OK, so our GE bet fell over due to a mutual misunderstanding on detail. No problem. I said I'd get back with a nice fun even money £20 charity bet that settles this year.
And here it is -
I say that DOMINIC RAAB will be vaccinated against Covid-19 at some point THIS YEAR.
Therefore, £20 paid by me to your charity if at midnight on 31 Dec 2020 he has NOT been so vaccinated.
£20 paid by you to my charity (Mermaids) if he has been.
All 5,000 home testing kits for key workers ran out within two minutes. The spokesman added the government hoped to have 18,000 daily home testing kits available for key workers by the “end of next week”.
So lets say all strands go well, that 20k home tests, 20k hospital tests, 20k drive-throughs...still not going to get to the 100k tests a day.
That's because capacity was only at 50k yesterday. They are confident of getting capacity up to 100k. All they need to do is offer more tests tomorrow.
No, I am saying, lets imagine capacity is still increased, they are saying they will only do 18k home test kits next week. I don't see how they get more than 20k from hospitals, as admissions starting to fall. And there aren't enough drive-throughs to be doing be doing 50-60-70k tests a day from that approach.
So, even optimistically, 20k for each strand.
I thought they were going from 20 to 50 drive-throughs before the end of the month? That might provide enough.
26 to 50 yes. But you need people to be aware of them and of the mindset to go to one. It takes times for people to start doing this.
I though they were getting appointments at the drive-throughs via the government website.
They won't be getting 100k tests a day done, if they insist on websites and appointments. They need as many centres as possible, and telling everyone who thinks they would benefit from a test to turn up. Demand needs to exceed supply.
The increasingly desperate media will be spinning 90k test this time next week as a massive failure on the part of the government.
I'm less interested in the media judgement, than in what I would regard as a reasonable judgement.
As far as I can reconstruct, the 100,000 test pledge was made on the 2nd April, the first day that the UK managed 10,000 tests. So the promise was to increase the number of tests by an order of magnitude.
My personal judgement then would be that, if they can sustain test numbers in the high tens of thousands then that's near enough to an order of magnitude increase to count as a pass. This currently looks like a stretching target.
I don't disagree, but what I can see happening is the testing target dominating the news in the next week, as PPE did this week.
The 100k target will form the basis of LotO's questioning at PMQs, the press conference questioning, the news bulletins and front pages. The set up will be "How much do you think you will miss your own target by, minister?"
The government are now in the position that can't be *seen* to miss the target - it will, in the eyes of many, define the success or failure of their handling of the crisis.
Some evidence now that the Infection Fatality Ratio is 0.3-0.5%. Between 3 and 5 times as fatal as the flu
If that is the case there will be an enormous dust-up to decide if we over-reacted.
Of course, this bug is more infectious than the flu and puts waaaay more people in hospital, even if it doesn’t kill them. Also it seems to leave more lingering health problems.
I think that it is time that we started paying way more attention to these lingering health problems. My understanding is that the largest of these is scarring of the lung tissue leaving the patient short of breath, effectively severely asthmatic. Has anyone read how common this is? It seems a possible outcome of this virus is going to be another generation of ex-miner type illness with significant resource implications.
@MarqueeMark and @bigjohnowls I'm not doing any long term forecasting, it's a predictive tool for date of death from 4 days worth of data at the moment, I want to bring that down to 3 or even 2. From Monday I'm off work so I'm going to sit down and put the data into a proper analytics suite (GCP) but it will only get me so far. Without the full line by line dataset it's not really possible to make any real long term predictions. My worry is that the government is using some very outdated predictive modelling and basing it on influenza.
I'd love to have at the full dataset and create an ML model which would feed in age, sex, location, ethnicity, severity of pre-existing conditions and local travel data to get a pretty good estimate of where this is heading.
This time last year my wife did 11 straight days (12 hour shifts) at her hospital as they were so busy and had a bit of sickness amongst her colleagues. Today was her first shift in 8 days (she is down to minimum hours). I have just spoken to her. She has one patient to look after against her normal 8-12.
Alright, we get it. We understand that you live in one of the (many) areas of the country that hasn't seen much transmission. The lockdown therefore seems totally over the top and actively detrimental to the provision of regular health services.
What is totally absent from your posts is any sense of understanding that there are just as many areas where the health services have seen an absolute tidal wave of pandemic-related admissions, and staff have worked their arses off just trying to keep the system afloat. Without additional measures taken, hospitals in those areas would surely have collapsed.
The remaining question seems to be simply whether it would have been feasible to have a lockdown only in those places which were thought to be at risk, while leaving everyone else's life as normal. Or, if that had happened, whether we would simply have seen a flood of people from the cities to the countryside, bringing the virus with them and overwhelming services everywhere. Or, indeed, if imposing the lockdown arbitrarily on some places but not others, if that would have weakened the messaging across the board and damaged efforts where it really mattered.
