politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Super Tuesday: With just over four hours to go before the coun

eadric said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

At least half the comments on this thread should have been flagged for going off-topic so soon.

I am sympathetic to your argument, as you know, but facts are facts. This POTUS election is taking place in a context of a full-on plague, which might, very conceivably, kill millions of Americans and hospitalise millions of others.

These are not fanciful figures, they are reasonable scenarios.

So whenever you start talking about the POTUS elex you will be talking about the virus within about 3 minutes, not least coz it could actually kill half the candidates. Cf Iran's parliament

https://twitter.com/aawsat_eng/status/1234955458194092032?s=20

A fanatic: one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Mate, there is no other subject.

Please explain to me how you could debate the betting opportunities around the Dem primaries WITHOUT referencing a massive global menace which presages intense global death.

Answer, you can't.

It would be like discussing the Grand National betting opportunities without mentioning the fact the race will take place during a bizarre radioactive tornado, which attacks certain kinds of horses.

If you made the slightest link between the democratic primaries (and remember tonight is the biggest bunch of them in this presidential cycle for four years - hence "Super Tuesday") and the betting opportunities then I might be more forgiving.

But you don't. You just tediously wank out apocalyptical posts 24/7.

A better analogy for your final paragraph would be that you're a poster who goes to the Grand National, grabs a megaphone and then drowns out all conversation amongst all other spectators on the grandstand by shouting about how the bizarre radioactive tornado will wipe out all horses for all time and how we'd be best burning all our wallets and just throwing ourselves in front of them now so we can get it over with.

Then, when everyone groans, and then one horse subsequently falls over and needs to be put down, you shout even louder: "ah, you see - I told you I was right! It was just a worst case scenario!!"

I see you are still in "this is just the flu" stage. Good luck.

Normalcy bias.

Sad but he will come round.

I'm very nearly done with them. Let them f*cking die. Frankly.

Given your respective ages he's at much lower risk than you are.

DavidL said:

Foxy said:

DavidL said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

Italian daily update

2502 infected since the beginning of the outbreak

160 healed
79 dead

229 in intensive care
1034 in hospital
1000 isolated at home

Regional breakdown

1.326 cases in Lombardia, 398 in Emilia Romagna, 297 in Veneto, 56 in Piemonte, 59 Marche, 30 in Campania, 19 in Liguria, 18 in Toscana, 11 Lazio, 13 in Friuli Venezia Giulia, 5 in Sicilia, 6 in Puglia, 6 in Abruzzo, 4 in Trentino, 3 in Molise, 8 in Umbria, 1 each in Bolzano, in Calabria, in Sardegna e Basilicata

Italy is seriously close to matching China in number of dead today. What on earth is going on?

Italy is very vulnerable to flu outbreaks. 17,000 Italians die per annum from the flu (vs 4000 typically in the UK).

Weird. Is it a classification thing amongst doctors or something? I would have thought that their climate ought to have made them less vulnerable than ours.

Italy is pretty cold and damp in winter, and little central heating.

Yes but not as cold or damp as here. And our heating/ventilation isn't great. 4x the death rate? I can't help wondering how many of those deaths would have been classified in this country.

A quick check on Google says it is colder in Milan over the winter than it is in London, it is only when you hot spring it gets warmer. And consistently more humidity.

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

At least half the comments on this thread should have been flagged for going off-topic so soon.

I am sympathetic to your argument, as you know, but facts are facts. This POTUS election is taking place in a context of a full-on plague, which might, very conceivably, kill millions of Americans and hospitalise millions of others.

These are not fanciful figures, they are reasonable scenarios.

So whenever you start talking about the POTUS elex you will be talking about the virus within about 3 minutes, not least coz it could actually kill half the candidates. Cf Iran's parliament

https://twitter.com/aawsat_eng/status/1234955458194092032?s=20

A fanatic: one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Mate, there is no other subject.

