Coronavirus

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, Tamworthram said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in denial, I also don't doubt the seriousness of this virus but, I would just query the maths behind your scenario.

What we don't know is how many of those that have sadly lost their lives would have been amongst the normal deaths (horrible phrases but I can't think of any other way of saying it).

What would prove it is if the normal mortality rate (based on a number of years, not just one year in isolation) is say 10,000 per week but the current mortality rate is say 14,000 per week.

I would emphasise again, I'm no @smiths_tavrn I really do think this is a very serious situation and it is, in my opinion, causing a very large number of deaths.

That is why I dont understand the vitriol shown towards @smiths_tavrn because that is literally what he was saying.

Maybe he was just winding posters up with his posting.style?

[Tamworthram]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

That is why I dont understand the vitriol shown towards @smiths_tavrn because that is literally what he was saying.

Maybe he was just winding posters up with his posting.style?

yes but I think he was taking it too far and almost suggesting (from what I recall) that it wasn't a problem. I'm sure one of his statements suggested that it's no more serious than the common cold (I may have miss-remembered). 

[Gritstone Ram]

1 minute ago, Tamworthram said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in denial, I also don't doubt the seriousness of this virus but, I would just query the maths behind your scenario.

What we don't know is how many of those that have sadly lost their lives would have been amongst the normal deaths (horrible phrases but I can't think of any other way of saying it).

What would prove it is if the normal mortality rate (based on a number of years, not just one year in isolation) is say 10,000 per week but the current mortality rate is say 14,000 per week.

I would emphasise again, I'm no @smiths_tavrn I really do think this is a very serious situation and it is, in my opinion, causing a very large number of deaths.

I find it really difficult to work out who would survive and who would die. What I do know is I have an uncle who has got emphysema and although his health isn’t very good he keeps on going. I know, without any medical experts advise, that he would not survive this virus, however I think he would carry on if he doesn’t. I think this is where the majority of the extra deaths will come from.

[Coneheadjohn]

1 hour ago, JoetheRam said:

July - peak A&E admissions from alcohol poisoning/fighting.

Everyone will go daft!

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, Tamworthram said:

yes but I think he was taking it too far and almost suggesting (from what I recall) that it wasn't a problem. I'm sure one of his statements suggested that it's no more serious than the common cold (I may have miss-remembered). 

Possibly, but until people can provide any stats which prove otherwise, it's silly to write his thoughts off as being stupid.

 

[RamNut]

14 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Nope.

https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd8-11ea-89df-41bea055720b

It’s not saying that half have been infected. It’s using different models to predict outcomes.

Quote

If we were suddenly seeing a surge in hidden pneumonia cases since mid-February, that would tell us we’re in deep, deep doo-doo; that this thing is like Italy; that we’re going to suddenly skyrocket and our hospitals are going to be overwhelmed. But if, by contrast, the same number of cases are found in the historic samples going back to the first of January, that would tell us, “Okay, it’s gradually unfolding,

It’s basically saying they don’t know and that antibody testing is required to determine how many people have had it, then they can predict the number of deaths etc. 

[Steve How Hard?]

49 minutes ago, Van Cone De Head said:

 

Had to smile at a chap who came down with a load of lube in his trolley,I just looked at him  

and told him to have a nice day.

You miserable sod. I thought you would have given me discount on that since I was bulk buying and we sort of know each other. ?

[Archied]

5 hours ago, RamNut said:

I must admit I can never tell if David Icke is totally serious. He seems to have made a comfortable income out of his books and website traffic. There is clearly a market for this stuff. He is obviously intelligent and has become a skilled and persuasive speaker, but......it borders on self-parody at times. When he logs off, does he fall about laughing?

If he realises that he has got it wrong and the moon really isn’t a gigantic alien spaceship, does he plough on regardless or what?

His first book , (it doesn’t have to be like this ,) was quality read ,it was when he was very much into the Green Party and it really questioned big business, government and religion 

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, RamNut said:

It’s not saying that half have been infected. It’s using different models to predict outcomes.

Hence why I said it's a big IF.

But if its medical experts from Oxford University, modelling from data already available, then for me it carries more credibility, than sensationalist reporters or part time experts on Facebook/Twitter.