Or, if we hadn't had a lockdown, what the numbers would have been and where and when.
This fellow thinks the German and Italian lockdowns were unnecessary
Problem with that (if analysis is correct, I pass no comment on that) is that reproduction of 1 means steady state of number infected, in hospital, dying (once the system reaches equilibrium). So in Italy, where the health service was overwhelmed, keeping infections at that level just means continued chaos. It was necessary there to reduce the numbers to a manageable level first (by reproduction < 1).
In Germany, different story of course, health service was coping.
More generally, the reported numbers we have at the moment are probably not all that accurate from anywhere (even Germany, S Korea with lots of testing) so I'd be very cautious about the uncertainties that implies for the reproduction number (which I would guess are not included in the shaded confidence interval as that's pretty much impossible to do as they are unknown, that instead just assuming a random/representative population sample).
Yes indeed. The policy implications of an R number of 1,1 are very different to 0.9.
@MarqueeMark and @bigjohnowls I'm not doing any long term forecasting, it's a predictive tool for date of death from 4 days worth of data at the moment, I want to bring that down to 3 or even 2. From Monday I'm off work so I'm going to sit down and put the data into a proper analytics suite (GCP) but it will only get me so far. Without the full line by line dataset it's not really possible to make any real long term predictions. My worry is that the government is using some very outdated predictive modelling and basing it on influenza.
I'd love to have at the full dataset and create an ML model which would feed in age, sex, location, ethnicity, severity of pre-existing conditions and local travel data to get a pretty good estimate of where this is heading.
Some evidence now that the Infection Fatality Ratio is 0.3-0.5%. Between 3 and 5 times as fatal as the flu
If that is the case there will be an enormous dust-up to decide if we over-reacted.
Of course, this bug is more infectious than the flu and puts waaaay more people in hospital, even if it doesn’t kill them. Also it seems to leave more lingering health problems.
It won’t take long to conclude that if the figure is anywhere near those, you for sure certainly over-reacted.
I am sure you haven’t forgotten your posting here that, in such an eventuality, you would both deserve and welcome the ordure that PB’ers would justifiably send your way.
Mate, with all due respect to you, as an honourable fellow PBer, and a good friend of the site, you’re a cranky incel twat. As such, I don’t give the tiniest scintilla of a fuck what you choose to believe
This time last year my wife did 11 straight days (12 hour shifts) at her hospital as they were so busy and had a bit of sickness amongst her colleagues. Today was her first shift in 8 days (she is down to minimum hours). I have just spoken to her. She has one patient to look after against her normal 8-12.
Alright, we get it. We understand that you live in one of the (many) areas of the country that hasn't seen much transmission. The lockdown therefore seems totally over the top and actively detrimental to the provision of regular health services.
What is totally absent from your posts is any sense of understanding that there are just as many areas where the health services have seen an absolute tidal wave of pandemic-related admissions, and staff have worked their arses off just trying to keep the system afloat. Without additional measures taken, hospitals in those areas would surely have collapsed.
The remaining question seems to be simply whether it would have been feasible to have a lockdown only in those places which were thought to be at risk, while leaving everyone else's life as normal. Or, if that had happened, whether we would simply have seen a flood of people from the cities to the countryside, bringing the virus with them and overwhelming services everywhere. Or, indeed, if imposing the lockdown arbitrarily on some places but not others, if that would have weakened the messaging across the board and damaged efforts where it really mattered.
Or, if we hadn't had a lockdown, what the numbers would have been and where and when.
This fellow thinks the German and Italian lockdowns were unnecessary
Eadric, various friends who are established figures in biorisk management and health security (Ivy-League professors, epidemiologists, virologists, public health officials) in a private Facebook discussion of Ben Israel's work, have systematically debunked all his arguments. I can't be arsed to repost here, but the arguments ran to several pages, even with the expletives deleted.
Just beware that there are a lot of instant experts out there with impressive sounding credentials and scientific looking graphs who really don't know what the f**k they are talking about
You miss my point entirely.
He could be Ronald McDonald for all I care, it doesn’t matter. The fact is he is pointing out a truth: Sweden’s curve is starting to look very similar to the curves in other countries, which had much stricter lockdowns.
Yet just yesterday you utterly condemned the Swedish approach in words that I won’t repeat.
All 5,000 home testing kits for key workers ran out within two minutes. The spokesman added the government hoped to have 18,000 daily home testing kits available for key workers by the “end of next week”.
So lets say all strands go well, that 20k home tests, 20k hospital tests, 20k drive-throughs...still not going to get to the 100k tests a day.
That's because capacity was only at 50k yesterday. They are confident of getting capacity up to 100k. All they need to do is offer more tests tomorrow.
