When will this shit end?

[gizmoman]

9 minutes ago, Cream Soda said:

Maybe part of it is down to the number of people dying WITH Covid 19 or "after testing positive for Covid 19" being included in the figures (even though it might not have been the actual/direct cause of death)?  We are aware of it now and looking for it, whereas deaths may still have been occurring from Covid then (albeit fewer) but being recorded as pneumonia, other respiratory problems etc.  Deaths from other causes such as a heart attack would have just gone down as that and never been tested for Covid.    I believe they count every positive tested death in the US in the stats (regardless of whether it caused the death) but I'm not sure if it is the same here.  Seems a pretty bizarre way of doing things when you think about it.

I'm talking about overall death rates, it doesn't matter what is on the death certificate, if Covid  is more deadly than say regular flu and it was around since December there would have been a spike in deaths well before March (assuming it does spread pretty quickly). If it isn't as deadly or transmissible as has been said we have killed the economy for nothing, simply shielding old peoples homes and the most vunerable would have reduced the spread.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

6 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

I'm talking about overall death rates, it doesn't matter what is on the death certificate, if Covid  is more deadly than say regular flu and it was around since December there would have been a spike in deaths well before March (assuming it does spread pretty quickly). If it isn't as deadly or transmissible as has been said we have killed the economy for nothing, simply shielding old peoples homes and the most vunerable would have reduced the spread.

I see what you mean, too. But is it not possible that it is just far less deadly than we think? The way I’m imagining it is a a graph with daily deaths claiming to their peak, which is obviously data we know and reflected in the stats, with a corresponding line a long way above that, which reflects the actual number of cases we’ve had. Either way I think this can only be a positive, but something somewhere doesn’t really add up either.

[gizmoman]

55 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

Huge increase in muggings incoming then...

The only conclusion you can take from this is that for SOME reason they don't want this app to work, and by extension don't actually want the testing and tracing to work either. It isn't some difficult technological thing older politicians don't get- they themselves use phones and know people don't have them unlocked. This is deliberate but why? 

If you believe they are trying to keep this crisis going until a vaccine can be rolled out then it makes perfect sense, If you listen to Gates and the WHO (same thing) a vaccine is the only solution, they don't even want to consider any other remedy, as time goes on this agenda should be more obvious. People on here don't want to hear it but Gates' involvement with big pharma and his history with toxic vaccines in developing countries needs to be looked at by everyone. Go read the work of Robert F. Kennedy JNR.  (JFK's nephew).

[Toilet Duck]

11 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I see what you mean, too. But is it not possible that it is just far less deadly than we think? The way I’m imagining it is a a graph with daily deaths claiming to their peak, which is obviously data we know and reflected in the stats, with a corresponding line a long way above that, which reflects the actual number of cases we’ve had. Either way I think this can only be a positive, but something somewhere doesn’t really add up either.

I expect you are correct. Even if we just take the estimate of 10X infections compared to those we detect (more and more evidence supporting this, whereas the 50X found in California was seriously flawed), then you can divide the CFR by 10. That puts it well under 1% fatality rate. An accurate serology test will help to determine this (none of them are accurate enough at the moment, but they will get more accurate as more people are infected, or we'll get better tests). There's a new test coming that works within 24 hours of infection (before you become infectious), still don't know how accurate it is though! A company I'm working with (to make a new breast cancer test) have pivoted their technology and have a new rapid test that gives results in 45 minutes, just launching now, development data looks good, but we'll see how that one works too (it's a rapid PCR, not an antibody test, we were working with them to make cheap breast cancer diagnostics for developing countries as the tests we use are far too expensive for healthcare systems in many places). 

 

Edit: I should point out that the initial modelling from Imperial had the CFR at 1%, rather than the higher rate we see in most places, so their projections about fatalities if nothing was done probably weren't far from the truth. 

Edited May 5, 2020 by Toilet Duck
further thoughts!

[gizmoman]

Forgot to add this link.

https://www.naturalblaze.com/2020/04/robert-f-kennedy-jr-responds-to-bill-gates-statements-on-a-mandatory-coronavirus-vaccine.html

[Woffy]

56 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

 

 

She’s a Mathematician and Scientist who’s done a paper on tracing apps.

 

For those interested, Dr Hannah Fry also conducted this (weirdly prescient) experiment back in 2018.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2018/contagion

Most will know her from her Maths of Life slot on Lauren Laverne's 6 Music show, but she's also got a show on Radio 4 'The Curious Cases of Rutherford and Fry' and a podcast DeepMind.