Please explain to me how you could debate the betting opportunities around the Dem primaries WITHOUT referencing a massive global menace which presages intense global death.

Answer, you can't.

It would be like discussing the Grand National betting opportunities without mentioning the fact the race will take place during a bizarre radioactive tornado, which attacks certain kinds of horses.

If you made the slightest link between the democratic primaries (and remember tonight is the biggest bunch of them in this presidential cycle for four years - hence "Super Tuesday") and the betting opportunities then I might be more forgiving.

But you don't. You just tediously wank out apocalyptical posts 24/7.

A better analogy for your final paragraph would be that you're a poster who goes to the Grand National, grabs a megaphone and then drowns out all conversation amongst all other spectators on the grandstand by shouting about how the bizarre radioactive tornado will wipe out all horses for all time and how we'd be best burning all our wallets and just throwing ourselves in front of them now so we can get it over with.

Then, when everyone groans, and then one horse subsequently falls over and needs to be put down, you shout even louder: "ah, you see - I told you I was right! It was just a worst case scenario!!"

I see you are still in "this is just the flu" stage. Good luck.

Absolute bollocks.

rottenborough said:

Mysticrose said:

rottenborough said:

eadric said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

At least half the comments on this thread should have been flagged for going off-topic so soon.

I am sympathetic to your argument, as you know, but facts are facts. This POTUS election is taking place in a context of a full-on plague, which might, very conceivably, kill millions of Americans and hospitalise millions of others.

These are not fanciful figures, they are reasonable scenarios.

So whenever you start talking about the POTUS elex you will be talking about the virus within about 3 minutes, not least coz it could actually kill half the candidates. Cf Iran's parliament

https://twitter.com/aawsat_eng/status/1234955458194092032?s=20

A fanatic: one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Mate, there is no other subject.

Please explain to me how you could debate the betting opportunities around the Dem primaries WITHOUT referencing a massive global menace which presages intense global death.

Answer, you can't.

It would be like discussing the Grand National betting opportunities without mentioning the fact the race will take place during a bizarre radioactive tornado, which attacks certain kinds of horses.

If you made the slightest link between the democratic primaries (and remember tonight is the biggest bunch of them in this presidential cycle for four years - hence "Super Tuesday") and the betting opportunities then I might be more forgiving.

But you don't. You just tediously wank out apocalyptical posts 24/7.

I see you are still in "this is just the flu" stage. Good luck.

Normalcy bias.

Sad but he will come round.

I'm very nearly done with them. Let them f*cking die. Frankly.

Not sure the virus cares whether it kills those with normalcy bias or the rest.

If we're going all anthropomorphic, what does the virus get out of killing its host? It's something which has always baffled me.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that these kinds of virus are more likely to evolve/mutate to a state where they don't kill the host.

Ah, okay, thank you.

Ratters - really interesting post below. Thank you for that.

DavidL said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

tyson said:

another_richard said:

tyson said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

Omnium said:

HYUFD said:

Omnium said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Omnium said:

The origin is certainle norm. It'd be stupid to blame China in this.

No, it would be stupid not to blame China in this

No. It is stupid not to accept Trump is putting his citizens at risk of their lives

Until about ten days ago Trump was calling the Virus a hoax...then it hit the markets...

The poor preparation by the US to manage the epidemic may prove to be one of the worst policy decisions in the history of mankind

Trump doesn't control every level of government in the USA.

I'd be interested to know what, for example, the Governors of California and Washington have been doing.

A fragmentndous for the US...it's been horrendous for China..and that is just the start

I think it'll be bad.

It's not sure though tha

Who knows.

Glad you broached this, not me!

If coronavirus kills off a shagload of old people and severely reduces property prices etc etc it may well be a good thing..... in the very long term.

Also good for the environment, pangolins, and crowding in Venice.

Seems unfair that you should cut off my thoughts given the tricky terrain!

"It's not sure though tha" makes me seem like a blithering idiot. I can do that with no help whatsoever from you thanks.