No, I am saying, lets imagine capacity is still increased, they are saying they will only do 18k home test kits next week. I don't see how they get more than 20k from hospitals, as admissions starting to fall. And there aren't enough drive-throughs to be doing be doing 50-60-70k tests a day from that approach.
So, even optimistically, 20k for each strand.
I thought they were going from 20 to 50 drive-throughs before the end of the month? That might provide enough.
26 to 50 yes. But you need people to be aware of them and of the mindset to go to one. It takes times for people to start doing this.
I though they were getting appointments at the drive-throughs via the government website.
They won't be getting 100k tests a day done, if they insist on websites and appointments. They need as many centres as possible, and telling everyone who thinks they would benefit from a test to turn up. Demand needs to exceed supply.
The increasingly desperate media will be spinning 90k test this time next week as a massive failure on the part of the government.
I'm less interested in the media judgement, than in what I would regard as a reasonable judgement.
As far as I can reconstruct, the 100,000 test pledge was made on the 2nd April, the first day that the UK managed 10,000 tests. So the promise was to increase the number of tests by an order of magnitude.
My personal judgement then would be that, if they can sustain test numbers in the high tens of thousands then that's near enough to an order of magnitude increase to count as a pass. This currently looks like a stretching target.
I don't disagree, but what I can see happening is the testing target dominating the news in the next week, as PPE did this week.
The 100k target will form the basis of LotO's questioning at PMQs, the press conference questioning, the news bulletins and front pages. The set up will be "How much do you think you will miss your own target by, minister?"
The government are now in the position that can't be *seen* to miss the target - it will, in the eyes of many, define the success or failure of their handling of the crisis.
This is the sort of "tractor statistics" approach that we rightly see criticised in historical accounts of Communist Russia/China. Where have we gone so wrong?
On trend! 557 for the 7 days to the 17th, I predicted 560 a couple of days ago, for the 7 days to the 18th I estimated 520 and that looks about right as well. The following day was about 490-510 which is also about right.
The 20th looks like it will be another mini-peak the same as the 15th but the overall trend is downwards.
%age change in cumulative 7 day deaths compared to the same day last week:
Given that 20k deaths was supposed to be a good outcome. We are already well in excess of that level even if you only add in the last reported ONS care home deaths what does your model estimate the range of first wave deaths will be?
I think minimum 30,000 maybe as high as 35,000
Back of an envelope calc:
- 2k deaths that occurred yesterday or earlier and will be reported over the coming days and weeks - Another 8k deaths from today up to the last week of May, assuming the current improvements continue and are linear
Total: another 10k on the reported figures (ie just hospitals), so just under 30k total.
It's a bit sensitive to the assumption around "tail" deaths - ie how many cases are reported more than three weeks late (three weeks being how much detailed data we have to work with).
I'm assuming 2.5% are unreported after day 24. If it's zero, then knock off about 600. If it's 5%, add on the same amount. 10% (unlikely but possible), add on 1.5k.
OK, so our GE bet fell over due to a mutual misunderstanding on detail. No problem. I said I'd get back with a nice fun even money £20 charity bet that settles this year.
And here it is -
I say that DOMINIC RAAB will be vaccinated against Covid-19 at some point THIS YEAR.
Therefore, £20 paid by me to your charity if at midnight on 31 Dec 2020 he has NOT been so vaccinated.
£20 paid by you to my charity (Mermaids) if he has been.
How does that sound?
Let me have a think about vaccines, but yes a £20 fun bet sounds fine. Need to find a way to arbitrate your question though, as the medical details of government ministers wouldn't necessarily be made public.
On trend! 557 for the 7 days to the 17th, I predicted 560 a couple of days ago, for the 7 days to the 18th I estimated 520 and that looks about right as well. The following day was about 490-510 which is also about right.
The 20th looks like it will be another mini-peak the same as the 15th but the overall trend is downwards.
%age change in cumulative 7 day deaths compared to the same day last week:
Given that 20k deaths was supposed to be a good outcome. We are already well in excess of that level even if you only add in the last reported ONS care home deaths what does your model estimate the range of first wave deaths will be?
I think minimum 30,000 maybe as high as 35,000
Professor Costello reckoned up to 40k. I reckon he was right
I think the macro number of Covid-19 deaths this year - based on excess over trend - will end up being considerably higher than that.
This time last year my wife did 11 straight days (12 hour shifts) at her hospital as they were so busy and had a bit of sickness amongst her colleagues. Today was her first shift in 8 days (she is down to minimum hours). I have just spoken to her. She has one patient to look after against her normal 8-12.
Alright, we get it. We understand that you live in one of the (many) areas of the country that hasn't seen much transmission. The lockdown therefore seems totally over the top and actively detrimental to the provision of regular health services.
