'Good' hand maybe the best in Europe, badly played, opportunities/lives wasted.Originally Posted by vagabond
Last edited by Passenger; 18th May 2020 at 10:48.
1) My post contained no statistics nor any mention of them.
2) As for 'seeking information', I would think the Department for Education's Chief Scientific Adviser might have been someone whose input would have been useful for the Government to at least hear before they made a decision on reopening schools was made.
3) As for 'spurious questions in the hope they can catch someone out'...
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
Think that was a very small number of tests that gave false positives haven’t heard that being an issue for quite a while.
Sorry but it seemed you were comparing. In answer to my saying ".... I doubt any country could handle the millions of tests required to do that..." you replied "Taiwan did. New Zealand does..." so making a comparison.
Which turned out to be wrong because neither have implemented 'millions of tests'.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
I just wonder in those dark days what the 'current' media would have made of the decisions taken up until then?
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
Actually if you look at your chart it does show the UK in fourth place by deaths per million as well! So perhaps you are correct, the data doesn't lie.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
I don't know why you are arguing. The references for that site are shown at the bottom, if the integrity of any data you viewed mattered to you then you would already know this.
Good, and your point is? So to follow through your discussion with SJ on comparisons - deaths per million matter but not testing capacity vs population size?
Last edited by mondie; 18th May 2020 at 11:34.
Deaths have nothing to do with what was being discussed regarding lock down easing and testing which has been pointed out so many times. Cases are also irrelevant in that discussion. OOK’s comment about what a ‘case’ is in normal times is correct but most of the reporting being done at the moment seems to count cases more based on positive test results.Yep, the chart above tells you nothing in isolation and is quite out of date. Here is the current data which paints a clearer picture and its not as rosy as we would like ot see. If you haven't found it, this site is fantastic for a visual representation of COVID data globally which is updated frequently - https://informationisbeautiful.net/v...phic-datapack/
data beutiful 18May by Simon Gee, on Flickr
It’s the number of infections and how that is changing that is really the only relevant figure.
Back to the schools thing, somebody in Government clearly has the time to brief selected media to try and sway public opinion, so why can’t they sit down with the schools leadership and share the evidence available that shows it’s safe or if not what the risks are?
They cannot be ‘too busy’ to address this critical and emotive issue, and trust is low after what has happened in social care...
Where do you get your figures from, official number isn’t 35,000+ and probably 50%+ higher ?
It wasn't posted for a discussion on deaths, it was posted to update the data that monobrow posted which lead to the discussion that followed.
Depends what you consider the schools leadership there have been lots of discussions with various bodies and last week online meeting with Unions and others and the relevant people from Sage.
And that discussion was that it was basically irrelevant, seems some people will just take every opportunity to post something
negative even if it’s irrelevant.
I never said testing capacity didn't matter, simply questioned SJ's assertion that Tawian and New Zealand had tested millions.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
Why does it matter when you do It if it’s mass testing of the population which is what your original post said
and you again say it’s possible, it isn’t. 66 million in the U.K. it’s not possible.
And if you say you are now talking about track, trace and test you’ve moved the goal posts.
No I haven't. That's the only thing I have talked about when the easing of the lockdown was given consideration, because 1) it is indeed necessary to ease out of the lockdown and 2) because done without test, track, tracing and isolating it will lead to another lockdown.
Furthermore the idea isn't to test everyone (straw man alert!), especially as some people need to be tested repeatedly, but to test those who cannot keep their distances because of work or transport. And if it requires regional release then that's the way to go. If it requires an army of testers, whether specially recruited and paid, volunteers and military then that's the way to go. Unless instead of picking holes you have an alternative that will not lead to another lockdown of course.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Posting actual data is negative? Seems balanced.
Regardless, correcting outdated info seems sensible. Obviously it is influenced by tests conducted but it is one of many measurements, all of which are not subject to any agreed global standard. Thus it is obvious that it should be interpreted as such.
Yesterday's official figure was 34,636. So perhaps I should have said 34k+ deaths.
It doesn't make it a whole lot better really.
They are/have successfully easing/eased out of lockdown. How did they do it? by testing, tracing, tracking and isolating. If they don't have millions to do it's because they have a smaller population and more importantly because they acted swiftly enough. The fact that we haven't is our own fault, but it doesn't dispense us from doing what has proved to be successful up to now.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
It’s not the numbers of people to do the actual tests as a lot are now being sent out it’s the numbers of tests available and capacity in labs to process them. The capacity isn’t big enough to just keep testing everyone regularly who isn’t staying at home, it is in the millions. If you cant work from home and are going to work you are already eligible for a test if you have symptoms.