Apols!

But your point is good.

My wife is very much of the Gaia persuasion. And I discern some sense in what she says. This is the planet readjusting. Giving humanity a lesson, and making sure we stop f*cking around with pollution, animal welfare, plastics, and so on.

It's a good perspective to use, mentally. This is the cold sharp shock. This is the Earth saying: Wise Up or you ALL die.

If there is any truth in this Gaia needs to pull a finger out. So far in about 3 months 3,000 people have died. In the meantime the human population increases by about 250,000 a day: https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

Aside from the fact it's absolutely barking it's also a tidy example of confirmation bias.

538 forecast, Democratic nomination:

No majority: 3 in 5
Biden: 3 in 10
Sanders: 1 in 12

https://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/super-tuesday/

rottenborough said:

Mysticrose said:

rottenborough said:

eadric said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

At least half the comments on this thread should have been flagged for going off-topic so soon.

I am sympathetic to your argument, as you know, but facts are facts. This POTUS election is taking place in a context of a full-on plague, which might, very conceivably, kill millions of Americans and hospitalise millions of others.

These are not fanciful figures, they are reasonable scenarios.

So whenever you start talking about the POTUS elex you will be talking about the virus within about 3 minutes, not least coz it could actually kill half the candidates. Cf Iran's parliament

https://twitter.com/aawsat_eng/status/1234955458194092032?s=20

A fanatic: one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Mate, there is no other subject.

Please explain to me how you could debate the betting opportunities around the Dem primaries WITHOUT referencing a massive global menace which presages intense global death.

Answer, you can't.

It would be like discussing the Grand National betting opportunities without mentioning the fact the race will take place during a bizarre radioactive tornado, which attacks certain kinds of horses.

If you made the slightest link between the democratic primaries (and remember tonight is the biggest bunch of them in this presidential cycle for four years - hence "Super Tuesday") and the betting opportunities then I might be more forgiving.

But you don't. You just tediously wank out apocalyptical posts 24/7.

I see you are still in "this is just the flu" stage. Good luck.

Normalcy bias.

Sad but he will come round.

I'm very nearly done with them. Let them f*cking die. Frankly.

Not sure the virus cares whether it kills those with normalcy bias or the rest.

If we're going all anthropomorphic, what does the virus get out of killing its host? It's something which has always baffled me.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that these kinds of virus are more likely to evolve/mutate to a state where they don't kill the host.

Isn't that natural selection? If it's too deadly the host dies before transmitting it.

Who would be Nick Watt or others tonight? Trying to put some umph into the Patel story when we are faced by a massive, generation-level health crisis.

9/109. The case/death ratio in the US is now the worst in the world.

And Trump might still win? Jeez, he should be hanging off a lamp post.

rcs1000 said:

TimT said:

eristdoof said:

Beibheirli_C said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

@HYUFD

May I use an analogy?

On your street are five houses. In House Number One, an electric blanket catches fire. All five houses burn down.

In Houses One through Four, the residents fitted smoke detectors. The consequence of which is that - although the houses were burnt down - everyone survived.

In House Five, the owner thought fitting smoke alarms was "fear mongering". When his house burnt down, his wife and child died.

Does the owner of House Five have any responsibility for the deaths, or does it all fall on House One?

Ultimately it falls on House One as he caused the fire and used an electric blanket in a dangerous condition.

Of course it might have been advisable for House 5 to buy a smoke alarm to limit the damage but that does not absolve the owner of House 1 of ultimate responsibility

What about the builder who built the houses so close together and of combustible material? What about the manufacturer of the electric blanket. Or the fire service - was their response up to scratch? Or the politicians and media that put such silly notions into the head of Mr no. 5?

You are way too quick to jump to conclusions.

It is actually the fault of the electric blanket manufacturer for making such a rubbish product.

it is actually the fault of George Westinghouse for developing the high voltage AC electricity system in the 1880's, allowing the development of national electricit grids. Without this the electric blanket would never have been invented, and the poor residents at No.5 would never have died.