What is totally absent from your posts is any sense of understanding that there are just as many areas where the health services have seen an absolute tidal wave of pandemic-related admissions, and staff have worked their arses off just trying to keep the system afloat. Without additional measures taken, hospitals in those areas would surely have collapsed.
The remaining question seems to be simply whether it would have been feasible to have a lockdown only in those places which were thought to be at risk, while leaving everyone else's life as normal. Or, if that had happened, whether we would simply have seen a flood of people from the cities to the countryside, bringing the virus with them and overwhelming services everywhere. Or, indeed, if imposing the lockdown arbitrarily on some places but not others, if that would have weakened the messaging across the board and damaged efforts where it really mattered.
Actually I am fully behind what the Government has done to prepare the NHS for an unknown number of patients, I think that they should be getting an enormous amount of credit which the media will never give them. The NHS staff working in ICU do an incredible job.
I do apologise if I've misinterpreted your posts, but you seem to be fairly vocal in criticising the lockdown policy. I didn't assume in any way that you were casting aspersions on the health provision aspect.
The Government had to do the Lockdown policy, it was the only thing they could do and I fully support them for doing it. My question is a more scientific one as to whether they actually work for this virus. If we only had data for the UK now and nothing else to go on I would say that they probably do work. Deaths are coming down quite rapidly and it feels that after 32 days of a quite moderate lockdown we are coming out the other side. However the evidence from Lombardy and Spain does not necesarily confirm that thesis and they have had a significantly more draconian lockdown than us. I have an enquiring mind and I like certainty and logic and I don't think it exists with this virus. That is why I just cannot get my head round Vietnams infection rate.
If it is only 50-60k a day, the 100k capacity spin won't wash.
Maybe. But at the same time, they'll be able to claim almost no other country is doing more. The USA is at 150k, but that's with 5x our population, while Germany is ~50k, Italy 55k, Spain ~45k. France not sure, best I could find was a minister saying they're aiming for 50k by the end of the month.
Some evidence now that the Infection Fatality Ratio is 0.3-0.5%. Between 3 and 5 times as fatal as the flu
If that is the case there will be an enormous dust-up to decide if we over-reacted.
Of course, this bug is more infectious than the flu and puts waaaay more people in hospital, even if it doesn’t kill them. Also it seems to leave more lingering health problems.
It won’t take long to conclude that if the figure is anywhere near those, you for sure certainly over-reacted.
I am sure you haven’t forgotten your posting here that, in such an eventuality, you would both deserve and welcome the ordure that PB’ers would justifiably send your way.
Mate, with all due respect to you, as an honourable fellow PBer, and a good friend of the site, you’re a cranky incel twat. As such, I don’t give the tiniest scintilla of a fuck what you choose to believe
@MarqueeMark and @bigjohnowls I'm not doing any long term forecasting, it's a predictive tool for date of death from 4 days worth of data at the moment, I want to bring that down to 3 or even 2. From Monday I'm off work so I'm going to sit down and put the data into a proper analytics suite (GCP) but it will only get me so far. Without the full line by line dataset it's not really possible to make any real long term predictions. My worry is that the government is using some very outdated predictive modelling and basing it on influenza.
I'd love to have at the full dataset and create an ML model which would feed in age, sex, location, ethnicity, severity of pre-existing conditions and local travel data to get a pretty good estimate of where this is heading.
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
OK, so our GE bet fell over due to a mutual misunderstanding on detail. No problem. I said I'd get back with a nice fun even money £20 charity bet that settles this year.
And here it is -
I say that DOMINIC RAAB will be vaccinated against Covid-19 at some point THIS YEAR.
Therefore, £20 paid by me to your charity if at midnight on 31 Dec 2020 he has NOT been so vaccinated.
£20 paid by you to my charity (Mermaids) if he has been.
How does that sound?
Let me have a think about vaccines, but yes a £20 fun bet sounds fine. Need to find a way to arbitrate your question though, as the medical details of government ministers wouldn't necessarily be made public.
My "charity" would be the PB server hosting fund.
Great. No rush.
But maybe void if the answer is "unknown"?
I think we WOULD know, actually, but I get the point.
Some evidence now that the Infection Fatality Ratio is 0.3-0.5%. Between 3 and 5 times as fatal as the flu
If that is the case there will be an enormous dust-up to decide if we over-reacted.
Of course, this bug is more infectious than the flu and puts waaaay more people in hospital, even if it doesn’t kill them. Also it seems to leave more lingering health problems.
It won’t take long to conclude that if the figure is anywhere near those, you for sure certainly over-reacted.
I am sure you haven’t forgotten your posting here that, in such an eventuality, you would both deserve and welcome the ordure that PB’ers would justifiably send your way.
Mate, with all due respect to you, as an honourable fellow PBer, and a good friend of the site, you’re a cranky incel twat. As such, I don’t give the tiniest scintilla of a fuck what you choose to believe
Just lame, once again. I’m not playing your game.
