupid and just angering the population.

And you seem to be annoyed that he wants to open up now, with the possibility of locking down in the winter. Would you rather we stayed locked down until the winter then?

What the medical expert is saying, is that the medical evidence is that we can likely do without most restrictions for the near future. As he's got, well, medical expertise and access to more data than most, and more experts to advise him than most, this is an excellent thing.

It's the self-same medical expertise that offers caution (and there's no certainty either way, as we just don't know yet!) going forward - it's his job to assess what he has in front of him, after all. What's he supposed to do, say he's off on an eight month bender because the past year and a half hasn't been what he hoped for when he took the job?!?
 

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
means fuck all to them if they want to start locking down every winter when there's a bit of flu going about.
Genuine question so don't jump on me - but why are you under the impression that the government "wants" to lockdown? Its obviously crippling for the economy and pisses everyone off but your posts seem to suggest that its something they want to do.

Why do you think they want to?
 

Nick

Administrator
I'd say it's just being cautious and saying that there might be another lockdown if things get bad again. Which I think is fair enough.

Better to do it that way than categorically deny the possibility of any future lockdowns and then have to U-turn, again, making them look stupid and just angering the population.

And you seem to be annoyed that he wants to open up now, with the possibility of locking down in the winter. Would you rather we stayed locked down until the winter then?

Nope, I'd just rather it was made more clear.

Why would we need to lockdown in Winter if near enough everybody will be vaccinated? As sad as it is, people are going to die. Vaccinated or not.
 

David O'Day

Well-Known Member
Not sure the maths works out with the headline does it?

it doesn't give a % of those who were at an informal gathering but these are included in the Euro 2020 tag stats

You can't say the headline is right or wrong as the data is incomplete but 1500 or so were either in London, a fan zone or a game at Hampden
 

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
There are literally two charts that are important to me right now - the daily cases compared to the daily deaths. I don't really care about the cases on it's own, we have to accept there will be more cases because its obvious there will be, people are mixing and theres a big chunk of people unvaccinated. Those are younger people who are less at risk. It's going to happen.

It's the link to deaths isn't it. At a glance it looks like the link is well and truly broken. But, it's kind of too early to tell. Theres a pretty clear two week lag in the historical data between cases and deaths - peak 7 day MA for cases was January 10th, peak 7 day MA for deaths was January 24th.

So, obviously im just eyeballing this and it's not based on any statistical significance or regression or anything, but if we pick June 25th as a pretty good anchor point for an obvious rise in cases, we will be able to make a pretty good call on the impact to deaths by what, July 10th?

So it makes sense to have delayed things, the annoying thing is that they had the data so should've seen this coming. If we get to July 10th and the deaths chart doesnt look like the cases chart we can all crack the fuck on and hope that we don't get some new vaccine avoiding variant.



1625059881453.png

1625059899275.png
 

Nick

Administrator
Genuine question so don't jump on me - but why are you under the impression that the government "wants" to lockdown? Its obviously crippling for the economy and pisses everyone off but your posts seem to suggest that its something they want to do.

Why do you think they want to?

Let's face it, lockdown hasn't really applied to them on a personal level has it?

I'm full blown conspiracy theory but politics does play a massive part in it. It was entirely political that the country remained locked down while London was opened up.

On the other hand if we lockdown to save the NHS it saves them doing much with it.
 

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
Let's face it, lockdown hasn't really applied to them on a personal level has it?

I'm full blown conspiracy theory but politics does play a massive part in it. It was entirely political that the country remained locked down while London was opened up.

On the other hand if we lockdown to save the NHS it saves them doing much with it.
I hear you and i get that frustration but you've not really answered the question. Do you think they "want" to lockdown the country? If so, why?
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
There are literally two charts that are important to me right now - the daily cases compared to the daily deaths. I don't really care about the cases on it's own, we have to accept there will be more cases because its obvious there will be, people are mixing and theres a big chunk of people unvaccinated. Those are younger people who are less at risk. It's going to happen.

It's the link to deaths isn't it. At a glance it looks like the link is well and truly broken. But, it's kind of too early to tell. Theres a pretty clear two week lag in the historical data between cases and deaths - peak 7 day MA for cases was January 10th, peak 7 day MA for deaths was January 24th.

So, obviously im just eyeballing this and it's not based on any statistical significance or regression or anything, but if we pick June 25th as a pretty good anchor point for an obvious rise in cases, we will be able to make a pretty good call on the impact to deaths by what, July 10th?

So it makes sense to have delayed things, the annoying thing is that they had the data so should've seen this coming. If we get to July 10th and the deaths chart doesnt look like the cases chart we can all crack the fuck on and hope that we don't get some new vaccine avoiding variant.



View attachment 20676

View attachment 20677
I was going to do a subtle nuanced response, but tbh a like will suffice, and I'll forget the nuance ;)
 

Nick

Administrator
I hear you and i get that frustration but you've not really answered the question. Do you think they "want" to lockdown the country? If so, why?

