Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

1 minute ago, craigkillie said:

An R number is a numerical calculation based on interpreting the existing data, therefore a statistician is literally the best qualified person to comment on it.

Again what are your qualifications here?  We're sitting here with two laymen parroting another one to undermine the actual experts in the field.  

[G51]

1 minute ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

Again what qualifications do you have to say the published R rate is clearly wrong?  This is what's wrong with society, we've had enough of experts etc.  You or he are laymen spouting off through wishful thinking.

What qualifications? Well, I completed primary school, which is enough for me to know that 0.61 (London's current R rate) - 0.7 (The initial estimate of the impact of the new strain on the R number) = -0.09 (What the R rate would look like if this new strain did not exist).

Given that a negative R is a theoretical impossibility, then I think it's more than reasonable to say "Hang on, something's not quite right here, maybe those initial estimates (that were given as between 0.46 - 0.8 with a 95% CI and no explanation on how this was calculated) might be a touch off here, we should consider whether this needs to be revised down."

It's not as simple as 0.61 - 0.7 = -0.09, but it's a fag-packet calculation that shows the initial estimate is off.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

Just now, G51 said:

What qualifications? Well, I completed primary school, which is enough for me to know that 0.61 (London's current R rate) - 0.7 (The initial estimate of the impact of the new strain on the R number) = -0.09 (What the R rate would look like if this new strain did not exist).

Given that a negative R is a theoretical impossibility, then I think it's more than reasonable to say "Hang on, something's not quite right here, maybe those initial estimates (that were given as between 0.46 - 0.8 with a 95% CI and no explanation on how this was calculated) might be a touch off here, we should consider whether this needs to be revised down."

It's not as simple as 0.61 - 0.7 = -0.09, but it's a fag-packet calculation that shows the initial estimate is off.

Alright well I'll stick to the people who know what they're talking about if that's all the same.  

[Billy Jean King]

I don't think so actually.  I think they aren't that stupid but are happy for people to think its incompetence.
If you look at their actions all the way through this they have done this, they have chosen courses of action that have caused increased spread and cases to increase. 
This is because they are pursuing a path of herd immunity, so I would imagine the plan was keep the planes flying for a few days make sure we get that strain too then stop them and go 'awww we were just too late, again, can you believe how unlucky we are?'
Its the same with everything with Tories. People make the mistake of believing they are decent people who are just incompetent or have different ideas about how to go about things. They aren't decent people, they are absolute monsters, and when you look at it like that their actions in every area make much more sense.

That's bollocks. You are basically saying they are intentionally importing more virulent strains knowing full well the NHS is already at breaking point. They might be incompetent but they aren't psychopaths.

[Aladdin]

2 minutes ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

Again what are your qualifications here?  We're sitting here with two laymen parroting another one to undermine the actual experts in the field.  

Yeah, what qualifications does @craigkillie have to conclude that a statistician is best qualified to interpret statistics?

In fact what qualifications do I have to even pose such a question?  There's no BA in Philosophy lurking down the back of the couch.

[Bairnardo]

Again what are your qualifications here?  We're sitting here with two laymen parroting another one to undermine the actual experts in the field.  

And a multi account, multi banned troll from a Scottish football forum most recently seen claiming his mum was a better football manager than Jose Mourinho, and making up lies about doctors in Ireland, apparently

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

1 minute ago, Billy Jean King said:

12 minutes ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

I don't think so actually.  I think they aren't that stupid but are happy for people to think its incompetence.
If you look at their actions all the way through this they have done this, they have chosen courses of action that have caused increased spread and cases to increase. 
This is because they are pursuing a path of herd immunity, so I would imagine the plan was keep the planes flying for a few days make sure we get that strain too then stop them and go 'awww we were just too late, again, can you believe how unlucky we are?'
Its the same with everything with Tories. People make the mistake of believing they are decent people who are just incompetent or have different ideas about how to go about things. They aren't decent people, they are absolute monsters, and when you look at it like that their actions in every area make much more sense.

That's bollocks. You are basically saying they are intentionally importing more virulent strains knowing full well the NHS is already at breaking point. They might be incompetent but they aren't psychopaths.

Erm....yes they are, without question.  Psychopaths and sociopaths is exactly what they are.

[TheScarf]

Fuck me, get this thread closed down.

