Coronavirus

[Smendrick Feaselberg]

Wooooooooosh!

[Ornchurch]

I'm coming round to the view that this is deliberate incompetence from the government in order to achieve their original aim of herd immunity by stealth.

[Rich Tea Wellin]

Weren't amazon lined up in about april to do this and then it all got pulled?

[Dunners]

They were Primed to go?

[StillSpike]

They were Primed to go?

This story should be checked out

[Smendrick Feaselberg]

Think we need a fresh idea, this really is no big deal of the day

[Currywurst and Chips]

SAGE believe only one in 5 are properly self isolating when they get symptoms

The number is even lower in members of the household where someone is exhibiting symptoms.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... 200827.pdf

[StockholmO]

Wash your hands, wear a face mask and keep your distance. It’s not difficult stuff. f*cking lemmings. Some of you lot need to use the brain and a bit of common sense.

[BIGRON]

Saw earlier that a significant number of people are trying to/successfully obtaining tests when they don't have symptoms so FaldO isn't talking bawlocks.

I have to have a blood test every 4 weeks to kee an eye on my blood cancer , the last 3 times ive had to have a covid test before thevblood test , its not a nice experience but at least its been negative each time

[Smendrick Feaselberg]

Wash your hands, wear a face mask and keep your distance. It’s not difficult stuff. f*cking lemmings. Some of you lot need to use the brain and a bit of common sense.

People havent bothered keeping a distance round here for weeks now. Totally oblivious.

[Thor]

Further questions over the death numbers are raised by Oxford University.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... auses.html

[BoniO]

Further questions over the death numbers are raised by Oxford University.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... auses.html

Same old, same old from you Thor. Same old agenda of trying to minimise the impact of Covid. Sickening.

The article is based on data from the whole period of the outbreak. Being the Daily Mail, it is happy to headline well used soundbytes like the "killed in a car accident but recorded as covid" incident. This reporting "glitch" was removed when the 28 day rule was introduced i.e. only deaths within 28 days of being diagnosed with covid could be recorded as a covid death. So, data before the 28 day rule may have been skewed, since the 28 day rule - much less so.

So basically this whole DM article is really reflecting the period before the 28 day rule was introduced. The data since then is much more "accurate". The government revisited the fatality numbers (pre 28 day rule) and reduced the total by around 5K - about 11% I think. You can rest assured that they would have reduced the number further if they could. So, the article is deliberately misleading and intended to add petrol to the flames that the impact of covid is being exaggerated. Of course, some idiots will take this at face value, won't they Thor.

[tuffers#1]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... r-54205353

Pub crawler should have been home isolating
Not out gettin p155ed up in Bolton .

[Thor]

Bonio im just posting up the article, I didn’t comment on it, it’s up to others what they draw from it.

[faldO]

Further questions over the death numbers are raised by Oxford University.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... auses.html

Same old, same old from you Thor. Same old agenda of trying to minimise the impact of Covid. Sickening.

The article is based on data from the whole period of the outbreak. Being the Daily Mail, it is happy to headline well used soundbytes like the "killed in a car accident but recorded as covid" incident. This reporting "glitch" was removed when the 28 day rule was introduced i.e. only deaths within 28 days of being diagnosed with covid could be recorded as a covid death. So, data before the 28 day rule may have been skewed, since the 28 day rule - much less so.

So basically this whole DM article is really reflecting the period before the 28 day rule was introduced. The data since then is much more "accurate". The government revisited the fatality numbers (pre 28 day rule) and reduced the total by around 5K - about 11% I think. You can rest assured that they would have reduced the number further if they could. So, the article is deliberately misleading and intended to add petrol to the flames that the impact of covid is being exaggerated. Of course, some idiots will take this at face value, won't they Thor.

Before you lay into someone for simply posting a link to a news story perhaps you should check it out more thoroughly.

It's based on some new research available here: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/death-cer ... -of-death/ and has very little to do with the 28 day rule that you mention.

You don't have to believe the research and there may well be counter-arguments or it might completely wide of the mark, but the suggestion that people are deliberately trying to minimise the impact of covid is wrong.

The Daily Mail put a spin on it but that's a separate argument. The researchers are well-respected scientists who are doing their job to dig into the data to ensure it's accurate - it's the same team who did the "28 day rule" stuff.

It is vital that accurate data is available since it drives policy, and is literally a matter of life and death to people.

