Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[beefybake]

5 minutes ago, Gaz said:

Right Todd_Is_God, I'm going to ask you a genuine question.

You're obviously a reasonably intelligent chap, capable of interpreting fairly complex details from graphs / charts / tables and disseminating it to others. You seem to be possessed with a degree of critical thinking.

Why, then, are you so comfortable with talking about the science behind coronavirus but when faced with a complete, overwhelming consensus from the respected scientific community that climate change is being accelerated by the actions of humanity do you discount that?

Because he starts with an opinion, belief..... and then looks for what he considers suitable to back up the opinion, or belief.

Scientific method starts with a question.  

Edited July 9, 2020 by beefybake

[Billy Jean King]

ONS estimates for 22/6 - 5/7 put the estimated active number of infections in England at 0.026% of the population.
Scottish estimates put it at 0.018% here.
That is clearly not "many times" less prevelant as the FM often says when explaining why we need to be cautious about importing the virus from there.
There are a number of conclusions that can be drawn from those two figures, the most likely of which is that the SG's estimate of 1,000 contagious people is an overestimation, the root cause of which is that we simply aren't testing enough.
The problem with that is it is the estimated figure which is holding back the progress in the areas we would all like to see relaxations in.
Jackson Carlaw is a bellend but he has a perfect opportunity to ask the FM why they believe they are only capturing 1 in every 10 positive cases 4 months into the pandemic. He's far too busy being a shit stirrer, bumping his gums about borders and creating soundbites to ask what would be a reasonably fair question.

As I posted further up the new England prevalence rate is clearly bollocks. It simply cannot have dropped from 130 per 100k to 26 per 100k in 2 weeks. Ours is roughly 18 per 100k. Anyone with half a brain can see that England with 642 new cases today to our 6 simply cannot have such a low prevelance all of a sudden the figures simply do not compute.

[Todd_is_God]

Just now, Gaz said:

Why, then, are you so comfortable with talking about the science behind coronavirus but when faced with a complete, overwhelming consensus from the respected scientific community that climate change is being accelerated by the actions of humanity do you discount that?

The honest answer to that would be I don't really pay too much attention to scientific data on climate change, compared to the constant data presented on Covid-19.

It seems too convenient to me. There is a lot of money to be made from sustainable energy etc etc.

If the consensus has changed to 100% then i've missed that.

I'm certainly not going to sit and argue with someone over it.

[eez-eh]

1 hour ago, stumigoo said:

This is just my own view on the gym - I know it is of course the case that I can do the same/similar exercises at home or outside in my garden but it’s like trying to decide between live football and watching football on the TV. Not a chance I’m choosing watching football on TV over going to a game. It’s so much more than the ‘thing’ you are wanting to do. Yes you are technically taking part in the same experience but actually going to the gym is a big deal for me in terms of my mental health and what I get out of it. Being able to use the other facilities like steam rooms and the pool or being able to sit and have a drink or some food afterwards in the building also adds to that. I’ve always struggled to replicate the feeling of gym based exercise by doing the same at home. It’s definitely a mental health thing for me as much as a physical thing (as is going to the football, which is also becoming a real struggle).

I understand why the government are still hesitant about gyms but I really hope we are in a position by the start of August to get them open.

Yep. I also find it far easier to get into a rhythm and push myself much more when at the gym. At home it’s far too easy to just make a half arsed attempt at it and/or decide you can’t be bothered.

P.s. anyone saying body weight exercises are the same thing is talking out their hoop.

Edited July 9, 2020 by eez-eh

[Todd_is_God]

25 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

42 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

ONS estimates for 22/6 - 5/7 put the estimated active number of infections in England at 0.026% of the population.
Scottish estimates put it at 0.018% here.
That is clearly not "many times" less prevelant as the FM often says when explaining why we need to be cautious about importing the virus from there.
There are a number of conclusions that can be drawn from those two figures, the most likely of which is that the SG's estimate of 1,000 contagious people is an overestimation, the root cause of which is that we simply aren't testing enough.
The problem with that is it is the estimated figure which is holding back the progress in the areas we would all like to see relaxations in.
Jackson Carlaw is a bellend but he has a perfect opportunity to ask the FM why they believe they are only capturing 1 in every 10 positive cases 4 months into the pandemic. He's far too busy being a shit stirrer, bumping his gums about borders and creating soundbites to ask what would be a reasonably fair question.

As I posted further up the new England prevalence rate is clearly bollocks. It simply cannot have dropped from 130 per 100k to 26 per 100k in 2 weeks. Ours is roughly 18 per 100k. Anyone with half a brain can see that England with 642 new cases today to our 6 simply cannot have such a low prevelance all of a sudden the figures simply do not compute.

I agree that is impossible.

But the ONS figures put it at 45 per100k last week, and 90 per100k 2 weeks ago.

That is a seemingly realistic, and steady reduction of ~50% per week.

Assuming the UK cases figure is accurate and not lagged, what do the ONS (and its partners in the survey) have to gain by misrepresenting or underestimating these figures?

Maybe worth pointing out that the SG's 'lower limit' estimate puts the prevelance in Scotland tomorrow at 7 per 100k. Perhaps privately they feel this is much closer to reality than 18 (hence the "many times" line, but publicly don't want to represent just 400 active cases for fear of people completely ignoring any guidance.