Your earlier predictions - and your post welcoming the ordure you would deserve if they proved to be pants - are a matter of record. Your not yet having asked young Smithson to delete all of your posts from the record, as you did for your original PB account,
I used to think your posts here were mildly amusing, if remarkably self obsessed.
This virus crisis has unveiled what a selfish, dishonest, uncaring and hypocritical scumbag you really are.
I see Barnier is still wanting us to sign on the dotted line their choices of a "level playing field" for a future agreement.
To continue the cricket theme: doing what the other side least want you to do is generally a good tactic.
Indeed. Some don't seem to have understood that the EU are the opposition during these negotiations.
We can be friendly with Australians even during the Ashes but on the pitch our batsmen and bowlers need to do what's best for England not what the Australians want us to do.
Ridiculous comment. People who regard negotiations as things one does with “opposition” have generally never done any serious negotiating. Negotiation is a tool to bring about or obtain something by discussion. It has no “opponents”.
You're being ridiculous.
I've done lots of negotiations and I can tell you the opposite number frequently wants the opposite to what I want. If I'm trying to negotiate a discount on a product then I don't simply accept whatever price they quote as a done deal, I seek to get a lower price. If I can offer eg a bulk purchase to make it worth their while then that can be an incentive to them to accept, but I'm seeking as low a price I can get while they're seeking as high a price as I will pay and we meet in the middle or walk away if we can't reach a deal.
Some evidence now that the Infection Fatality Ratio is 0.3-0.5%. Between 3 and 5 times as fatal as the flu
If that is the case there will be an enormous dust-up to decide if we over-reacted.
Of course, this bug is more infectious than the flu and puts waaaay more people in hospital, even if it doesn’t kill them. Also it seems to leave more lingering health problems.
It won’t take long to conclude that if the figure is anywhere near those, you for sure certainly over-reacted.
I am sure you haven’t forgotten your posting here that, in such an eventuality, you would both deserve and welcome the ordure that PB’ers would justifiably send your way.
Mate, with all due respect to you, as an honourable fellow PBer, and a good friend of the site, you’re a cranky incel twat. As such, I don’t give the tiniest scintilla of a fuck what you choose to believe
Just lame, once again. I’m not playing your game.
Your earlier predictions - and your post welcoming the ordure you would deserve if they proved to be pants - are a matter of record. Your not yet having asked young Smithson to delete all of your posts from the record, as you did for your original PB account,
I used to think your posts here were mildly amusing, if remarkably self obsessed.
This virus crisis has unveiled what a selfish, dishonest, uncaring and hypocritical scumbag you really are.
Hold on hold on hold on.
I take issue with that.
He has always been a selfish, dishonest, uncaring and hypocritical scumbag.
But he writes extremely well and is often amusing.
Take it that you have a) rattled him; and b) won the argument if he starts to insult you instantly.
This time last year my wife did 11 straight days (12 hour shifts) at her hospital as they were so busy and had a bit of sickness amongst her colleagues. Today was her first shift in 8 days (she is down to minimum hours). I have just spoken to her. She has one patient to look after against her normal 8-12.
Alright, we get it. We understand that you live in one of the (many) areas of the country that hasn't seen much transmission. The lockdown therefore seems totally over the top and actively detrimental to the provision of regular health services.
What is totally absent from your posts is any sense of understanding that there are just as many areas where the health services have seen an absolute tidal wave of pandemic-related admissions, and staff have worked their arses off just trying to keep the system afloat. Without additional measures taken, hospitals in those areas would surely have collapsed.
The remaining question seems to be simply whether it would have been feasible to have a lockdown only in those places which were thought to be at risk, while leaving everyone else's life as normal. Or, if that had happened, whether we would simply have seen a flood of people from the cities to the countryside, bringing the virus with them and overwhelming services everywhere. Or, indeed, if imposing the lockdown arbitrarily on some places but not others, if that would have weakened the messaging across the board and damaged efforts where it really mattered.
Or, if we hadn't had a lockdown, what the numbers would have been and where and when.
This fellow thinks the German and Italian lockdowns were unnecessary
Yet Sweden is on course to see higher deaths than it's "peak" and it's intensive care figures are remaining high with no sign of subsidence.
Sweden's intensive care figures were a great big awooga of an alarm that they were not on a downward slope. The good thing about intesive care figures for Sweden is that they are a lot more timely than the day of death figures, which keep updating for well over a week.
The 8th of April peak in Sweden was a trick of the light.