[BoniO]

Further questions over the death numbers are raised by Oxford University.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... auses.html

Same old, same old from you Thor. Same old agenda of trying to minimise the impact of Covid. Sickening.

The article is based on data from the whole period of the outbreak. Being the Daily Mail, it is happy to headline well used soundbytes like the "killed in a car accident but recorded as covid" incident. This reporting "glitch" was removed when the 28 day rule was introduced i.e. only deaths within 28 days of being diagnosed with covid could be recorded as a covid death. So, data before the 28 day rule may have been skewed, since the 28 day rule - much less so.

So basically this whole DM article is really reflecting the period before the 28 day rule was introduced. The data since then is much more "accurate". The government revisited the fatality numbers (pre 28 day rule) and reduced the total by around 5K - about 11% I think. You can rest assured that they would have reduced the number further if they could. So, the article is deliberately misleading and intended to add petrol to the flames that the impact of covid is being exaggerated. Of course, some idiots will take this at face value, won't they Thor.

Before you lay into someone for simply posting a link to a news story perhaps you should check it out more thoroughly.

It's based on some new research available here: https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/death-cer ... -of-death/ and has very little to do with the 28 day rule that you mention.

You don't have to believe the research and there may well be counter-arguments or it might completely wide of the mark, but the suggestion that people are deliberately trying to minimise the impact of covid is wrong.

The Daily Mail put a spin on it but that's a separate argument. The researchers are well-respected scientists who are doing their job to dig into the data to ensure it's accurate - it's the same team who did the "28 day rule" stuff.

It is vital that accurate data is available since it drives policy, and is literally a matter of life and death to people.

The Article is crap. It's all over the place quoting contradictory numbers & percentages. At one point it mentions that 7.8% is the amount of deaths that should not be attributed to Covid whereas the headline screams out that a third should not. The background analysis may well be of value, I'm not disputing that but nor have I investigated it. However, what is self evident is that the Article is deliberately alarmist and deliberately misleading. Typical Daily Mail bum-wiping material in fact.

[PoliticOs]

Also should be said from the very beginning (of the period we realised this was going to be serious) people have been questioning the science, downplaying it (often through fear or libertarianism) and responding to facts by saying we are being lied to, or no one is listening, or people are sheep etc.
As soon as we made it to a period of better numbers of cases/deaths those same people now have some statistics they are desperate for people to listen to. Seems like its a self fulfilling prophecy for some.

[Still's Carenae]

In April testing showed that between 25-35% of people tested were positive. Now around 1-1.5% and they are wanting lockdown.

The madness of this is that 5 times as many people are dying from flu. Why don't they swob us for that, where probably 10-25% are carrying this currently.

The numbers are mainly made up of 18-50 year olds who were not tested before, so we are not comparing like with like.

The other parts are that hospital admissions are not increasing in line with the increase of cases, even with a 2 week lag. They are gearing the hospitals up for another surge, even though only 70% of beds are being utilised at the moment, in April it was as low as 35%.

Almost the last point is about the tests. They pick up RNA as well as the DNA. Remember that theae are dead parts of the virus usually. These are increased a billion times, in doing this they are picking up dead bits that our bodies are getting rid of, which can take up to 3 months. So these tests are over sensitive and they may well be picking up what you had in June, not now.

Sweden - safe country no new rises, no lockdown.

So the government should be looking after our vulnerable sections, over 80's, obese, hypertensive and diabetic, especially males.

The message should be different- No hugging, no kissing, no getting close to people not in your family unit and keep your distance when with people outside your family unit. If you cough or sneeze into your elbow. We can then get on with our lives. This is not rocket science, but the scientists and government do not trust the people. Why should we trust them!

[Rich Tea Wellin]

In April testing showed that between 25-35% of people tested were positive. Now around 1-1.5% and they are wanting lockdown.

The madness of this is that 5 times as many people are dying from flu. Why don't they swob us for that, where probably 10-25% are carrying this currently.

Thats what i don't understand. The media have, and even the government have become obsessed with reporting number of positive tests, which is relatively meaningless considering the number of tests done every day changes, and its completely different to April/May.

The only real useful stat is % of positive tests but thats somehow very hard to find and not reported.

[Long slender neck]

Project fear

[Thor]

Project fear

PW in wake up shocker!! Glad you've seen the light young man.

[BoniO]

In April testing showed that between 25-35% of people tested were positive. Now around 1-1.5% and they are wanting lockdown.