Clearly, you're on the right track with your root cause analysis. But have you gone back quite far enough? Is Mr Faraday blameless?

I hereby solemnly promise to never use an analogy on PB ever again.

Isn't that like a bear promising never to sh*t in the wood again?

DavidL said:

9/109. The case/death ratio in the US is now the worst in the world.

And Trump might still win? Jeez, he should be hanging off a lamp post.

Surely that is because even ill people are being turned away for a test if they aren’t ill enough?

That case that hit the news today - person pitches up with temperature of 100, denied test because the qualifying threshold is 100.4. Now turns out they have the virus.

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Foxy said:

DavidL said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

Italian daily update

2502 infected since the beginning of the outbreak

160 healed
79 dead

229 in intensive care
1034 in hospital
1000 isolated at home

Regional breakdown

1.326 cases in Lombardia, 398 in Emilia Romagna, 297 in Veneto, 56 in Piemonte, 59 Marche, 30 in Campania, 19 in Liguria, 18 in Toscana, 11 Lazio, 13 in Friuli Venezia Giulia, 5 in Sicilia, 6 in Puglia, 6 in Abruzzo, 4 in Trentino, 3 in Molise, 8 in Umbria, 1 each in Bolzano, in Calabria, in Sardegna e Basilicata

Italy is seriously close to matching China in number of dead today. What on earth is going on?

Italy is very vulnerable to flu outbreaks. 17,000 Italians die per annum from the flu (vs 4000 typically in the UK).

Weird. Is it a classification thing amongst doctors or something? I would have thought that their climate ought to have made them less vulnerable than ours.

Italy is pretty cold and damp in winter, and little central heating.

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

No, there is some tentative evidence, from a German study I lined days ago.

Sadly, some experts think the sun won't necessarily save us:

https://twitter.com/skarlamangla/status/1234552464768000000?s=20

NB: this Harvard guy is one of the early warners I've been watching for a month. He sensed the danger and sounded the klaxon, for a long time he was ignored.

Marc is certainly well plugged into all the national preparedness and policy circles in DC on biological issues. He was prominent in the gain-of-function debate here.

He predicts 40-70% contagion rate around the world.

Which means millions dead in just America, and the UK. Pretty damn sobering.

It will be very interesting to see where the numbers shake out once we have good, comprehensive data from serology of entire populations. Alas, we very rarely get that.

Democrats don't like Trump. Who knew !

TimT said:

eristdoof said:

Beibheirli_C said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

@HYUFD

May I use an analogy?

On your street are five houses. In House Number One, an electric blanket catches fire. All five houses burn down.

In Houses One through Four, the residents fitted smoke detectors. The consequence of which is that - although the houses were burnt down - everyone survived.

In House Five, the owner thought fitting smoke alarms was "fear mongering". When his house burnt down, his wife and child died.

Does the owner of House Five have any responsibility for the deaths, or does it all fall on House One?

Ultimately it falls on House One as he caused the fire and used an electric blanket in a dangerous condition.

Of course it might have been advisable for House 5 to buy a smoke alarm to limit the damage but that does not absolve the owner of House 1 of ultimate responsibility

What about the builder who built the houses so close together and of combustible material? What about the manufacturer of the electric blanket. Or the fire service - was their response up to scratch? Or the politicians and media that put such silly notions into the head of Mr no. 5?

You are way too quick to jump to conclusions.

It is actually the fault of the electric blanket manufacturer for making such a rubbish product.

it is actually the fault of George Westinghouse for developing the high voltage AC electricity system in the 1880's, allowing the development of national electricit grids. Without this the electric blanket would never have been invented, and the poor residents at No.5 would never have died.

Clearly, you're on the right track with your root cause analysis. But have you gone back quite far enough? Is Mr Faraday blameless?

Edison surely? Faraday was a DC man.....

