Coronavirus

[jimmyp]

8 minutes ago, Archied said:

Oops , Albert will be along any minute to give you a good telling off in a very long post ,,, get your tin ( foil ) hat on?

What’s in that report that makes you think Albert will give maxjam a good telling off?

What do you think of the report?

[Bob The Badger]

49 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said:

Bob, almost an identical scenario to me as I also scored 149 (at Manchester University).

I never made it to a meeting thankfully and pulled the plug on membership after about a year.

I actually got free accommodation using the MENSA magazine Entre Nous after posting a free ad.

I had a biz trip to Minnesota that I had deliberately timed for when the LA Rams were playing the Vikings. (Big Rams fan - but of course we lost on overtime)

I placed an ad asking for a room for free and this woman and her guy Patrick offered me a spare room to use for two nights.

Weeeellll, Patrick turned out be a German Shepherd, the house turned out to only have one bathroom (through her bedroom as an en suite) and she had strong Irish heritage.

I had no idea that Minnesota outside of Boston and New York has the highest population or Irish people in the US and NORAID were very active/popular around there.

The English were not as popular, as I found out after she took me to an Irish bar for a night of revelery/abuse.

In fairness, the only REAL Irish person in there (who was born in Ireland and just visiting) I spoke to was great, but the 2nd and 3rd generation Irish were utter knobs to me and made me feel really hated.

To cut a long story short, I got pizzed and then when we gotback needed a pee in the night. I was scared to death of wandering through her bedroom in my boxer shorts with Patrick there. So I went outside in the ducking snow freezing my nads off for a leak.

Good times.

[Archied]

50 minutes ago, jimmyp said:

What’s in that report that makes you think Albert will give maxjam a good telling off?

What do you think of the report?

Point 1  ,  just a wild guess

point 2   , seems some interesting points but to be fair I will be interested to hear opinions on how much sway the bmj should have or has,

I do know that there are other sensible fairly qualified scientific and medical people who have a different view from the gov line and it’s beyond daft to just keep lumping them in one big pool of cranks and I know my opinion is the damage being done is going to be far worse than the virus

[Eddie]

7 hours ago, Normanton Lad said:

You’ve presented an interesting paradox. Because you scored very high on an IQ test I would take advice from you on most things rather than from someone who scored lowly on an IQ test. But you are advising us to ignore the evidence from IQ tests because it is rubbish. I don’t know whether to accept your advice or not.

'Intelligence', as far as measures like the Cattell Scale (the one which used to be used for Mensa entrance tests) are concerned, can be simply and succinctly defined as "The ability to perform well in intelligence tests".

I perform extremely well in intelligence tests, but I wouldn't dream of suggesting that you follow my advice in any subject apart from those that are my proven strengths.

 

[Grumpy Git]

27 minutes ago, Eddie said:

'Intelligence', as far as measures like the Cattell Scale (the one which used to be used for Mensa entrance tests) are concerned, can be simply and succinctly defined as "The ability to perform well in intelligence tests".

I perform extremely well in intelligence tests, but I wouldn't dream of suggesting that you follow my advice in any subject apart from those that are my proven strengths.

 

??

As well as the stuff I know, I have a great sideline in complete baalocks.

[Albert]

4 hours ago, maxjam said:

When good science is suppressed by the medical-political complex, people die

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425

Pretty damning report tbh

It's not really a 'report', rather, it's an editorial. It is important to know and understand the difference. 

With that said, I complete agree with them. There has been a worrying politicisation of Covid-19 in places like the UK and the USA. The ignoring of the leading experts for the ones that are saying what they want, and doing so for political gain has been troubling, and this has, in part, led to the ineffective response that the UK has had. The USA's example is even more worrisome, as there are suggestions of the CDC being repurposed for political gain, particularly around the US election. The rush on antiviral drugs, for which there is limited to no support, has also been very concerning. 

While Australia isn't perfect in this regard, the big issues being around things like climate change, our public service has worked effectively to advise the government, and Covid-19 has, at a government level at least, remained apolitical. This can be best seen by governments on both sides of the political spectrum following similar strategies. This has been very effective overall. 

The other point you're right about is that it's certainly not just 'following the science' as that's a poorly defined term. What people mean most of the time when they refer to this is that people should follow the advice of their leading scientists, but when this is the case, saying that they should follow the expert advice is more exact. 

[maxjam]

Well we may not have found the right solution to dealing with covid in the UK (or pretty much anywhere in the EU for that matter) but regardless of what @Albert says about Australia their approach would bring civil war to the streets of Europe. 

[ariotofmyown]

8 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Well we may not have found the right solution to dealing with covid in the UK (or pretty much anywhere in the EU for that matter) but regardless of what @Albert says about Australia their approach would bring civil war to the streets of Europe. 

Those were the rules in Spain (at least Madrid) back when 100s were dying every day in March.

[maxjam]

Just now, ariotofmyown said:

Those were the rules in Spain (at least Madrid) back when 100s were dying every day in March.

Australia are doing it for approx 30 infections...

[Albert]

10 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Well we may not have found the right solution to dealing with covid in the UK (or pretty much anywhere in the EU for that matter) but regardless of what @Albert says about Australia their approach would bring civil war to the streets of Europe. 

Civil war over lives and livelihoods being saved? You seriously think so little of Europe?

It's not that Europe doesn't know approaches that could have worked, it's that they ignored them for politicised reasons, as discussed above. 'We're too impatient to achieve anything' isn't a defence for what has happened. The crisis was politicised, people died. 

[Albert]

2 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Australia are doing it for approx 30 infections...