OK so you exaggerated that and where did the probably 50%+ more come from.
But before having symptoms you're going to be in contact with people, who you may contaminate. They, in turn will contaminate people until they have symptoms. etc. New lockdown
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
You're really arguing from rounding up a figure to the closest thousand? in this context? As to the 50%, I believe there is an overall agreement that the official figures are underestimated. By how much? his 50% is no less reliable than anyone you can come up with
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Taiwan has the right to track you full stop, they were tracking people who were meant to be isolating for 14 days,
Reckon a large proportion here are not going to download the app when it’s available because they think it’s an
invasion of their privacy.
And N.Zealand you can’t really draw comparisons it has one of the lowest population densities in the world, if it was a sheep
virus then different story.
But you said it could be done and it can’t, and without a vaccine above is going to happen whenever you lift lockdown
measures, all you can do is do it gradually as the infection rate is dropping and R is below 1 and keep testing to check
the current infection level using pillar 4.
Iceland, then.
Taiwan was excluded from WHO under pressure from China, and had to develop its own tactics to fight SARS (or was it MERS?). The fact is, they successfully dealt with the outbreak. People would use the Apple/Google app if their privacy is maintained. They might also download the existing one if the government went through Parliament and guaranteed that data would be erased after the crisis and privacy restored. But they don't. And considering their past history in terms of keeping their promises and being true to their word, how can they hope to get away with it? the answer is they don't, but they then have someone else to blame.
Or Kerbala, despite the tremendous pressures brought about by a no-warning lockdown that stranded millions away from home. Stop refuting examples of success because you can find a difference with the UK:
- - - Updated - - -
Who said it can't? You? Why are we recruiting 17000 people then? And how do you stop a new lockdown?
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Yes I am it’s exaggerating when everyone knows what the figure is, Im not going to come up with a figure to try and contradict the 50%+ because no one will know for sure for sometime what a final figure will be so plucking 50%+ from nowhere is just BS
And the other figure isn’t an estimate they are people who unfortunately have died as a result of covid directly or as a combination with other health issues.
They do seem rather keen to limit who's involved in the decision to reopen schools, don't they?
The Department for Education’s own chief scientific adviser stunned MPs by revealing he had not made an assessment of plans to reopen English schools amid the Covid-19 crisis.
Osama Rahman suggested to the Commons science and technology committee that he had not personally assessed how the proposal to restart classes for primary pupils could be implemented effectively.
He added that the decision to push for a June 1 reopening timetable was not a decision made by the DfE, but by the cabinet on the advice of the government’s Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (Sage).
Rahman also surprised the committee by suggesting that Public Health England had not yet approved new guidance on the June 1 reopening proposals, describing it as a “first draft”.
In evidence to the MPs, he further admitted he did not know how many under-18s had died from the virus, and declared that children could “possibly” become vectors for transmission under the government plans.
When asked by Labour MP Zara Sultana what assessment he had made on how effectively the new guidance could be implemented, the DfE’s chief scientific adviser replied: “I haven’t.”
Once again, my post contained no statistics nor any mention of them. So exactly what statistics are you referring to?
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
I have only quoted facts and by the way Iceland also has one of the lowest population densities in the world, think it’s less
than N Zealand.
And I’m pretty sure people will shy away from any tracking app if that’s what the Government say they want to use.
We we’re talking about regularly testing everyone who isn’t able to stay at home which isn’t possible because of the scale not about track and trace with the app which is what the 17000 people is for.
Last edited by TBKBABAB; 18th May 2020 at 13:56.
The "exaggeration" as you call it was less than 2% - hardly an exaggeration in this context - especially when the government's own ONS reported figures for COVID-19 related deaths are much higher.
The actual figures may not come out till much later, if at all. We can all speculate what they might be - if you're happy to accept the "official" figure now, fine, let's wait and see.
The percentage urban population of Iceland is greater than that of UK. Overall population density is not important if no-one lives in, for example, 95% of the country.
I think you know what I meant.
And don’t know what you are referring to when you say it is obviously influenced by tests, deaths aren’t directly
related to number of tests.
Stop coming up with your facts, please. He needs a reason to dismiss another country who succeeded in containing the virus (and also managed to test the largest percentage of its population)
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
The FT has been running an analysis of the true death figures based on looking at the ONS figures which are more accurate and include all deaths rather than the selective figures which the Government give on their daily briefing. In their analysis deaths are now north of 60K and still rising albeit albeit at a slower rate.
To exaggerate a figure that is so widely known in such a desperate situation where so many people have suffered losses just to try and make your point is wrong.