'In 1888, the first medical use of H2O2 was described by Love as efficacious in treating numerous diseases, including scarlet fever, diphtheria, nasal catarrh, acute coryza, whooping cough, asthma hay fever and tonsillitis (Love, 1888). Similarly, Oliver and collaborators reported that intravenous injection of H2O2 was efficacious in treating influenza pneumonia in the epidemic following World War I (Oliver et al., 1920). Despite its beneficial effects, in the 1940s medical interest in further research on H2O2 was slowed down by the emerging development of new prescription medicines.' https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3417441/
One nil to Trump?
They used lot of weird stuff in the 1920s; most of it (like H2O2) with marginal efficacy. The second paper you cite has zero to do with injecting bleach, but about therapeutic approaches to targeting hydrogen peroxide metabolism... in stroke victims: ...We believe that the therapeutic potential of drugs targeting H2O2 metabolism needs to be explored in depth at a preclinical level in order to transform their theoretical use in brain ischaemia in a true clinical application....
In the mid to late 40's Hydrogen Peroxide was used as a disinfectant wound cleanser for minor skin injuries. Recall being told that the frothing was the cleansing. Quite an encouragement to use it.
It's still used as a topical disinfectant, in mouthwash, and of course to bleach hair (and it's undoubtedly effective in cleaning surfaces). Injecting, not so much.
Quite, but given that, here is what we know:
- H202 kills viruses - it's used to clean ambulances - H202 could kill or harm you if you ingest or inject it in excessive quantity or at excessive concentrations - H202 will not kill you if you ingest or inject it in small enough quantities and at low enough concentrations
What we don't yet know, is whether there is any crossover in the Venn diagram between being effective at killing viruses and being non-injurious to human health.
**IF** there is, and if this can be established by recognised testing, then if administered professionally, you have an all-purpose front-line weapon against viruses, regardless of specifics, that is cheap, quick, and easy to administer, in all countries.
Given how effective it is at killing other viruses, don't you think this would have been tested by now? The fact we haven't been doing that for the past decades suggest there is no overlap whatsoever.
That's a bit of a logic fail isn't it? It cannot be effective or someone would have tested it by now?
Many must find it beneficial, including some doctors, if we're to believe the poster above who warns of a burgeoning peroxide subculture.
This is a really fascinating insight into how we are seen inside the Trump administration. It is dripping with nostalgia, laden with the past. It will resonate with many here, too. https://twitter.com/usambuk/status/1253229648546324480?s=21
Yes, England is an old country with a lot of history and heritage. America doesn't have that. And a lot the rest of world also value that here too - it's why tourists come here in their droves and we have so much soft power and cultural influence.
Much of that does reasonate with me and is deeply moving.
Does it not for you too?
Not really, but it's clearly well-meaning and nice of him to make the effort - I wouldn't criticise him for that myself. The fact that we have lots of attractive landscape and historic buildings is one of our many strengths, though we don't want to be seen as a historical theme park and have more to offer than that. I'm afraid, though, that SO is right that it's how we're seen in the US, and not just by the administration.
Most people have a mental sketch of other countries which they can't be bothered to nuance, like the idea that the US is New York+Hollywood+rednecks. or Russia is Moscow+peasants. Britain's USP for many tourists is that we have loads of visual history - that's why London is such a draw and you don't see many foreign tourists wandering round the Highlands.
"that's why London is such a draw and you don't see many foreign tourists wandering round the Highlands"
You'd be surprised, Nick. During Summer the roads up here are crawling with European registered cars, esp German and Scandinavian. Also a surprising number of people from the Far East - who are not very adept with single track roads and reversing into passing places!
Most on here inhabit the M25 ring and so have absolutely not a clue on anything about Scotland. They think we are all unemployed , drinking Buckfast and running about in kilts eating fried Mars Bars.
That's your oppression/grievance fantasy talking that speaks more to your prejudices about London than anyone elses prejudices about Scotland. Very few people on here, given the amount of anti-London prejudice bandied about, live within the M25 anyway. And I am not sure what inhabiting "the M25 ring" means. Is this supposed entity a ring of towns including Dartford, Redhill, Sevenoaks and Watford?
Fairly simple , they live inside the M25 and most of the Tories on here spout absolute crap about Scotland , obviously learned from dumb London based Tory msm. You obviously are not on here much / read many posts or perhaps are one of them.
This is a really fascinating insight into how we are seen inside the Trump administration. It is dripping with nostalgia, laden with the past. It will resonate with many here, too. https://twitter.com/usambuk/status/1253229648546324480?s=21
Yes, England is an old country with a lot of history and heritage. America doesn't have that. And a lot the rest of world also value that here too - it's why tourists come here in their droves and we have so much soft power and cultural influence.
Much of that does reasonate with me and is deeply moving.
Does it not for you too?
Not really, but it's clearly well-meaning and nice of him to make the effort - I wouldn't criticise him for that myself. The fact that we have lots of attractive landscape and historic buildings is one of our many strengths, though we don't want to be seen as a historical theme park and have more to offer than that. I'm afraid, though, that SO is right that it's how we're seen in the US, and not just by the administration.
