Page 2 of 342
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:44 am
by Long slender neck
They're not opposite views or 'spun'. Thought you legal types had to be clever?
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:48 am
by spen666
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:44 am
They're not opposite views or 'spun'. Thought you legal types had to be clever?
They are not opposite?
One person saying Corona is more dangerous, one saying no, its flu that is more dangerous. Sounds like opposite views to me.
Each person selectively chooses a set of figure that supports their viewpoint. That's called spin
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:52 am
by Long slender neck
My figures show that COVID-19 is the more dangerous virus. Flu is just more widespread.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:54 am
by EastDerehamO
I do wonder that if a few weeks back when the threat was known, all international passenger flights were closed down for a couple of weeks initially, then the spread would have been severely limited. If we end up in a situation with towns and cities in lockdown on a wide-scale, as is happening in Northern Italy now, one can only conclude that the authorities didn’t act appropriately earlier, and lives were lost as a result. Time will tell I guess.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:56 am
by spen666
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:52 am
My figures show that COVID-19 is the more dangerous virus. Flu is just more widespread.
No, your figures show one statistic only.
What is more dangerous is a matter of opinion. Something that kills 20 times the % of people affected is not necessarily more dangerous than something that is 2-300 times more likely to be contracted.
Like I say the figures may well be correct. Its a matter of how you interpret those figures.
You are 2-300 times more likely to die from flu. You are 20 times more likely to die from corona IF YOU HAVE CONTRACTED IT ALREADY. There we have the spin on figurres
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:01 am
by Long slender neck
spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:56 am
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:52 am
My figures show that COVID-19 is the more dangerous virus. Flu is just more widespread.
No, your figures show one statistic only.
What is more dangerous is a matter of opinion.
Something that kills 20 times the % of people affected is not necessarily more dangerous than something that is 2-300 times more likely to be contracted.
Like I say the figures may well be correct. Its a matter of how you interpret those figures.
You are 2-300 times more likely to die from flu. You are 20 times more likely to die from corona IF YOU HAVE CONTRACTED IT ALREADY. There we have the spin on figurres
Stopped reading your post here.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:07 am
by spen666
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:01 am
spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:56 am
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:52 am
My figures show that COVID-19 is the more dangerous virus. Flu is just more widespread.
No, your figures show one statistic only.
What is more dangerous is a matter of opinion.
Something that kills 20 times the % of people affected is not necessarily more dangerous than something that is 2-300 times more likely to be contracted.
Like I say the figures may well be correct. Its a matter of how you interpret those figures.
You are 2-300 times more likely to die from flu. You are 20 times more likely to die from corona IF YOU HAVE CONTRACTED IT ALREADY. There we have the spin on figurres
Stopped reading your post here.
Your choice. You are clearly blinkered and not able to see the spin you are putting on figures.
Something that kills upto 650k people per year compared to something that kills 2700 .
I am not saying either is more dangerous merely pointing out that with use of selective figures ( and failing to state the limitation on those figures) you can argue it either way. What most people would know as spin
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:23 am
by NuneatonO's
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:32 am
NuneatonO's wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:13 am
According to figures maintained by the World Health Organisation, around 2,700 people have died due to Coronavirus.
Meanwhile, it also reports that anually, there's anything between 290,000 - 650,000 deaths from respiratory diseases - linked to seasonal flu.
I guess the media just can't generate such mass hysteria from a simple flu headline these days?
There are vaccines available for flu, at the moment there isnt one for coronovirus.
Flu death rate 0.1%
Coronovirus death rate 2%
Actually, the death rate is somewhere between 1-2%; but let's not worry about glossing the facts, eh.
There are indeed vaccines for flu; but these clearly aren't stopping hundreds of thousands of ongoing deaths anually, are they?
Taking the current Tenerife Hotel example, staff (not medical professionals) are continuing to work with just basic face masks. Meanwhile, despite the mass hysteria from media reports that people are confined to their rooms, it's become apparent from the Social Media of guests staying there, that people are actually walking around the hotel freely; using the pool and sun loungers, etc.
