Coronavirus

[jimmyp]

46 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Which ones?

Which do you think we should listen to?

What would be your minimum requirements of them in order for you to act upon their recommendations? 

[GboroRam]

1 hour ago, Cardinal said:

It seems to me in some cases decisions have been made and then data has been found to support that decision rather than the other way round. Or data has been incorrectly interpreted leading to random decisions . I have no examples to give as don't have the time to find them. Call it a gut feel. 

I find the interpretation of data always fascinating. I direct you to an excellent website - https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations. This shows how you can draw any random conclusion using data. 

For example using the below it would suggest that by spending more on science, space and technology the number of suicides by hanging, etc goes up. Therefore the conclusion would be to prevent suicides the US needs to stop spending on science, space and tech. 

 

 

Aware this is an extreme example but is it possible that this sort of thing is happening on some level with COVID? I don't know myself. Just an interesting consideration I think. 

This is a consequence of data mining. You get so much information, some of it is bound to align with other data. But I think we can see causation and correlation between a virus, and hospital admissions. Or a virus and people dying. There's a causal link there.

[Boycie]

2 hours ago, ketteringram said:

Just curious. Are you getting tested due to having symptoms? And then testing negative?

Due to feeling crap for nearly 7 days, although no ‘official 3’ symptoms, heard from various people who’d had it that they too didn’t have the official symptoms either.

I though it was best to take a test to protect family and customers.

Must be manflu19

[sage]

3 hours ago, Boycie said:

Had my second test of the year yesterday at 11.30am.

Got my all clear at 9.50pm the same night.

Now thats a impressive turn around time. 
credit where credits due.

Edit...just seen your answer...glad you haven't got Covid and hope you feel better soon.  

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, maxjam said:

We clearly need to change strategy however as this lockdown will achieve nothing,

I think "nothing" is a bit strong. It will almost certainly lower the R number slightly - which is the main purpose. And that might allow us to limp through winter without overwhelming the hospitals

But it's a sticking plaster and seems to lack any long term vision. It's then a matter of time before we relax everything again and end up back here

With hindsight you have to wonder if a series of shorter lockdowns (eg 2 weeks lockdown, 3 weeks off, repeated) would have had a similar throttling of the R number and been a bit easier on people mentally?

 

[Marriot Ram99]

9 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

I think "nothing" is a bit strong. It will almost certainly lower the R number slightly - which is the main purpose. And that might allow us to limp through winter without overwhelming the hospitals

But it's a sticking plaster and seems to lack any long term vision. It's then a matter of time before we relax everything again and end up back here

With hindsight you have to wonder if a series of shorter lockdowns (eg 2 weeks lockdown, 3 weeks off, repeated) would have had a similar throttling of the R number and been a bit easier on people mentally?

 

That would ruin the economy more and cause more dissent in my opinion, constantly coming in and out would anger alot of people and the lack of stability would have massive logistical impacts. 

[maxjam]

16 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said:

I think "nothing" is a bit strong. It will almost certainly lower the R number slightly - which is the main purpose. And that might allow us to limp through winter without overwhelming the hospitals

But it's a sticking plaster and seems to lack any long term vision. It's then a matter of time before we relax everything again and end up back here

With hindsight you have to wonder if a series of shorter lockdowns (eg 2 weeks lockdown, 3 weeks off, repeated) would have had a similar throttling of the R number and been a bit easier on people mentally?

Well yeah, clearly if everyone hides away the rate of infection will drop -  it was just a quick way of saying thats probably it for any sort of social life until well after Christmas and the New Year.

If the lockdown does indeed end at the beginning of December (IMO it will get extended, especially as there is typically several weeks lag in hospital numbers rising and deaths - the Govt will use that as justification in prolonging the lockdown) and people start having Christmas Parties etc then we'll be back exactly where we are now in January.

We clearly have no long term strategy and are just reacting to problems as they arise.

[May Contain Nuts]

I suspect that keeping schools and universities open may well ensure that the R number doesn't go down 'enough' for this to end on 2nd December, and should be considered yet another joke of a decision.

[Stive Pesley]

1 hour ago, Marriott Ram99 said:

That would ruin the economy more and cause more dissent in my opinion, constantly coming in and out would anger alot of people and the lack of stability would have massive logistical impacts. 