Most people have a mental sketch of other countries which they can't be bothered to nuance, like the idea that the US is New York+Hollywood+rednecks. or Russia is Moscow+peasants. Britain's USP for many tourists is that we have loads of visual history - that's why London is such a draw and you don't see many foreign tourists wandering round the Highlands.
"that's why London is such a draw and you don't see many foreign tourists wandering round the Highlands"
You'd be surprised, Nick. During Summer the roads up here are crawling with European registered cars, esp German and Scandinavian. Also a surprising number of people from the Far East - who are not very adept with single track roads and reversing into passing places!
Most on here inhabit the M25 ring and so have absolutely not a clue on anything about Scotland. They think we are all unemployed , drinking Buckfast and running about in kilts eating fried Mars Bars.
That's your oppression/grievance fantasy talking that speaks more to your prejudices about London than anyone elses prejudices about Scotland. Very few people on here, given the amount of anti-London prejudice bandied about, live within the M25 anyway. And I am not sure what inhabiting "the M25 ring" means. Is this supposed entity a ring of towns including Dartford, Redhill, Sevenoaks and Watford?
Fairly simple , they live inside the M25 and most of the Tories on here spout absolute crap about Scotland , obviously learned from dumb London based Tory msm. You obviously are not on here much / read many posts or perhaps are one of them.
The Islands such as Skye are crawling with tourists in the summer.
I know quite a few people building houses in that area, and a *lot* go for holiday accommodation as a sideline. Fits well on crofts or decrofts.
This is a really fascinating insight into how we are seen inside the Trump administration. It is dripping with nostalgia, laden with the past. It will resonate with many here, too. https://twitter.com/usambuk/status/1253229648546324480?s=21
Yes, England is an old country with a lot of history and heritage. America doesn't have that. And a lot the rest of world also value that here too - it's why tourists come here in their droves and we have so much soft power and cultural influence.
Much of that does reasonate with me and is deeply moving.
Does it not for you too?
Not really, but it's clearly well-meaning and nice of him to make the effort - I wouldn't criticise him for that myself. The fact that we have lots of attractive landscape and historic buildings is one of our many strengths, though we don't want to be seen as a historical theme park and have more to offer than that. I'm afraid, though, that SO is right that it's how we're seen in the US, and not just by the administration.
Most people have a mental sketch of other countries which they can't be bothered to nuance, like the idea that the US is New York+Hollywood+rednecks. or Russia is Moscow+peasants. Britain's USP for many tourists is that we have loads of visual history - that's why London is such a draw and you don't see many foreign tourists wandering round the Highlands.
"that's why London is such a draw and you don't see many foreign tourists wandering round the Highlands"
You'd be surprised, Nick. During Summer the roads up here are crawling with European registered cars, esp German and Scandinavian. Also a surprising number of people from the Far East - who are not very adept with single track roads and reversing into passing places!
Most on here inhabit the M25 ring and so have absolutely not a clue on anything about Scotland. They think we are all unemployed , drinking Buckfast and running about in kilts eating fried Mars Bars.
That's your oppression/grievance fantasy talking that speaks more to your prejudices about London than anyone elses prejudices about Scotland. Very few people on here, given the amount of anti-London prejudice bandied about, live within the M25 anyway. And I am not sure what inhabiting "the M25 ring" means. Is this supposed entity a ring of towns including Dartford, Redhill, Sevenoaks and Watford?
Fairly simple , they live inside the M25 and most of the Tories on here spout absolute crap about Scotland , obviously learned from dumb London based Tory msm. You obviously are not on here much / read many posts or perhaps are one of them.
The Islands such as Skye are crawling with tourists in the summer.
I know quite a few people building houses in that area, and a *lot* go for holiday accommodation as a sideline. Fits well on crofts or decrofts.
Norwich city centre much busier than a week ago. Far more traffic too.
Not good. I don't like the lockdown but it still has to be respected whether we like it or not.
Maybe some people just need the money and don;t feel they can rely on the state to provide it.
Doesn't sound like they were at work. Sounds as though they were outside of work actually!
In a way the the government has had rotten luck. Their leader was stricken with illness at exactly the wrong time. and the weather since lockdown has been amazing in much of the country. That bank holiday!
They are rotten for sure , luck does not come into it.
Some evidence now that the Infection Fatality Ratio is 0.3-0.5%. Between 3 and 5 times as fatal as the flu
If that is the case there will be an enormous dust-up to decide if we over-reacted.
Of course, this bug is more infectious than the flu and puts waaaay more people in hospital, even if it doesn’t kill them. Also it seems to leave more lingering health problems.