It depends, the government is a big place and it depends on what will benefit them personally either way for their own interests.

I think they will now find it much easier to lockdown over things than they would have 2 years ago. So if there's a bit of flu for example they will just shout lockdown.
 

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
It depends, the government is a big place and it depends on what will benefit them personally either way for their own interests.

I think they will now find it much easier to lockdown over things than they would have 2 years ago. So if there's a bit of flu for example they will just shout lockdown.
So i'm inferring from that that your suggestion is there are members of government who stand to personally gain from lockdowns (how, out of curiosity?), and so they are deliberately doing it for themselves rather than public health.

Is that about right?
 

Nick

Administrator
So i'm inferring from that that your suggestion is there are members of government who stand to personally gain from lockdowns (how, out of curiosity?), and so they are deliberately doing it for themselves rather than public health.

Is that about right?

There will be members of the government gaining from all different scenarios. (as keeps coming out)

It wouldn't surprise me if a big contract making fucking "2 metre" signs was given to Hancock's other shag piece.

It's naive to think that everything they do isn't for themselves anyway, even if it's just for votes.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
There are literally two charts that are important to me right now - the daily cases compared to the daily deaths. I don't really care about the cases on it's own, we have to accept there will be more cases because its obvious there will be, people are mixing and theres a big chunk of people unvaccinated. Those are younger people who are less at risk. It's going to happen.

It's the link to deaths isn't it. At a glance it looks like the link is well and truly broken. But, it's kind of too early to tell. Theres a pretty clear two week lag in the historical data between cases and deaths - peak 7 day MA for cases was January 10th, peak 7 day MA for deaths was January 24th.

So, obviously im just eyeballing this and it's not based on any statistical significance or regression or anything, but if we pick June 25th as a pretty good anchor point for an obvious rise in cases, we will be able to make a pretty good call on the impact to deaths by what, July 10th?

So it makes sense to have delayed things, the annoying thing is that they had the data so should've seen this coming. If we get to July 10th and the deaths chart doesnt look like the cases chart we can all crack the fuck on and hope that we don't get some new vaccine avoiding variant.



View attachment 20676

View attachment 20677

I think you’ve left off the most important chart which is NHS capacity. That’s what drives everything. If people aren’t dying but are staying in hospital longer that’s a bad thing, if they’re having loads of cases but not hospitalisations that’s a good thing.

I have no idea what that graph shows so can’t comment either way.
 

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
I think you’ve left off the most important chart which is NHS capacity. That’s what drives everything. If people aren’t dying but are staying in hospital longer that’s a bad thing, if they’re having loads of cases but not hospitalisations that’s a good thing.

I have no idea what that graph shows so can’t comment either way.
Fair point, although i'd argue it's not the MOST important thing - i'd say deaths is but i think we're on the same page. Excuse my shitty excel chart i made it from raw data as couldn't find a decent visual.

Looks like there's basically zero lag between cases and hospital admissions (maybe a day or two, but peaks on January 10th again for hospital admissions). In which case, this looks really positive. Has there been an increase recently? Yeah. But nowhere near the same level as there has been for cases.

So what we used to see was:

Spike in cases -> +1/2 days, Spike in admissions -> +2 weeks, Spike in deaths.

Now we are seeing:

Spike in cases -> +1/2 days, No spike in admissions but an increase -> +2 weeks, Jury's out on impacts to deaths (more insight to come around July 10th).


1625063644844.png
 
Last edited:

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Fair point, although i'd argue it's not the MOST important thing - i'd say deaths is but i think we're on the same page. Excuse my shitty excel chart i made it from raw data as couldn't find a decent visual.

Looks like there's basically zero lag between cases and hospital admissions (maybe a day or two, but peaks on January 10th again for hospital admissions). In which case, this looks really positive. Has there been an increase recently? Yeah. But nowhere near the same level as there has been for cases.

So what we used to see was:

Spike in cases - Spike in admissions - Spike in deaths.

Now we are seeing:

Spike in cases - No spike in admissions but an increase - Jury's out on impacts to deaths (more insight to come around July 10th).


View attachment 20678

Yeah I meant in terms of lockdown, not general morality.

That’s new admissions isn’t it? It current occupancy available? @fernandopartridge probably better to ask, especially as you need to STFU and GBTW. ;)
 

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Which imperial model? Certainly not their first that was spot on.
I was talking about a couple over the past 2-3 months, in particular the forecast daily hospitalisations and inpatients (and in turn deaths). The quoting of thousands of hospitalisations per day and the build up of inpatients when the high risk had been vaccinated/a signifiant majority of the adult population have antibodies, just didn’t make sense to me. They’ve subsequently been revised down

Never like speaking too soon though as things can change very quickly so keeping fingers crossed it stays that way

Ps my language (‘horrifically’) after a few beers was probably a little OTT ! 😊
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top