I'm only really wondering out loud. I think a lot of people would cope better mentally if the lockdowns were shorter and planned. It's torturous going into a month-long November lockdown which no one really believes will end on the 2nd December

From a business perspective I also think most businesses would rather short lockdowns that they could plan around rather than the current situation of constantly changing rules, tiers and dates all being done on the fly

Not saying I'm right - and the fact that no countries have done this (to my knowledge) suggests I'm not!

Just that it feels like the government's pathetic plan all along was to come out of lockdown in July - get everyone spending and feeling like it was going to be OK and then lockdown again at the last possible moment before it gets out of control.

 

 

[Pearl Ram]

                       

[G STAR RAM]

2 hours ago, SchtivePesley said:

I'm only really wondering out loud. I think a lot of people would cope better mentally if the lockdowns were shorter and planned. It's torturous going into a month-long November lockdown which no one really believes will end on the 2nd December

From a business perspective I also think most businesses would rather short lockdowns that they could plan around rather than the current situation of constantly changing rules, tiers and dates all being done on the fly

Not saying I'm right - and the fact that no countries have done this (to my knowledge) suggests I'm not!

Just that it feels like the government's pathetic plan all along was to come out of lockdown in July - get everyone spending and feeling like it was going to be OK and then lockdown again at the last possible moment before it gets out of control.

Or maybe the plan was to use summer to try and save the hospitality sector which took such a battering between April and June?

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said: Decisions on which people to save and which to let die will then have to be made.

This scenario has probably already occurred 

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Without double checking, we're above 55k deaths and an estimated 10-15% of the population have had the virus. Based on those numbers  we'd be looking at about 370-550k total deaths if we let it burn through the entire country unrestricted- equivalent to a 0.55-0.8% fatality rate. However, those figures are based on current health care conditions. Without lockdown restrictions, we'd exceed surge capacity in hospitals in just over a month. That fatality rate will therefore increase by an unknown amount. Decisions on which people to save and which to let die will then have to be made.

This scenario has probably already occurred 

[Archied]

6 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Which ones?

Cherry picked ones is my guess?

[Eddie]

6 hours ago, Cardinal said:

It seems to me in some cases decisions have been made and then data has been found to support that decision rather than the other way round. Or data has been incorrectly interpreted leading to random decisions . I have no examples to give as don't have the time to find them. Call it a gut feel. 

I find the interpretation of data always fascinating. I direct you to an excellent website - https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations. This shows how you can draw any random conclusion using data. 

For example using the below it would suggest that by spending more on science, space and technology the number of suicides by hanging, etc goes up. Therefore the conclusion would be to prevent suicides the US needs to stop spending on science, space and tech. 

 

 

Aware this is an extreme example but is it possible that this sort of thing is happening on some level with COVID? I don't know myself. Just an interesting consideration I think. 

Are you Pastafarian, perchance?

[Eddie]

4 hours ago, maxjam said:

Well yeah, clearly if everyone hides away the rate of infection will drop -  it was just a quick way of saying thats probably it for any sort of social life until well after Christmas and the New Year.

If the lockdown does indeed end at the beginning of December (IMO it will get extended, especially as there is typically several weeks lag in hospital numbers rising and deaths - the Govt will use that as justification in prolonging the lockdown) and people start having Christmas Parties etc then we'll be back exactly where we are now in January.

We clearly have no long term strategy and are just reacting to problems as they arise.

I think you have nailed the government's thinking here - short-termism.

Lockdown now.

Then, some time in December, FREEDOM!!!

Followed by lockdown in January.

[G STAR RAM]

6 hours ago, jimmyp said:

Which do you think we should listen to?

What would be your minimum requirements of them in order for you to act upon their recommendations? 

I dont think there is a problem with SAGE.

I think the problem is that they are not considering anything other than Covid and dont seem to be listening to any other concerns or views.

The one thing Whitty and Vallance will be remembered for is Covid 19 so you can understand them trying to limit the deaths.

 

[ariotofmyown]

7x more deaths today than there were on the day the first lockdown was announced.

[Rev]

Just come back from Nottingham City centre after a meal.

Sanitised and temp checked on way in to restaurant, masked when going to toilet, sanitised on way out, literally nothing more the restaurant could do, even to the extent of posters in the toilet instructing you on how to wash your hands properly.

5 minute walk to the taxi rank, and it was all too obvious why we're locking down again. 

 Large groups of feral youths, drinking, chanting, urinating in the street, and generally acting like complete nobs, even though no pubs are open.

Have a good time nobheads, thanks for ruining it for everyone else you selfish cnuts.

 

[rammieib]

R number nearly back down to 1 according to Zoe App .... before lockdown has even started.