I think that it is time that we started paying way more attention to these lingering health problems. My understanding is that the largest of these is scarring of the lung tissue leaving the patient short of breath, effectively severely asthmatic. Has anyone read how common this is? It seems a possible outcome of this virus is going to be another generation of ex-miner type illness with significant resource implications.
Yeah, long term health problems are being neglected (perhaps understandably)
I now have several friends who have been through covid-19, and they all report - like me, if I had it - a lingering weakness/tightness in the lungs.
Some evidence now that the Infection Fatality Ratio is 0.3-0.5%. Between 3 and 5 times as fatal as the flu
If that is the case there will be an enormous dust-up to decide if we over-reacted.
Of course, this bug is more infectious than the flu and puts waaaay more people in hospital, even if it doesn’t kill them. Also it seems to leave more lingering health problems.
I think that it is time that we started paying way more attention to these lingering health problems. My understanding is that the largest of these is scarring of the lung tissue leaving the patient short of breath, effectively severely asthmatic. Has anyone read how common this is? It seems a possible outcome of this virus is going to be another generation of ex-miner type illness with significant resource implications.
Reading the literature on SARS survivors is not nice. 50% with permanent problems.
Comments
OK, so our GE bet fell over due to a mutual misunderstanding on detail. No problem. I said I'd get back with a nice fun even money £20 charity bet that settles this year.
And here it is -
I say that DOMINIC RAAB will be vaccinated against Covid-19 at some point THIS YEAR.
Therefore, £20 paid by me to your charity if at midnight on 31 Dec 2020 he has NOT been so vaccinated.
£20 paid by you to my charity (Mermaids) if he has been.
How does that sound?
The 100k target will form the basis of LotO's questioning at PMQs, the press conference questioning, the news bulletins and front pages. The set up will be "How much do you think you will miss your own target by, minister?"
The government are now in the position that can't be *seen* to miss the target - it will, in the eyes of many, define the success or failure of their handling of the crisis.
I'd love to have at the full dataset and create an ML model which would feed in age, sex, location, ethnicity, severity of pre-existing conditions and local travel data to get a pretty good estimate of where this is heading.
https://epcced.github.io/ramp/
Having advocated it just one day earlier.
Do you post here just to ask the idiot questions?
- 2k deaths that occurred yesterday or earlier and will be reported over the coming days and weeks
- Another 8k deaths from today up to the last week of May, assuming the current improvements continue and are linear
Total: another 10k on the reported figures (ie just hospitals), so just under 30k total.
It's a bit sensitive to the assumption around "tail" deaths - ie how many cases are reported more than three weeks late (three weeks being how much detailed data we have to work with).
I'm assuming 2.5% are unreported after day 24. If it's zero, then knock off about 600. If it's 5%, add on the same amount. 10% (unlikely but possible), add on 1.5k.
My "charity" would be the PB server hosting fund.
https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/alcohol/your-guide-to-holding-out-till-midday-before-starting-to-drink-20200326194913
Hmm.
But maybe void if the answer is "unknown"?
I think we WOULD know, actually, but I get the point.
761 people have died subject to increase
64 from scotland
110 from Wales
587 from England
Your earlier predictions - and your post welcoming the ordure you would deserve if they proved to be pants - are a matter of record. Your not yet having asked young Smithson to delete all of your posts from the record, as you did for your original PB account,
I used to think your posts here were mildly amusing, if remarkably self obsessed.
This virus crisis has unveiled what a selfish, dishonest, uncaring and hypocritical scumbag you really are.
I've done lots of negotiations and I can tell you the opposite number frequently wants the opposite to what I want. If I'm trying to negotiate a discount on a product then I don't simply accept whatever price they quote as a done deal, I seek to get a lower price. If I can offer eg a bulk purchase to make it worth their while then that can be an incentive to them to accept, but I'm seeking as low a price I can get while they're seeking as high a price as I will pay and we meet in the middle or walk away if we can't reach a deal.
I take issue with that.
He has always been a selfish, dishonest, uncaring and hypocritical scumbag.
But he writes extremely well and is often amusing.
Take it that you have a) rattled him; and b) won the argument if he starts to insult you instantly.
Sweden's intensive care figures were a great big awooga of an alarm that they were not on a downward slope. The good thing about intesive care figures for Sweden is that they are a lot more timely than the day of death figures, which keep updating for well over a week.
The 8th of April peak in Sweden was a trick of the light.
Peak hard to spot there - in part because Sweden has horrific weekend reporting artifacts.
New Intensive Care per day
Slight decline? But the data is still lagged here even if nore up to date than deaths
Deaths per Day
April 8th "Peak" not looking great
https://www.itv.com/news/wales/2020-04-24/another-110-deaths-from-suspected-coronavirus-reported-in-wales/
I know quite a few people building houses in that area, and a *lot* go for holiday accommodation as a sideline. Fits well on crofts or decrofts.