RobD said:

rottenborough said:

Mysticrose said:

rottenborough said:

eadric said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

At least half the comments on this thread should have been flagged for going off-topic so soon.

I am sympathetic to your argument, as you know, but facts are facts. This POTUS election is taking place in aise millions of others.

These are not fanciful figures, they are reasonable scenarios.

So whenever you start talking about the POTUS elex you will be talking about the virus within about 3 minutes, not least coz it could actually kill half the candidates. Cf Iran's parliament

https://twitter.com/aawsat_eng/status/1234955458194092032?s=20

A fanatic: one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Mate, there is no other subject.

Please explain to me how you could debate the betting opportunities around the Dem primaries WITHOUT referencing a massive global menace which presages intense global death.

Answer, you can't.

It would be like discussing the Grand National betting opportunities without mentioning the fact the race will take place during a bizarre radioactive tornado, which attacks certain kinds of horses.

If you made the slightest link between the democratic primaries (and remember tonight is the biggest bunch of them in this presidential cycle for four years - hence "Super Tuesday") and the betting opportunities then I might be more forgiving.

But you don't. You just tediously wank out apocalyptical posts 24/7.

I see you are still in "this is just the flu" stage. Good luck.

Normalcy bias.

Sad but he will come round.

I'm very nearly done with them. Let them f*cking die. Frankly.

Not sure the virus cares whether it kills those with normalcy bias or the rest.

If we're going all anthropomorphic, what does the virus get out of killing its host? It's something which has always baffled me.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that these kinds of virus are more likely to evolve/mutate to a state where they don't kill the host.

Isn't that natural selection? If it's too deadly the host dies before transmitting it.

Equally if not more pertinently, viruses that only make us slightly unwell encourage us to go out and about and share it with all our workmates and friends. Viruses that make us seriously ill keep us in bed away from doing too much harm.

DavidL said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Foxy said:

TimT said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stock up on Vitaman C?:

https://www.mpnnow.com/news/20200128/dr-gifford-jones-people-are-dying-needlessly-of-coronavirus?fbclid=IwAR2DoOIfnTVBtcs-mkCXwlFLHvntY3OtFlL-4ggY4-sqz3-2NCGPRK0OnLE

I think he is wrong to extrapolate from research on intravenous ascorbic acid to the oral form. They are not equivalent.

Though PBers may be interested in this little recipe for hand sanitizer.

https://www.oregonlive.com/coronavirus/2020/03/coronavirus-prevention-how-to-make-hand-sanitizer-at-home.html

For about £25 on Amazon, enough ingredients to make a couple of litres, and delivery for the weekend.

It is an enveloped RNA virus. Isn't soap all your need? A lot less than £25.

Soap is best, but alcohol hand rubs are good when on the move. Indeed our infection Prevention team favour them for general use except on invisibly contaminated hands.

Interestingly today when I arrived at my daughter's nursery to pick her up there was a new addition of an alcohol santiser dispenser at the front door of the nursery asking people to sanitise their hands before they come in to prevent the spread of germs which wasn't there this morning or before.

A good addition and not crazy given the age group the nursery is looking after, you don't want a viral outbreak with babies without good immunity and toddlers present. But it made me wonder why the dispenser was never there before today.

So far as we can tell the kids are not really at risk but that does not mean that they couldn't carry it and infect their families. Inter-familial infection was by far the most common in China. We have had these dispensers in Hospitals for some time now, ever since HAIs became a serious issue. It is surprising that the practice in places other than hospitals has not been reviewed.

Indeed this particular virus seems to not target kids and is especially targeting the elderly but many viruses DO target kids who lack an immune system, which is why looking back the sanitiser should likely have always been there.

DavidL said:

Andy_JS said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Foxy said:

DavidL said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

Italian daily update

2502 infected since the beginning of the outbreak

160 healed
79 dead

229 in intensive care
1034 in hospital
1000 isolated at home

Regional breakdown

Italy is very vulnerable to flu outbreaks. 17,000 Italians die per annum from the flu (vs 4000 typically in the UK).