[G51]

4 minutes ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

Alright well I'll stick to the people who know what they're talking about if that's all the same.  

If you can't engage on the substance, then maybe it's best you do.

[renton]

16 minutes ago, G51 said:

I think it's perfectly reasonable for a statistician to review and scrutinise the data and say "Something doesn't add up here". It's then for a virologist or epidemiologist to explain that.

I don't think there's much doubt that the new strain is more transmissible (the proof is that it continues to make up a greater percentage of cases) but 70% transmissible is clearly wrong, otherwise the lockdowns wouldn't be working. If London's R rate is currently sitting at 0.61, how is it possible for this new strain to add up to 0.7 on the R rate (which is what was originally claimed)?

 

In fairness the actual Ferguson paper said it had an additive effect to R of between 0.4 and 0.7, and even that was the aggregated medians of about 4 different models.

[Carnoustie Young Guvnor]

1 minute ago, Aladdin said:

Yeah, what qualifications does @craigkillie have to conclude that a statistician is best qualified to interpret statistics?

In fact what qualifications do I have to even pose such a question?  There's no BA in Philosophy lurking down the back of the couch.

Yeah none whatsoever, nobody on here is qualified to say this random on Twitter is in a better place to assess the R number than the people actually doing it for the government.  Its wishful thinking.

[Erih Shtrep]

If the Prime minister has imported the Brazilian variant via his 'Flying into the UK is a great idea'  strategy it should the latest in a long line of reasons for him to resign.  

[mizfit]

 
 

Well goodbye my bonus.

[G51]

Just now, renton said:

In fairness the actual Ferguson paper said it had an additive effect to R of between 0.4 and 0.7, and even that was the aggregated medians of about 4 different models.

It did (I covered that in my subsequent post).

My main gripe with this tbh is that when it was published, everyone ran with 0.7 and people lost their fucking minds. Now that is clearly less than that though, there's absolutely zero coverage.

I get that you always want to be cautious with this stuff, but the flip side is when you're talking about a figure that has been shown to be wrong, you're worrying people unnecessarily.

[Billy Jean King]

Erm....yes they are, without question.  Psychopaths and sociopaths is exactly what they are.

WoW ! And who does this description extend to within the UK wide response ?

[renton]

1 minute ago, G51 said:

It did (I covered that in my subsequent post).

My main gripe with this tbh is that when it was published, everyone ran with 0.7 and people lost their fucking minds. Now that is clearly less than that though, there's absolutely zero coverage.

I get that you always want to be cautious with this stuff, but the flip side is when you're talking about a figure that has been shown to be wrong, you're worrying people unnecessarily.

Well, yeah I agree with that. Media was always going to run with the more headline making number. I mean one of the models suggests the effect has a median of 0.36 with 95% confidence intervals of 0.11 and 0.58... 

[craigkillie]

13 minutes ago, Carnoustie Young Guvnor said:

Again what are your qualifications here?  We're sitting here with two laymen parroting another one to undermine the actual experts in the field.  

I've got a PhD in statistics.

[Todd_is_God]

4 minutes ago, renton said:

In fairness the actual Ferguson paper said it had an additive effect to R of between 0.4 and 0.7, and even that was the aggregated medians of about 4 different models.

The WHO said it had nothing to do with the new variant at all, and the increase was due to an increase in household mixing.

Unsurprisingly, with schools being closed now for over 3 weeks, and the Christmas shopping rush over, the R rate is decreasing again.

[Erih Shtrep]

1 minute ago, G51 said:

It did (I covered that in my subsequent post).

My main gripe with this tbh is that when it was published, everyone ran with 0.7 and people lost their fucking minds. Now that is clearly less than that though, there's absolutely zero coverage.

I get that you always want to be cautious with this stuff, but the flip side is when you're talking about a figure that has been shown to be wrong, you're worrying people unnecessarily.

Fair point.   Equally I'd like the politicians and be honest enough to say this strain is more deadly.   The UK ( at the minute ) has the highest daily death rates in the world per capita.   We've seen Germany comfortably dealing with the first wave seeing death numbers treble.   The current death rates in Scotland alone is higher than the US (adjusted for population), and it's off the scale in England.  

[MP_MFC]

c16k vaccinated yesterday. Keeping pace at this rate I presume until all the over 80s are done and then can begin to ramp up once bigger centres come available for the lower priority tiers