However, let's not stop good old-fashioned media sensationalism getting in the way of reality.
Meanwhile, Australia stil exists. The entire Country wasn't burnt to a cinder......as some of the Media would have had you believe just a few weeks ago.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:38 am
by BIGRON
This Coronavirus is frightening in my opinion , l was at Homerton Hospital yesterday visiting a very poorly relative and will be there again today , i saw quite a few visitors and staff wearing masks although there are no reports of cases there
.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:39 am
by Long slender neck
spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:07 am
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:01 am
spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:56 am
No, your figures show one statistic only.
What is more dangerous is a matter of opinion.
Something that kills 20 times the % of people affected is not necessarily more dangerous than something that is 2-300 times more likely to be contracted.
Like I say the figures may well be correct. Its a matter of how you interpret those figures.
You are 2-300 times more likely to die from flu. You are 20 times more likely to die from corona IF YOU HAVE CONTRACTED IT ALREADY. There we have the spin on figurres
Stopped reading your post here.
Your choice. You are clearly blinkered and not able to see the spin you are putting on figures.
Something that kills upto 650k people per year compared to something that kills 2700 .
I am not saying either is more dangerous merely pointing out that with use of selective figures ( and failing to state the limitation on those figures) you can argue it either way. What most people would know as spin
Its a shame you dont know what the word 'dangerous' means.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:40 am
by Orient Punxx
Only a matter of weeks before the Football League programme is affected??
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:44 am
by Long slender neck
NuneatonO's wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:23 am
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:32 am
NuneatonO's wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:13 am
According to figures maintained by the World Health Organisation, around 2,700 people have died due to Coronavirus.
Meanwhile, it also reports that anually, there's anything between 290,000 - 650,000 deaths from respiratory diseases - linked to seasonal flu.
I guess the media just can't generate such mass hysteria from a simple flu headline these days?
There are vaccines available for flu, at the moment there isnt one for coronovirus.
Flu death rate 0.1%
Coronovirus death rate 2%
Actually, the death rate is somewhere between 1-2%; but let's not worry about glossing the facts, eh.
There are indeed vaccines for flu; but these clearly aren't stopping hundreds of thousands of ongoing deaths anually, are they?
Taking the current Tenerife Hotel example, staff (not medical professionals) are continuing to work with just basic face masks. Meanwhile, despite the mass hysteria from media reports that people are confined to their rooms, it's become apparent from the Social Media of guests staying there, that people are actually walking around the hotel freely; using the pool and sun loungers, etc.
However, let's not stop good old-fashioned media sensationalism getting in the way of reality.
Meanwhile, Australia stil exists. The entire Country wasn't burnt to a cinder......as some of the Media would have had you believe just a few weeks ago.
1-2%? Prove it. That is still 10x higher than the death rate from seasonal flu.
Maybe not everyone gets the flu jab?
Dont know why you're bringing the Australian bushfires into this or why you are downplaying them.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:51 am
by NuneatonO's
An example of the utter BS and scaremongering from the UK Press:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/c ... t-21578658
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:55 am
by Long slender neck
Coronavirus could kill half a million people and infect 80 per cent of Britons in a "worst case scenario", a Government document warns.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:59 am
by NuneatonO's
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:44 am
NuneatonO's wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:23 am
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 9:32 am
There are vaccines available for flu, at the moment there isnt one for coronovirus.
Flu death rate 0.1%
Coronovirus death rate 2%
Actually, the death rate is somewhere between 1-2%; but let's not worry about glossing the facts, eh.
There are indeed vaccines for flu; but these clearly aren't stopping hundreds of thousands of ongoing deaths anually, are they?
Taking the current Tenerife Hotel example, staff (not medical professionals) are continuing to work with just basic face masks. Meanwhile, despite the mass hysteria from media reports that people are confined to their rooms, it's become apparent from the Social Media of guests staying there, that people are actually walking around the hotel freely; using the pool and sun loungers, etc.
