Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Billy Jean King said:

I have yet to visit any premesis that had music or tv volume, when someone asked for volume on the racing last week they were told it wasn't allowed. As for the rest of that post it makes no sense !
 

Pub I was in on Saturday had volume on the TV. The SWG3 had a DJ playing as well although that was outdoors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MixuFruit said:

This is such a tiresome attitude. Criticism is normal and healthy. It applies pressure for the government to do better. You can support the SNP while saying they did a bad job about X, this is not a betrayal of tHe MoVeMeNt

Detournement might post a lot of shite half the time but he's the best poster at bringing this stuff out from people, imo

Edited by NotThePars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, madwullie said:

The library thing is clearly because its indoors. Imo it seems pretty sensible and I really don't see whta the fuss is with complying. 

Took my dad down to the garden centre this morning for a coffee. Me, the wife, the two boys and the old man, masks oot. Just about everybody in there wearing one too, then once in the restaurant bit it was very distanced and most people including us de-masked. Seems pretty sensible unless you are the type of person to refer to masks as muzzles or face nappies in which case you'd probably be incandescent. 

Then you'd probably burn your mask.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that in the last 7 days alone, 254 people who were on the shielding list in Scotland have died.

Despite the significant relaxation of restrictions since the 29th of May, this is 254 more than died of Covid-19 in the same period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In what way is this interesting? Did you think that because covid is less prevalent than before old and vulnerable people would now be immune to death from other causes?
Only in Scotland. Embarrassing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

The results in my department are some of the worst we've had in 5 years - they have not even bothered looking at our grade averages or estimate trends (we tend to underestimate).

 

Instead of targeting those who were clearly at it they've used a broad brush approach that punished those who played the game fairly. Some pupils have been downgraded not once but twice - the first time when we internally moderated and again when SQA downgraded them. I've several pupils who were borderline 2/3 - we eventually entered them at a 3 - they've been awarded 5s - an utter nonsense.

 

Why should schools who were honest be punished yet others who gamed it were not?

 

Well obviously schools who were honest should not be punished.  Hopefully again, the appeals process will right some wrongs.  The distress in the meantime is, however, regrettable.

To be honest, beating down your own estimates was probably a mistake.  We were encouraged to err on the positive, and to infer attainment.  My own estimates tend to be on the low side, given that I don't want to be asked to appeal while lacking evidence of something better.  This year though, we upped them a little, more in line with our general ultimate attainment trends, rather than our estimate ones.  

The difficulty has been when schools have presented stratospherically better pictures than is typical.  I know that the emerging picture horrified SQA people back in June, as it's necessitated a larger scale intervention than they'd have liked.

I do worry about individual schools appearing to suffer, and I'm much more concerned about individual pupils losing out.  However I cut it though, I can't see that allowing vastly inflated grades to stand across the country, was a viable option.

Edited by Monkey Tennis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All we've have seen for the last 2-3 weeks is 'virus cases on the rise again'.

Thing is though, much like Donald Trump not taking death toll per million people into consideration when bumming up the US's performance against COVID, this increasing number of positive virus cases struggles against scrutiny when putting it up as a percentage of people tested.

Fact is, it's hovering very, very steadily about 0.5% of all tests coming back positive.

So whilst this makes for a very worrying graphic and sensationalises the prospect of a second wave:

_113811115_uk_daily_cases_1jul_4aug-nc.thumb.png.acc7fe4e97dc1862d34d5c086b37ab1f.png

 

 

 

 

This paints a much steadier picture:

_113811109_percentage_daily_positive_tests_inclaverage_1july3augupdated-nc.png.a1c81c526d6900a3cb594e65cee0008c.png

Edited by djchapsticks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

All we've have seen for the last 2-3 weeks is 'virus cases on the rise again'.

Thing is though, much like Donald Trump not taking death toll per million people into consideration when bumming up the US's performance against COVID, this increasing number of positive virus cases struggles against scrutiny when putting it up as a percentage of people tested.

Fact is, it's hovering very, very steadily about 0.5% of all tests coming back positive.

So whilst this makes for a very worrying graphic and sensationalises the prospect of a second wave:

_113811115_uk_daily_cases_1jul_4aug-nc.thumb.png.acc7fe4e97dc1862d34d5c086b37ab1f.png

 

 

 

 

This paints a much steadier picture:

_113811109_percentage_daily_positive_tests_inclaverage_1july3augupdated-nc.png.a1c81c526d6900a3cb594e65cee0008c.png

Can you please leave the graphs and scant analysis and projections to the thread expert.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

All we've have seen for the last 2-3 weeks is 'virus cases on the rise again'.

