Nick
Administrator
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.
The bastard, using his medical training to anticipate when things may be more of a struggle than the present.
It isn't his decision£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" ?
Personally I'd say it's very encouraging if the chief medical officer agrees that most retrictions can end July 19th. That's kind of, like, a positive thing...
£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" ?
Neil Ferguson's projections of deaths without any restrictions look pretty good tbh
Won’t take the bet as I think there will be future lockdowns for variants that the vaccine doesn’t work with
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.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.
COVID-19: Nearly 2,000 cases linked to Scotland fans watching Euro 2020 games
Out of the 1,991 cases registered by Public Health Scotland, two-thirds said they had gone to London to watch England v Scotland.news.sky.com
I'm just not naive, why is he keen to open everything up ASAP if we are in for a "tough winter" ?
Really bad news thatCOVID-19: Nearly 2,000 cases linked to Scotland fans watching Euro 2020 games
Out of the 1,991 cases registered by Public Health Scotland, two-thirds said they had gone to London to watch England v Scotland.news.sky.com
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!
Whitty wants everything to open before winter. Clearly to lock down again fully then.
I'm saying that it is obvious it is being lined up for another lockdown in a couple of months.
You didn't happen to be out with your mate in St James's Park in London over the weekend did you?
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?
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.means fuck all to them if they want to start locking down every winter when there's a bit of flu going about.
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?
Not sure the maths works out with the headline does it?
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?
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?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 was going to do a subtle nuanced response, but tbh a like will suffice, and I'll forget the nuanceThere 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 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?
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.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?
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
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.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 - 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
Inpatients data is available, I’ve been keeping tabs on it the last couple of weeks.
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 downWhich imperial model? Certainly not their first that was spot on.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?