Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Todd_is_God]

Just now, Stephen Malkmus said:

If Leitch was predicting a late Jan/Feb peak I've no idea where he got that from as it goes against the Gov's December modelling.

He is a patsy, happy to talk shite to justify a panicked response.

[101]

12 minutes ago, Left Back said:

They shat the bed and fired in additional restrictions for no justifiable reason.

Pretty sure Scotrail had to draft an interim time table, the Police had to use probationers to cover shifts, NHS Grampian publicly said they were struggling.

There is more than one reason to attempt to control.

[Left Back]

2 minutes ago, Stephen Malkmus said:

If Leitch was predicting a late Jan/Feb peak I've no idea where he got that from as it goes against the Gov's December modelling.

The number is by specimen date, not date reported.

Still miles out from the "projections" in the evidence paper restrictions were based on then.  You're on a roll here.

[Bairnardo]

1 minute ago, 101 said:

Pretty sure Scotrail had to draft an interim time table, the Police had to use probationers to cover shifts, NHS Grampian publicly said they were struggling.

There is more than one reason to attempt to control.

You're not saying these things are a reason why normal society should be able to be ceased at the drop of a hat though surely?

[Todd_is_God]

1 minute ago, 101 said:

Pretty sure Scotrail had to draft an interim time table, the Police had to use probationers to cover shifts, NHS Grampian publicly said they were struggling.

There is more than one reason to attempt to control.

These were all real issues, of course, but all were not helped by the government overestimating the severity of infection (despite SA data showing otherwise), and changing the isolation requirements.

"Living with Covid" cannot mean imposing mandatory isolation periods for no reason other than testing positive for a single, not very dangerous overall, pathogen

[101]

Just now, Bairnardo said:

You're not saying these things are a reason why normal society should be able to be ceased at the drop of a hat though surely?

No, we need an overhaul of our public services. However should events not be able to be safely carried out they should be cancelled, especially when the terror threat is still in its elevated position.

But table service doesn't exactly keep anyone safe and has an additional burden of staff working in venues so should be ditched, imo.

[Stephen Malkmus]

9 minutes ago, Left Back said:

Still miles out from the "projections" in the evidence paper restrictions were based on then.  You're on a roll here.

That's still within the Central projection of the model you quoted earlier. They were out by a few days but the worst case scenario numbers were reached fairly soon afterwards.

Edit: actually 8k cases on December 20th is in the lower end of the Worst case prediction in the model

Edited January 12, 2022 by Stephen Malkmus

[UsedToGoToCentralPark]

That's still within the Central projection of the model you quoted earlier. They were out by a few days but the worst case scenario numbers were reached fairly soon afterwards.

You are Jason Leitch AICMFP.

[superbigal]

The Tsunami alarm bells were that if cases went up by 500% then you may have 250% rise in ICU numbers allowing for Omicron being half as "serious" as Delta.

I surmise we have had a circa 500% rise in cases and feck all change to numbers in ICU.

[Stephen Malkmus]

1 minute ago, UsedToGoToCentralPark said:

5 minutes ago, Stephen Malkmus said:

That's still within the Central projection of the model you quoted earlier. They were out by a few days but the worst case scenario numbers were reached fairly soon afterwards.

You are Jason Leitch AICMFP.

I'm not even pro-restrictions any more, just correcting some facts on the case modelling

[Left Back]

2 minutes ago, Stephen Malkmus said:

That's still within the Central projection of the model you quoted earlier. They were out by a few days but the worst case scenario numbers were reached fairly soon afterwards.

You're funny.  You should post more on here.  Let me explain it simply for you.

Worst case scenario (as per the graphic you quoted) was 25000 by December 20th.  As per the "model" in the evidence paper it was still rising.  Anything remotely like the worst case scenario model would have been orders of magnitude higher than 25000 a few days later with the 2 day doubling nonsense.

The weren't out by a few days.  They were out by an era.

[Todd_is_God]

3 minutes ago, Stephen Malkmus said:

That's still within the Central projection of the model you quoted earlier. They were out by a few days but the worst case scenario numbers were reached fairly soon afterwards.

Edit: actually 8k cases on December 20th is in the lower end of the Worst case prediction in the model

Again you aren't wrong, but the scope of the worst case scenario was absolutely huge.

They modelled up to 50,000 cases per day in between Christmas and New Year, and that obviously didn't happen.

[craigkillie]

1 minute ago, superbigal said:

The Tsunami alarm bells were that if cases went up by 500% then you may have 250% rise in ICU numbers allowing for Omicron being half as "serious" as Delta.

I surmise we have had a circa 500% rise in cases and feck all change to numbers in ICU.

This was never sensible logic in the first place though. Something being half as serious but infecting twice as many people doesn't mean it will cancel out, just as if Delta had been twice as infectious we wouldn't have had twice as many people in ICU as we did. Most of the "extra" people it infects would have had minor effects anyway, just as most people who have caught covid have.

[Dons_1988]

I seem to remember reporting Scotland showing modelling that was predicting 50-60k daily cases in January/February 

[Todd_is_God]

2 minutes ago, superbigal said:

The Tsunami alarm bells were that if cases went up by 500% then you may have 250% rise in ICU numbers allowing for Omicron being half as "serious" as Delta.

I surmise we have had a circa 500% rise in cases and feck all change to numbers in ICU.

They estimated it was 50-75% less severe. It is currently estimated to be 90% less so.

Rather oddly, they decided a largely unvaccinated population with high levels of HIV had a better level of immune system defence than here. Baffling then, and looks ridiculous now.

[Todd_is_God]

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

I seem to remember reporting Scotland showing modelling that was predicting 50-60k daily cases in January/February 

60-600 deaths per day as well, remember.

[Stephen Malkmus]

1 minute ago, Todd_is_God said:

Again you aren't wrong, but the scope of the worst case scenario was absolutely huge.

They modelled up to 50,000 cases per day in between Christmas and New Year, and that obviously didn't happen.

That would have been a mega-tsunami compared to previous peaks.

2 minutes ago, Left Back said:

You're funny.  You should post more on here.  Let me explain it simply for you.

Worst case scenario (as per the graphic you quoted) was 25000 by December 20th.  As per the "model" in the evidence paper it was still rising.  Anything remotely like the worst case scenario model would have been orders of magnitude higher than 25000 a few days later with the 2 day doubling nonsense.

The weren't out by a few days.  They were out by an era.

The worst case scenario comprised a range, not an absolute number. 25000 by Dec 20th may have been the worst of the worst case numbers but it was never likely.

[101]

Another reason to go.

 

 

[Donathan]

Is this “TLDR news” the new version of the now banned Politics For All? 

[Detournement]

Looking at Travelling Tabby it's showing a whole 3 deaths this week in the 18-49 age range. 

Given that there are roughly 200,000 completely unvaccinated people in this group it shows Sturgeon's constant fear mongering up as total pish. 

You can already see the media are getting their orders to hype Long Covid again as people start to notice that unvaccinated people are getting through this peak completely unscathed. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by Detournement