Weird. Is it a classification thing amongst doctors or something? I would have thought that their climate ought to have made them less vulnerable than ours.

Italy is pretty cold and damp in winter, and little central heating.

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

No, there is some tentative evidence, from a German study I lined days ago.

Sadly, some experts think the sun won't necessarily save us:

https://twitter.com/skarlamangla/status/1234552464768000000?s=20

NB: this Harvard guy is one of the early warners I've been watching for a month. He sensed the danger and sounded the klaxon, for a long time he was ignored.

Marc is certainly well plugged into all the national preparedness and policy circles in DC on biological issues. He was prominent in the gain-of-function debate here.

He predicts 40-70% contagion rate around the world.

Which means millions dead in just America, and the UK. Pretty damn sobering.

Yep. Latest WHO mortality is up today to 3.4% which tallies with the current figure in Italy.

And we know this is now spreading in the US with its minimal testing regime. It's probably rampant in the UK without any lockdown measures.

It's really grim. And obviously far more important than how many delegates Sleepy Joe gets over Bernie Sanders.

There's no evidence it's rampant in the UK.

I don't believe for a moment it is. If it was our wide ranging testing would be picking up random cases. Every case today caught it abroad. Every one. So far, we are keeping this in check.

Yes, so far so good, but it is really a matter of time before community spread occurs.

Alistair said:

DavidL said:

Foxy said:

DavidL said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

Italian daily update

2502 infected since the beginning of the outbreak

160 healed
79 dead

229 in intensive care
1034 in hospital
1000 isolated at home

Regional breakdown

1.326 cases in Lombardia, 398 in Emilia Romagna, 297 in Veneto, 56 in Piemonte, 59 Marche, 30 in Campania, 19 in Liguria, 18 in Toscana, 11 Lazio, 13 in Friuli Venezia Giulia, 5 in Sicilia, 6 in Puglia, 6 in Abruzzo, 4 in Trentino, 3 in Molise, 8 in Umbria, 1 each in Bolzano, in Calabria, in Sardegna e Basilicata

Italy is seriously close to matching China in number of dead today. What on earth is going on?

Italy is very vulnerable to flu outbreaks. 17,000 Italians die per annum from the flu (vs 4000 typically in the UK).

Weird. Is it a classification thing amongst doctors or something? I would have thought that their climate ought to have made them less vulnerable than ours.

Italy is pretty cold and damp in winter, and little central heating.

Yes but not as cold or damp as here. And our heating/ventilation isn't great. 4x the death rate? I can't help wondering how many of those deaths would have been classified in this country.

A quick check on Google says it is colder in Milan over the winter than it is in London, it is only when you hot spring it gets warmer. And consistently more humidity.

Bet its colder in Glasgow though and certainly damper. The fact remains that they live longer than us on average so their living conditions are not harming them. The prevalence of recorded flu deaths must be down to something else.

Benpointer said:

Are we really doing any random testing? I'd assumed that was a luxury we can't really afford and only those with relevant symptoms were being tested.

Plus with current positive rates being so low*, what what would be the point? Chances of getting a positive from random testing must be near zero.

(*"As of 3 March, a total of 13,911 people have been tested in the UK, of which 13,860 were confirmed negative. 51 were confirmed as positive.")

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

Random amongst a targeted subset of people, namely those who would have been in contact with those infected?

Newsnight — get a grip. We want to hear about coronavirus not an alleged conspiracy to get rid of Priti Patel.

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

At least half the comments on this thread should have been flagged for going off-topic so soon.

I am sympathetic to your argument, as you know, but facts are facts. This POTUS election is taking place in a context of a full-on plague, which might, very conceivably, kill millions of Americans and hospitalise millions of others.

These are not fanciful figures, they are reasonable scenarios.