Exactly as we should. First major outbreak since April, and these 6 days should give us the time to get a fuller picture of where the infections have occurred. This, in turn, will see us out of lockdown quicker, and back to normal again. 

[G STAR RAM]

20 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Well we may not have found the right solution to dealing with covid in the UK (or pretty much anywhere in the EU for that matter) but regardless of what @Albert says about Australia their approach would bring civil war to the streets of Europe. 

I thought life was normal in Australia because of their approach?

[maxjam]

8 minutes ago, Albert said:

Civil war over lives and livelihoods being saved? You seriously think so little of Europe?

Civil was a bit hyperbolic - but you'd get far bigger protests than we've already been having.

If Aussie's are happy with literally not being able to go out of your house every time there is a minor outbreak - at the cost of 1000s of jobs and $millions per week then thats great.  Just sayin' its not gonna happen here regardless of the human cost, people won't stand for it.

[maxjam]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

I thought life was normal in Australia because of their approach?

That would be the 'new' normal.

[G STAR RAM]

12 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Those were the rules in Spain (at least Madrid) back when 100s were dying every day in March.

So Spain are rid of it now then I'm assuming?

[Albert]

15 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Civil was a bit hyperbolic - but you'd get far bigger protests than we've already been having.

If Aussie's are happy with literally not being able to go out of your house every time there is a minor outbreak - at the cost of 1000s of jobs and $millions per week then thats great.  Just sayin' its not gonna happen here regardless of the human cost, people won't stand for it.

Well, when we've had 200 something days of normal, while the rest of the World is seeing increasing loss of lives and loss of livelihoods... 6 days, even a month of this, is worth it for that. 

15 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I thought life was normal in Australia because of their approach?

It was, but there was a breach in the hotel quarantine system, which as it was a large family has led to a significant outbreak here in Adelaide. The result has been that we're in lockdown for 6 days while they ascertain the extent of the outbreak, then we'll be back to harsher restrictions until the case load is back to where it belongs; zero. 

Outside of South Australia, there are no cases of community transmission going on, and things are pretty normal. State of Origin happened in Queensland the other day in front of a full house at Lang Park even, though I'm not convinced that was the best idea still. 

Again, if a few weeks of quarantine once a every 9 months is the cost of what we've achieved, I'll take it. It's a hell of a lot less restrictions and lockdowns than elsewhere, and that's before even considering the other benefits, such as virtually no deaths from Covid, etc. 

[Eddie]

3 hours ago, maxjam said:

Australia are doing it for approx 30 infections...

And THAT's how you control this thing.

It's not luck that they manage to respond in an efficient way. It's acting in a responsible way. But when has that ever been an acceptable approach in this sceptered isle?

[Albert]

34 minutes ago, Eddie said:

And THAT's how you control this thing.

It's not luck that they manage to respond in an efficient way. It's acting in a responsible way. But when has that ever been an acceptable approach in this sceptered isle?

They've also just announced that we're coming out of it early thanks to new information that has come to light. 

The trigger to lockdown was someone supposedly getting infected through a takeaway pizza, with the place being open for days after that time. This lead to very serious concerns that this could have acted as a 'seeding event' for the whole city, so the lockdown was intended to do a 'ringfence' approach of contacting all people who had food from this business, and all of their close contacts. 

As it turns out, the person in question didn't get a takeaway pizza, they worked there. The reason for their lie has not been revealed, but based on that, and what they have found in the last 48 hours otherwise, means they have chosen to relax the restrictions from midnight tomorrow. 

Honestly, very impressed with how open and honest they have been through all of this, and how decisive their action has been. Will be interesting to see what happens through the next week or so. 

[Archied]

8 hours ago, Albert said:

Well, when we've had 200 something days of normal, while the rest of the World is seeing increasing loss of lives and loss of livelihoods... 6 days, even a month of this, is worth it for that. 

It was, but there was a breach in the hotel quarantine system, which as it was a large family has led to a significant outbreak here in Adelaide. The result has been that we're in lockdown for 6 days while they ascertain the extent of the outbreak, then we'll be back to harsher restrictions until the case load is back to where it belongs; zero. 

Outside of South Australia, there are no cases of community transmission going on, and things are pretty normal. State of Origin happened in Queensland the other day in front of a full house at Lang Park even, though I'm not convinced that was the best idea still. 

Again, if a few weeks of quarantine once a every 9 months is the cost of what we've achieved, I'll take it. It's a hell of a lot less restrictions and lockdowns than elsewhere, and that's before even considering the other benefits, such as virtually no deaths from Covid, etc. 

So from what your saying the way to handle it is the world locks down until the case load is zero? Then locks down regionally if a single case appears for a virus that kills less than 1% of those infected ,,, have I got that right?

[Albert]

33 minutes ago, Archied said:

So from what your saying the way to handle it is the world locks down until the case load is zero? Then locks down regionally if a single case appears for a virus that kills less than 1% of those infected ,,, have I got that right?

No, the point is that aiming for elimination, then maintaining it, is a better strategy for lives and livelihoods, and is being demonstrated by numerous countries, achieving this in a range of different ways. 

In South Australia's case, the reason for the lockdown was concern about a handful of cases and their contacts that suggested that they did not have a handle on contacts, nor the reproduction rate of this strain of the virus. With that sorted, they have quickly moved to end the lockdown 3 days in. 

The real point is that the health authorities should be the ones calling the shots, and you shouldn't be dithering on decision making. We'll see how effective this is for South Australia in the coming weeks though. If they've played this right, 3 days of lockdown out of the last over 200 seems a pretty good deal for the number of lives and livelihoods saved.