From the ONS website so if anything ONS figures will be lower
“Note that up-to-date counts of the total numbers of deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19) are published by Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) on the .GOV.UK website. ONS figures differ from the DHSC counts as the latter include deaths which have not yet been registered.”
No I don't, otherwise I would not have said it.
The way deaths are counted is different across countries as again there is no agreed global standard, hence they too are not a totally reliable indicator. I didn't say that deaths were influenced by tests. Slow down and read what is written.
Thanks for posting. Excellent info out there, but rarely given the publicity in clearly deserves.
We were sold a crock of $h!t back in the 50's regarding the food pyramid and heart disease (Ancel "bloody" Keys, you have a lot to answer for), followed by the sun was dangerous etc. So people cut back on saturated fats (big vitamin / mineral carriers), increase processed carbohydrate / sugar consumption and reduce exposure to the sun.
What could possibly go wrong?
Don't worry, we'll spend billions on making a "treatment" (rarely a cure) instead.
See my previous post, they are all using the same data, I presume this is just guessing that deaths which are above the average norm but aren’t attributed to Covid are, although the last ONS figures published were a total of about 41,000 above the 5 year average for the same period so even if that assumption is correct unless 19,000 people have died from Covid in the last 17 Days don’t see how you get to 60,000.
It may be the case that actual figures turn out to be higher but it’s guess work and I think when this is all analysed at a later date a lot of the figures worldwide are going to be somewhat different to the ones we are seeing now.
It’s the relevance I don’t get.
Last edited by TBKBABAB; 18th May 2020 at 14:50.
Yep - no money in that message. Plus it's the sort of message that makes people feel more positive and comfortable, - and we don't want that, do we! :D
If you’re going to be deliberately obtuse and pedantic it’s hardly worth replying to you.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
I never questioned any of that. I said it would not be possible to test millions of people. You said Taiwan and New Zealand had. Do you admit that was wrong?
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
There is nothing obtuse or pedantic in me pointing out there were no statistics in my post.
You were plain wrong in your claim, however I doubt you can bring yourself to admit it, let alone apologise.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
To the letter yes, of course. Gladly.
However I persist in thinking that my point stands. Those countries who have the pandemic under control are countries that acted decisively (which explains why they didn't need millions of tests) but it doesn't invalidate the method.
Why do you think the UK is recruiting 17,000 people? And if it's not enough, why?
I believe that any country with a decent health system has a testing facility roughly proportional to its population's needs. When I say roughly, some may be two or three times more by inhabitants, but the idea is that the means are defined by the size of the population first, and by the health ministry in terms of priorities second.
In any case what is possible in one country should not be perceived as impossible in another. Even if we made things harder for ourselves. The alternative is to say, as Cummings seems to think, that some deaths are worth saving the economy.
This is best illustrated by the following:
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Me neither, why did you bring it up? Anyway this is petty and adds nothing to the discussion so let's leave it there.
SJ seems you have half your wish, everyone over 5 now eligible for a test but only if you have symptoms, how many
are going to turn up and start coughing...
They can do that if the please. The issue will be bit supplying the tests but actually processing the swabs. From ordering a test until results is currently taking 6 days.
Ok then. You posted this.
And I replied with this.They do seem rather keen to limit who's involved in the decision to reopen schools, don't they?
R
Which was fairly obviously referring to the piece you quoted which said. "In evidence to the MPs, he further admitted he did not know how many under-18s had died from the virus, and declared that children could “possibly” become vectors for transmission under the government plans." So he admitted not knowing a statistic, i.e. 'how many under-18s had died from the virus'.
Which I even posted as a screenshot which you ignored. But then you knew all along what I was referring to.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
Thank you. Yes your point stands in that early testing and isolating was the best policy. I do think however comparisons with countries that have, shall we say, rather authoritarian regimes, should be avoided. The people in the UK are already complaining that the app to track and trace might infringe their privacy. Although most probably plaster the details of their lives over social media on the internet!To the letter yes, of course. Gladly.
However I persist in thinking that my point stands. Those countries who have the pandemic under control are countries that acted decisively (which explains why they didn't need millions of tests) but it doesn't invalidate the method.
Why do you think the UK is recruiting 17,000 people? And if it's not enough, why?
I believe that any country with a decent health system has a testing facility roughly proportional to its population's needs. When I say roughly, some may be two or three times more by inhabitants, but the idea is that the means are defined by the size of the population first, and by the health ministry in terms of priorities second.
In any case what is possible in one country should not be perceived as impossible in another. Even if we made things harder for ourselves. The alternative is to say, as Cummings seems to think, that some deaths are worth saving the economy.
This is best illustrated by the following:
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