However, let's not stop good old-fashioned media sensationalism getting in the way of reality.
Meanwhile, Australia stil exists. The entire Country wasn't burnt to a cinder......as some of the Media would have had you believe just a few weeks ago.
1-2%? Prove it. That is still 10x higher than the death rate from seasonal flu.
Maybe not everyone gets the flu jab?
Dont know why you're bringing the Australian bushfires into this or why you are downplaying them.
I'm absolutely not downplaying the Australian bushfires whatsoever. I was simply using that as another example of media sensationalism; that did not mirror the full facts.
However, as someone who works within the Tourism sector; and was driving a motorhome throughout NSW, Vic. & the South Australia Territories during December/early January, I can categorically assure you that the hysteria, particularly across the European Media, was vastly exaggerated. One can only assume it was very quiet for other news.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:19 am
by Lucky7
BIGRON wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:38 am
This Coronavirus is frightening in my opinion , l was at Homerton Hospital yesterday visiting a very poorly relative and will be there again today , i saw quite a few visitors and staff wearing masks although there are no reports of cases there
.
Shock horror medical staff in a hospital wearing masks
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:23 am
by Millennial Snowflake
2% is still a pretty low death rate to be fair, and that figure will be skewed upwards due to most cases being in countries with much poorer developed healthcare systems.
Most of the fatalities in Europe are elderly people and people with pre-existing health conditions, so I'm not panicking just yet
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:26 am
by Sid Bishop
And so it begins.....Canary Wharf office of US oil company Chevron sends home 300 workers over coronavirus fears after employee reports flu-like symptoms
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... &si=744904
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:29 am
by spen666
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:39 am
spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 10:07 am
Your choice. You are clearly blinkered and not able to see the spin you are putting on figures.
Something that kills upto 650k people per year compared to something that kills 2700 .
I am not saying either is more dangerous merely pointing out that with use of selective figures ( and failing to state the limitation on those figures) you can argue it either way. What most people would know as spin
Its a shame you dont know what the word 'dangerous' means.
Its a shame you do not seem to understand the difference between facts and subjective decisions.
What you say is dangerous, someone else will say isn't. That is because it is a subjective term.
That the deaths are 2700 compared to 650K is a fact.
That the death rate AFTER CONTRACTING the virus is 2% compared to 0.1% is a fact ( assuming figures are correct. I have not checked them, but am quoting earlier figures in this thread)
Whether that makes Flu or Corona more dangerous is a matter of opinion, not fact.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:32 am
by Long slender neck
FACT- one is 20x more dangerous than the other.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:42 am
by spen666
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:32 am
FACT- one is 20x more dangerous than the other.
No, that is not a fact at all. That is your opinion based on the fact that the fatality rate AFTER CATCHING THE VIRUS is 20 times the fataility rate of the other.
Another fact is Flu kills 2-300 times the number of people each year that have ever been killed by Corona.
Whether those facts make flu or corona more dangerous is a matter of opinion (not fact)
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:46 am
by NuneatonO's
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:32 am
FACT- one is 20x more dangerous than the other.
Meanwhile, death via walking, cycling or travelling by car are significantly riskier than taking a plane.
Maybe we just need to fly everywhere then.
'Just to be on the safe side'.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:48 am
by Long slender neck
Nope, flu is more widespread, probably because its not as dangerous.
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:58 am
by spen666
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:48 am
Nope, flu is more widespread, probably because its not as dangerous.
We are simply going round in circles.
You claim a virus that kills 2700 people is more dangerous than one that kills 650,000 people a year.
You fail to appreciate the term "more dangerous" is a subjective term. No matter how many times you claim it is factual does not change the term from being subjective to being objective
Re: Coronavirus
Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2020 12:01 pm
by Sid Bishop
Prestige Worldwide wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2020 11:48 am
Nope, flu is more widespread, probably because its not as dangerous.
For myself, at 72 years old, I have had the flu many times and got over it ok, so given the choice, would far sooner catch the Flu again than this Coronavirus.