She's an excellent communicator of maths/science.

Carry on...

 

[fred quimby]

31 minutes ago, fatyeti24 said:

We've done it guys!  Number 1 in Europe!

UK coronavirus death toll rises above 32,000 to highest in Europe

I am being lazy here. Does anyone have a site that is good to see how countries count their deaths.

 

I know that we include everyone who had Covid even if that was not the cause of death whereas they are excluded in other countries.

We would still be the highest but just being curious

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

2 minutes ago, Cream Soda said:

So do the US.  Seems an odd thing to do when you consider those stats are then used to inform decisions about lockdowns, etc.

Yes, Belgium have the highest death rate when population adjusted, but it’s basically because the meticulously count every death in every setting and have from the start:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-belgium-death-toll-lockdown-trump-who-uk-spain-italy-a9494186.html%3famp

[Mark E. Spliff]

19 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

If you believe they are trying to keep this crisis going until a vaccine can be rolled out then it makes perfect sense, If you listen to Gates and the WHO (same thing) a vaccine is the only solution, they don't even want to consider any other remedy, as time goes on this agenda should be more obvious. People on here don't want to hear it but Gates' involvement with big pharma and his history with toxic vaccines in developing countries needs to be looked at by everyone. Go read the work of Robert F. Kennedy JNR.  (JFK's nephew).

Just Googled Robert F Kennedy and vaccines and found the respected US science websites calling him out for a long history of non-scientific anti-vaxxer distortion of the evidence:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-robert-f-kennedy-jr-distorted-vaccine-science1/

https://www.statnews.com/2017/09/22/robert-kennedy-vaccine-safety/

https://www.sciencealert.com/robert-f-kennedy-tweets-a-ridiculous-conspiracy-theory-about-vaccinations

The last time I responded to you in this thread, you'd just posted a tweet from an alt-right troll slagging off anti-fascist protesters.  How do you go about deciding which bits of the internet you listen to? 

Edited May 5, 2020 by Mark E. Spliff

[steviewevie]

They just need to switch off 5G.

Problem solved.

[Toilet Duck]

8 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Yes, Belgium have the highest death rate when population adjusted, but it’s basically because the meticulously count every death in every setting and have from the start:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-belgium-death-toll-lockdown-trump-who-uk-spain-italy-a9494186.html%3famp

In Ireland, not only has every death in every setting been counted, but probable deaths as well (where patients had symptoms consistent with infection, but haven't returned a positive test result yet). These account for around 15% of the deaths recorded, and testing per capita is pretty high. 

[zahidf]

Yup

 

[Neil]

5 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Yup

 

IDS self-awareness paradox alert!  

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Yup

 

I’m not sure you can blame the public for going to Cheltenham when at the time the government allowed them to, and their view at that point was that mass gatherings and sporting events didn’t make much difference.

This goes back to the point that the measures don’t necessarily reflect people’s own perception of the risk. The vast majority of the public agree and support the lockdown and therefore go along with it, but equally if measures were relaxed many would relax with them, which surely is completely understandable?

[gizmoman]

30 minutes ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

Just Googled Robert F Kennedy and vaccines and found the respected US science websites calling him out for a long history of non-scientific anti-vaxxer distortion of the evidence:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-robert-f-kennedy-jr-distorted-vaccine-science1/

https://www.statnews.com/2017/09/22/robert-kennedy-vaccine-safety/

https://www.sciencealert.com/robert-f-kennedy-tweets-a-ridiculous-conspiracy-theory-about-vaccinations

The last time I responded to you in this thread, you'd just posted a tweet from an alt-right troll slagging off anti-fascist protesters.  How do you go about deciding which bits of the internet you listen to? 

Same way you do by the looks of it, just choose something that supports my prejudice! Instead of a lazy google search maybe you should spend some time reading what he actually says and give it some critical thought. If you read it and think it's all rubbish that's fine but dismissing every dissenting voice against corporate medicine as a conspiracy theorist is pretty blinkered. It's ironic RFK being dismissed as a conspiracy theorist given his history. (for those that don't know the term was invented to discredit anyone questioning the official version of the JFK assassination).

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I’m not sure you can blame the public for going to Cheltenham when at the time the government allowed them to, and their view at that point was that mass gatherings and sporting events didn’t make much difference.