So whenever you start talking about the POTUS elex you will be talking about the virus within about 3 minutes, not least coz it could actually kill half the candidates. Cf Iran's parliament

https://twitter.com/aawsat_eng/status/1234955458194092032?s=20

A fanatic: one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Mate, there is no other subject.

Please explain to me how you could debate the betting opportunities around the Dem primaries WITHOUT referencing a massive global menace which presages intense global death.

Answer, you can't.

It would be like discussing the Grand National betting opportunities without mentioning the fact the race will take place during a bizarre radioactive tornado, which attacks certain kinds of horses.

If you made the slightest link between the burno!!"

I see you are still in "this is just the flu" stage. Good luck.

Normalcy bias.

Sad but he will come round.

Fuck off.

Seriously: fuck off.

I first posted my concerns about Coronavirus on 22nd January (check my twitter feed) when @eadric was just a wink in an international novelist's eye. I ordered emergency supplies for 2-3 weeks before you or anyone else were bleating about it on here, including sanitisers, goggles, masks, gloves and medical supplies. My assumption is that most of us will get it and I have factored in self-isolation and supply chain disruption.

I have done it soberly, rationally and calculatedly. Just like I do with my betting. And I bet I thought about it weeks before you.

What I haven't done is been a total fucking bore about it on here night and day because I'm an absolute drama queen who thinks there's no difference between keeping calm and being ignorant, and so the only sign of being informed is to lose your shit about it every 42 minutes.

But, you know this. You're just a follower who struggles with independent thought and who's very easily influenced by others.

And so, we feel a bit sorry for you - and we ignore you.

That well known lefty rag is causing more problems for Priti Patel

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1234969156467994626

Mysticrose said:

rottenborough said:

eadric said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

At least half the comments on this thread should have been flagged for going off-topic so soon.

I am sympathetic to your argument, as you know, but facts are facts. This POTUS election is taking place in a context of a full-on plague, which might, very conceivably, kill millions of Americans and hospitalise millions of others.

These are not fanciful figures, they are reasonable scenarios.

So whenever you start talking about the POTUS elex you will be talking about the virus within about 3 minutes, not least coz it could actually kill half the candidates. Cf Iran's parliament

https://twitter.com/aawsat_eng/status/1234955458194092032?s=20

A fanatic: one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Mate, there is no other subject.

Please explain to me how you could debate the betting opportunities around the Dem primaries WITHOUT referencing a massive global menace which presages intense global death.

Answer, you can't.

It would be like discussing the Grand National betting opportunities without mentioning the fact the race will take place during a bizarre radioactive tornado, which attacks certain kinds of horses.

If you made the slightest link between the democratic primaries (and remember tonight is the biggest bunch of them in this presidential cycle for four years - hence "Super Tuesday") and the betting opportunities then I might be more forgiving.

But you don't. You just tediously wank out apocalyptical posts 24/7.

I see you are still in "this is just the flu" stage. Good luck.

Normalcy bias.

Sad but he will come round.

I'm very nearly done with them. Let them f*cking die. Frankly.

Not sure the virus cares whether it kills those with normalcy bias or the rest.

If we're going all anthropomorphic, what does the virus get out of killing its host? It's something which has always baffled me.

The ones that kill their hosts are still at the design stage.

Andy_JS said:

Newsnight — get a grip. We want to hear about coronavirus not an alleged conspiracy to get rid of Priti Patel.

Yes. Does feel very odd.

TheScreamingEagles said:

That well known lefty rag is causing more problems for Priti Patel

https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1234969156467994626

If Boris wants his immigration points system delivered I humbly suggest he needs a new Home Secretary.

Ratters said:

Looking at this outbreak from a maths background, two concepts spring to mind: 1) exponential growth, which had been well discussed; and 2) catastrophe theory, which has been less so.

Catastrophe theory is essentially the study of what happens in non-linear systems where a small change causes a sudden very large change (think a landslide), where it is often highly unpredictable in advance what the breaking point will be.