[Rev]

18 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in denial, I also don't doubt the seriousness of this virus but, I would just query the maths behind your scenario.

What we don't know is how many of those that have sadly lost their lives would have been amongst the normal deaths (horrible phrases but I can't think of any other way of saying it).

What would prove it is if the normal mortality rate (based on a number of years, not just one year in isolation) is say 10,000 per week but the current mortality rate is say 14,000 per week.

I would emphasise again, I'm no @smiths_tavrn I really do think this is a very serious situation and it is, in my opinion, causing a very large number of deaths.

A bonus side effect of the measures, apparently far less people are coming down with seasonal flu and other such ailments, due to us all washing our hands more.

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, Archied said:

His first book , (it doesn’t have to be like this ,) was quality read ,it was when he was very much into the Green Party and it really questioned big business, government and religion 

I've half heartedly watched some of his material.

For anyone who thinks he is coming out of the woodwork and making his latest material up to fit coronavirus are very wrong, and this is the sort of thing he has been talking about for a long time.

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

A bonus side effect of the measures, apparently far less people are coming down with seasonal flu and other such ailments, due to us all washing our hands more.

Or could it be that Coronavirus is just replacing normal seasonal flu?

[RamNut]

6 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Hence why I said it's a big IF.

But if its medical experts from Oxford University, modelling from data already available, then for me it carries more credibility, than sensationalist reporters or part time experts on Facebook/Twitter.

They are not modelling from data already available...thats their whole point. They are arguing the need for testing data.

[Tamworthram]

12 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Possibly, but until people can provide any stats which prove otherwise, it's silly to write his thoughts off as being stupid.

 

well the overwhelming medical and scientific "experts" seem to be suggesting that it is a major problem and causing a significant number of deaths. 

 

[BaaLocks]

1 hour ago, BaaLocks said:

Because you don't die on day one and also because even with us all being indoors there will still be infection spread now amongst those that have it (NHS workers) who are highly contagious. Plus, if others follow Matt Hancock's lead and are out and about only seven days after contagion (not 14 as recommended by the WHO) I suspect we will see more and more unnecessary cases in our hospitals. 

And not just Matt - this is an image from the opening of the Nightingale Hospital. I'm sorry to get straight on the back of certain people but I seriously doubt we have even the slightest clue what's going on. Surely the PR Rozzers should have got everyone before the cameras came and said to every person 'whatever you do, wherever you do it, make sure you are more than two metres from the person next to you. If you get your dick out and wave it in front of the camera, make sure you are two metres from the next person. Just be two metres away.'. What is the point of having everyone locked up if you are going to let journalists or whoever stroll about like they are back at the Cheltenham Festival?

[G STAR RAM]

3 minutes ago, RamNut said:

They are not modelling from data already available...thats their whole point. They are arguing the need for testing data.

Are they not modelling from data available from China?

[G STAR RAM]

4 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

well the overwhelming medical and scientific "experts" seem to be suggesting that it is a major problem and causing a significant number of deaths. 

Should be easy to provide the data to back this up then?

All I'm seeing so far is 'x amount of people have died with coronavirus'

That stat means absolutely nothing.

It's like me saying 'x amount of people have died after saying they have a headache' and then concluding headaches kill people.

[RamNut]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

Are they not modelling from data available from China?

They have just got a range of hypothetical models leading to different outcomes. They are then saying that if we had antibody test results they could then decide which model is the most accurate and thereby give a more informed prediction of the outcome.

 

[G STAR RAM]

Just now, RamNut said:

They have just got a range of hypothetical models leading to different outcomes. They are then saying that if we had antibody test results they could then decide which model is the most accurate and thereby give a more informed prediction of the outcome.

 

If their modelling is correct and 50% of us have/had it, then what would your conclusion be then?

[Tamworthram]

6 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Should be easy to provide the data to back this up then?

All I'm seeing so far is 'x amount of people have died with coronavirus'

That stat means absolutely nothing.

It's like me saying 'x amount of people have died after saying they have a headache' and then concluding headaches kill people.

I know what you mean but, call me naive, in the absence of any such data I feel the need to trust the medical and scientific experts. It can't possibly be a worldwide conspiracy or over-reaction can it?