Edited July 9, 2020 by Todd_is_God

[HTG]

A long but mildly interesting article on the utter fucking fiasco of privatised contracting around COVID19. 

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2020/07/08/the-pro-privatization-shock-therapy-of-the-uks-covid-response/

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Why cant we be first on anything. Our virus is further suppressed than theirs. They will be lucky to be where we are now on the 25th but yet that date is there and they will stuck to it. Not everything has to be just after England ffs. Just do it if it's safe, which it almost certainly is.

We'll be first with schools back full-time . . .

[DeeTillEhDeh]

As I posted further up the new England prevalence rate is clearly bollocks. It simply cannot have dropped from 130 per 100k to 26 per 100k in 2 weeks. Ours is roughly 18 per 100k. Anyone with half a brain can see that England with 642 new cases today to our 6 simply cannot have such a low prevelance all of a sudden the figures simply do not compute.

The death trends as well seem to indicate that 3 countries have things under control and one does not.

 

[Raidernation]

Some brain donors on my Facebook posted a pic of a “Corona virus cure” bottle from 2000 and shrieked about “hiding the cure!”

No comprehension of the fact that it’s not the same fucking corona virus.




Unfriended

[Donathan]

The death trends as well seem to indicate that 3 countries have things under control and one does not.  

Do you realise that deaths reported from outside hospitals (e.g. care home/deaths at home) are highly lagged in the figures and a lot of the deaths being reported happened weeks if not months ago?

NHS England’s figures are far more reliable, and they’re showing less than 50 per day on average

[Donathan]

Also, Sturgeon claiming the England prevelance was 180 per 100k was laughable when Leicester got put into lockdown at 142 per 100k and that was 3 times higher than anywhere else in the UK

[hk blues]

18 hours ago, sjc said:

I remain to be convinced. Far too much contradictory science. I'm not saying the deaths aren't real, they clearly are.

Not at all. I live in a highly densely populated Country with the oldest populus in the world that has had cases of covid19 before Europe or America, had no enforced lockdown and yet had no spike in deaths whatsoever.

My own situation highlights this, being high risk with neutrophils of less than 1000, yet still attending a designated Covid19 treatment hospital for fortnightly chemotherapy. I've also continued to work (like everyone else) throughout.

Compare and contrast this with the UK/USA where the death toll has been huge in spite of all the lockdown restrictions. 

There was no lockdown but the equivalent measure of State of Emergency was implemented (Lockdowns not permitted under the constitution) - I'd be willing to bet, based on my daily discussions with around 15-20 Japanese students, that the State of Emergency was as effective as any lockdown.   I'm surprised that you say you've continued to work like everyone else throughout - a significant number of Japanese were moved to teleworking for several weeks during the state of emergency were they not,  as well as schools being closed?  Anyhow, the numbers are rising in the Tokyo area now so let's see. 

What exactly is your theory about what has killed almost 560,000 people if not a pandemic?  

 

[mizfit]

So how long are we giving it before someone has a massive Twitter rant about being forced to wear a mask to go shopping?

I give it 3 hours.

[doulikefish]

Cant wait to see all the clips of folk refusing to wear a face covering today 

[Billy Jean King]

I agree that is impossible.
But the ONS figures put it at 45 per100k last week, and 90 per100k 2 weeks ago.
That is a seemingly realistic, and steady reduction of ~50% per week.
Assuming the UK cases figure is accurate and not lagged, what do the ONS (and its partners in the survey) have to gain by misrepresenting or underestimating these figures?
Maybe worth pointing out that the SG's 'lower limit' estimate puts the prevelance in Scotland tomorrow at 7 per 100k. Perhaps privately they feel this is much closer to reality than 18 (hence the "many times" line, but publicly don't want to represent just 400 active cases for fear of people completely ignoring any guidance.

Given their elimination goal I would have thought if they believed the figures were close to 7 per 100k they would be singing that from the rooftops, we would almost be there.

[Gallant Pioneer]

47 minutes ago, Donathan said:

 

 

Do you realise that deaths reported from outside hospitals (e.g. care home/deaths at home) are highly lagged in the figures and a lot of the deaths being reported happened weeks if not months ago?

NHS England’s figures are far more reliable, and they’re showing less than 50 per day on average

 

 

 

49 minutes ago, Donathan said:

 

 

Do you realise that deaths reported from outside hospitals (e.g. care home/deaths at home) are highly lagged in the figures and a lot of the deaths being reported happened weeks if not months ago?

NHS England’s figures are far more reliable, and they’re showing less than 50 per day on average

 

 

So what you are saying is that prior periods which were already higher than elsewhere are being revised upwards every day. That also means that each daily figure reported will at some point in the future also be revised upwards

[PWL]

Annecdotally, observance on my train has been 100%. However, that's probably due to the fact that even the staunchest "SNPBaaaaad' type doesn't fancy the risk on a confined carriage.  Shops might be a whole different matter. 

Given that mine is a Dumbarton FC one, I'm more likely to mocked for that rather than actually wearing one in shops. 

[Todd_is_God]

I will leave this here for @virginton

 

[Detournement]

15 minutes ago, doulikefish said:

Cant wait to see all the clips of folk refusing to wear a face covering today 

In Scotland it's more likely people just won't go to the shops and this will be binned when retail sales jack knife. 

[Detournement]

3 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

I will leave this here for @virginton

 

Pure Dead Miserable will be our new national slogan.