Thing is though, much like Donald Trump not taking death toll per million people into consideration when bumming up the US's performance against COVID, this increasing number of positive virus cases struggles against scrutiny when putting it up as a percentage of people tested.

Fact is, it's hovering very, very steadily about 0.5% of all tests coming back positive.

So whilst this makes for a very worrying graphic and sensationalises the prospect of a second wave:

_113811115_uk_daily_cases_1jul_4aug-nc.thumb.png.acc7fe4e97dc1862d34d5c086b37ab1f.png

 

 

 

 

This paints a much steadier picture:

_113811109_percentage_daily_positive_tests_inclaverage_1july3augupdated-nc.png.a1c81c526d6900a3cb594e65cee0008c.png

Comparing numbers of cases today, where we have a Track & Trace system in place which actively seeks out mild and asymptomatic cases by targetted testing of anyone in close contact with a person who tests positive (and then repeats that process if it finds any), to case numbers from before these systems went live (in particular March & April where you had to be on the verge of being hospitalised to get a test), is of limited use, but makes a good story.

Unless the actual worrying things like hospital admissions, ICU admissions, people on ventilators, and deaths start going back up, there is no real need to worry.

Even on a global level, the number of daily cases is looking like it wants to start coming down again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

All we've have seen for the last 2-3 weeks is 'virus cases on the rise again'.

Thing is though, much like Donald Trump not taking death toll per million people into consideration when bumming up the US's performance against COVID, this increasing number of positive virus cases struggles against scrutiny when putting it up as a percentage of people tested.

Fact is, it's hovering very, very steadily about 0.5% of all tests coming back positive.

So whilst this makes for a very worrying graphic and sensationalises the prospect of a second wave:

_113811115_uk_daily_cases_1jul_4aug-nc.thumb.png.acc7fe4e97dc1862d34d5c086b37ab1f.png

 

 

 

 

This paints a much steadier picture:

_113811109_percentage_daily_positive_tests_inclaverage_1july3augupdated-nc.png.a1c81c526d6900a3cb594e65cee0008c.png

As long as the positive rate is rising at the same level as the number of tests it means the virus is staying at a steady level. It would be better if the positive rate was dropping, but at least it's not going up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

Comparing numbers of cases today, where we have a Track & Trace system in place which actively seeks out mild and asymptomatic cases by targetted testing of anyone in close contact with a person who tests positive (and then repeats that process if it finds any), to case numbers from before these systems went live (in particular March & April where you had to be on the verge of being hospitalised to get a test), is of limited use, but makes a good story.

Unless the actual worrying things like hospital admissions, ICU admissions, people on ventilators, and deaths start going back up, there is no real need to worry.

Even on a global level, the number of daily cases is looking like it wants to start coming down again.

While that's true, by the time that's happening the situation is verging on out of control. We need to be aware of what is going on at the earlier stages. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

A Comparing numbers of cases today, where we have a Track & Trace system in place which actively seeks out mild and asymptomatic cases by targetted testing of anyone in close contact with a person who tests positive (and then repeats that process if it finds any), to case numbers from before these systems went live (in particular March & April where you had to be on the verge of being hospitalised to get a test), is of limited use, but makes a good story.

 B Unless the actual worrying things like hospital admissions, ICU admissions, people on ventilators, and deaths start going back up, there is no real need to worry.

Even on a global level, the number of daily cases is looking like it wants to start coming down again.

The whole point of A is to stop B from happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, madwullie said:

While that's true, by the time that's happening the situation is verging on out of control. We need to be aware of what is going on at the earlier stages. 

The problem is that we won't be aware of what is going on in the early stages if we look in the wrong places for that information.

Looking at the cases graph, in England alone the average number of daily cases has increased by around 33% since the start of July, yet the number of patients in hospital over the same period has reduced by over 62%

The warning, if you want to call it that, will be an increase in the number of people (and particularly older people) who would normally be offered the flu jab testing positive.

There's a reason we aren't seeing an increase in hospital admissions etc in the "hotspots"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

The whole point of A is to stop B from happening.

Well no, because you are comparing two very different sets of data. It'll do the job, but it's like using a flamethrower to kill a spide.

Advise a cautionary note to the vulnerable to avoid higher risk activities if you detect a little increase in a particular area.

Shutting venues down should be a last resort, not the first.

Edited by Todd_is_God
Link to comment
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.

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...