This goes back to the point that the measures don’t necessarily reflect people’s own perception of the risk. The vast majority of the public agree and support the lockdown and therefore go along with it, but equally if measures were relaxed many would relax with them, which surely is completely understandable?

I kind of agree, just think if they relaxed the lockdown and Glastonbury was on nearly everyone here would go. Many have said here it’s the one event they would go to regardless of the risk. It’s not that far of a stretch that for others Cheltenham is that type of event too.

 

That’s not to say people won’t be stupid when they are allowed out though. 

[stuartbert two hats]

I like vaccines.  

[Mark E. Spliff]

24 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Same way you do by the looks of it, just choose something that supports my prejudice! Instead of a lazy google search maybe you should spend some time reading what he actually says and give it some critical thought. If you read it and think it's all rubbish that's fine but dismissing every dissenting voice against corporate medicine as a conspiracy theorist is pretty blinkered. It's ironic RFK being dismissed as a conspiracy theorist given his history. (for those that don't know the term was invented to discredit anyone questioning the official version of the JFK assassination).

Guilty as charged - I haven't read any of his stuff.  However, I'm reasonably up to speed on the main anti-vaxxer debate and, as with climate change, I'm pretty sure that (1) the anti-vaxxers have distorted the science and (2) their claims that mainstream science is prejudiced against them doesn't make sense - the scientific method is all about proposing a null hypothesis, using the data to support/refute it whilst everything is being overseen by public peer-review.  This doesn't leave any room for shady vested interests.

Have you read any of the above links to the mainstream scientific critique of this guy?

 

Edit: was curious about your claim that the concept of 'conspiracy theory' was invented to discredit anyone doubting the official JFK assassination report.  Theres an interesting article about this on Snopes:

https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/03/16/did-the-cia-invent-the-term-conspiracy-theory/

Edited May 5, 2020 by Mark E. Spliff

[jparx]

8 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

I like vaccines.  

They nailed it on the Other last year!

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, jparx said:

They nailed it on the Other last year!

this vaccine is going to be painful enough   anyway without the need for nailing it 

[Toilet Duck]

59 minutes ago, Cream Soda said:

What happens if a probable death turns out not to be Covid, do the figures get revised?

As far as I know, if they are confirmed they are added to the confirm list, if not, they stay recorded as probable.

[Toilet Duck]

23 minutes ago, Mark E. Spliff said:

Guilty as charged - I haven't read any of his stuff.  However, I'm reasonably up to speed on the main anti-vaxxer debate and, as with climate change, I'm pretty sure that (1) the anti-vaxxers have distorted the science and (2) their claims that mainstream science is prejudiced against them doesn't make sense - the scientific method is all about proposing a null hypothesis, using the data to support/refute it whilst everything is being overseen by public peer-review.  This doesn't leave any room for shady vested interests.

Have you read any of the above links to the mainstream scientific critique of this guy?

 

Edit: was curious about your claim that the concept of 'conspiracy theory' was invented to discredit anyone doubting the official JFK assassination report.  Theres an interesting article about this on Snopes:

https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/03/16/did-the-cia-invent-the-term-conspiracy-theory/

Have a read of Ben Goldacre. There's plenty of room for shady vested interests in the pharma industry! (he also does a good number on anti-vaxxers, quack "doctors" and homeopathy too among many others). In general, how science works is pretty well controlled, but the benefits for cheating the system mean that some unfortunately do from time to time. They usually get called out by other scientists though. The science refuting the claims of anti-vaxxers is concrete mind you (it spans every aspect of the debate from mathematics to biology). 

[zahidf]

Hancock wants respect dammit

 

 

[Woffy]

52 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

It's ironic RFK being dismissed as a conspiracy theorist given his history. (for those that don't know the term was invented to discredit anyone questioning the official version of the JFK assassination).

Used pejoratively rather than invented. As a term it'd been around for a century or two.

[Mark E. Spliff]

20 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Have a read of Ben Goldacre. There's plenty of room for shady vested interests in the pharma industry!

Ben Goldacre is my preferred expert when it comes to debunking bad science.  My earlier comment wasn't that there's no room for shady vested interests in big pharma - it was that there's no room for shady vested interests in the scientific process with public peer-review.  As soon as you give up trust in that process, the tin foil hat beckons and the dodgy vested interests can manipulate you into believing anything.

Edited May 5, 2020 by Mark E. Spliff