The madness of this is that 5 times as many people are dying from flu. Why don't they swob us for that, where probably 10-25% are carrying this currently.

The numbers are mainly made up of 18-50 year olds who were not tested before, so we are not comparing like with like.

The other parts are that hospital admissions are not increasing in line with the increase of cases, even with a 2 week lag. They are gearing the hospitals up for another surge, even though only 70% of beds are being utilised at the moment, in April it was as low as 35%.

Almost the last point is about the tests. They pick up RNA as well as the DNA. Remember that theae are dead parts of the virus usually. These are increased a billion times, in doing this they are picking up dead bits that our bodies are getting rid of, which can take up to 3 months. So these tests are over sensitive and they may well be picking up what you had in June, not now.

Sweden - safe country no new rises, no lockdown.

So the government should be looking after our vulnerable sections, over 80's, obese, hypertensive and diabetic, especially males.

The message should be different- No hugging, no kissing, no getting close to people not in your family unit and keep your distance when with people outside your family unit. If you cough or sneeze into your elbow. We can then get on with our lives. This is not rocket science, but the scientists and government do not trust the people. Why should we trust them!

There's a lot of "data" there. It would be good if you could provide links to the "data" sources for each assertion. TIA.

[tuffers#1]

In April testing showed that between 25-35% of people tested were positive. Now around 1-1.5% and they are wanting lockdown.

The madness of this is that 5 times as many people are dying from flu.

Deaths in the U.S from flu april 2019 -april 2020
24,000 - 62,000

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/pr ... imates.htm

U.S deaths for Covid 199,000

https://www.google.com/search?ei=JTVnX8 ... s-wiz-serp

Are you sure 5 times more are dying from Flu ?

And we still have 3 months.to go for a calendar year

[Mick McQuaid]

quote="Still's Carenae" post_id=139071 time=1600591650 user_id=189]
In April testing showed that between 25-35% of people tested were positive. Now around 1-1.5% and they are wanting lockdown.

Until the end of April nearly all testing was pillar one - tests in hospital for people who were symptomatic or staff working in hospital. In the early days there wasn't regular testing for NHS staff. Now pillar one accounts for less than a third of all tests, if there is data on the split between patients and staff I can't easily find it, but staff tests will account for a much higher proportion. Blindingly obvious why the rates are so different and why they can't be compared.


The madness of this is that 5 times as many people are dying from flu. Why don't they swob us for that, where probably 10-25% are carrying this currently.

Er.....There is a weekly national flu report and a similar report for Covid, prevalence of covid is currently at least 10-20 times more than flu.

The numbers are mainly made up of 18-50 year olds who were not tested before, so we are not comparing like with like.

The other parts are that hospital admissions are not increasing in line with the increase of cases, even with a 2 week lag. They are gearing the hospitals up for another surge, even though only 70% of beds are being utilised at the moment, in April it was as low as 35%.

Hospital admissions are now rising, I don't think you need to be an epidemiologist to understand that the.more people are actively out and about the[ more likely they are to get it but that will then spread to people who are trying to keep themselves safe. The lag is much longer than two weeks.

Almost the last point is about the tests. They pick up RNA as well as the DNA. Remember that theae are dead parts of the virus usually. These are increased a billion times, in doing this they are picking up dead bits that our bodies are getting rid of, which can take up to 3 months. So these tests are over sensitive and they may well be picking up what you had in June, not now.

I can give a complicated answer if you want, but in short you're wrong. Tests are far more likely to give false negatives than false positives

Sweden - safe country no new rises, no lockdown.

Yes, Sweden are a great example of a different way of doing things but you have to look at the fundamentally different approach in all sorts of areas not just pick out that there'sbeen no lockdown

So the government should be looking after our vulnerable sections, over 80's, obese, hypertensive and diabetic, especially males.

Totally agree but without controlling it in the wider population that is almost impossible

The message should be different- No hugging, no kissing, no getting close to people not in your family unit and keep your distance when with people outside your family unit. If you cough or sneeze into your elbow. We can then get on with our lives. This is not rocket science, but the scientists and government do not trust the people. Why should we trust them!


[/quote]

Can't be arsed writing a longer post but lockdown or no lockdown is a moot point in the absence of a proper strategy involving well targeted testing and support to isolate when needed.

[Real Al]

Why is anyone looking at Sweden as an example? The Nordic countries as a whole got off pretty lightly, but Sweden had 4 times as many infections and deaths as all the other Nordic countries combined.