The relevance here is the impact on healthcare systems and society. This 'may' only be 10x worse than normal flu in isolation, but that places no limit on what the impact will be in certain countries when they reach breaking point. Some countries (hopefully the UK from our initial response) may only see a bad flu season plus slowing economic growth, but others (see Iran...) won't be so lucky.

On 1. Sigmoid aka logistic growth ist the usual pattern for disease counts, which in the "take off" stage is indistinguishable from exponential growth, which is where we are now. Wuhan could well be in the linear stage in the middle, before the tailing off.

On 2. Your right. And for those who don't know, a catastrophe in this sense does not have to be a disaster, but where an overhanging cliff edge in the mathematical functon is reached and there is suddenly a drop to another smooth part of the function. If a mathematical catastrophe point is reached in the spread of this virus, it would be a human catastrophe as well.

This type of problem is modelled in the applied maths and physics fields where the inputs can be accurately controlled and the occurrence of a catastrophic event easily measured. Such models are rarely fitted in data analysis, although a higly non-linear model like a neural network might find such behaviour. The problem is you need shed loads of data to have a chance of modelling it, and we have at the moment very limited data.

TL;DR catastrophe theory models might be relevant, but aren't going to help us at this stage, due to lack of information.

LostPassword said:

Chameleon said:

From a purely economic view, a 20% reduction in the number of over 75s would enhance the fiscal prospects of the next 50 years greatly. The massive pensions spend would fall, the amount spent on care would fall, less strain on the NHS etc. From a cold objective view this virus might not be all bad.

On the flip side, every death is someone losing their parent, many someones losing their grandparents etc. Add on top of that the massive psychological trauma that such an event would cause.

I disagree with almost everything Mr Meeks says, but his this is looking like a divider in history, a true before/after event like 9/11 is looking more likely by the day.

But I am enormously grateful that our Health minister and public health bodies look to be tackling it in a world leading manner, so far.

One consequence of your observation is that there will be an economic penalty suffered by countries that manage the virus well and minimise deaths compared to countries that suffer a higher death rate, if that difference is large. I know which I'd choose, but it's odd how that will also shape the years to come.

I disagree.

All countries will be forced to take measures eventually, and the later you take them, the greater the economic impact.

Beibheirli_C said:

rcs1000 said:

TimT said:

eristdoof said:

Beibheirli_C said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

@HYUFD

May I use an analogy?

On your street are five houses. In House Number One, an electric blanket catches fire. All five houses burn down.

In Houses One through Four, the residents fitted smoke detectors. The consequence of which is that - although the houses were burnt down - everyone survived.

In House Five, the owner thought fitting smoke alarms was "fear mongering". When his house burnt down, his wife and child died.

Does the owner of House Five have any responsibility for the deaths, or does it all fall on House One?

Ultimately it falls on House One as he caused the fire and used an electric blanket in a dangerous condition.

Of course it might have been advisable for House 5 to buy a smoke alarm to limit the damage but that does not absolve the owner of House 1 of ultimate responsibility

What about the builder who built the houses so close together and of combustible material? What about the manufacturer of the electric blanket. Or the fire service - was their response up to scratch? Or the politicians and media that put such silly notions into the head of Mr no. 5?

You are way too quick to jump to conclusions.

It is actually the fault of the electric blanket manufacturer for making such a rubbish product.

it is actually the fault of George Westinghouse for developing the high voltage AC electricity system in the 1880's, allowing the development of national electricit grids. Without this the electric blanket would never have been invented, and the poor residents at No.5 would never have died.

Clearly, you're on the right track with your root cause analysis. But have you gone back quite far enough? Is Mr Faraday blameless?

I hereby solemnly promise to never use an analogy on PB ever again.

Why?

It’s like he designed a great car and then it spun off the road.

Gallowgate said:

Priti Patel

Drip... drip... drip...

Is she melting? Or at least defrosting?

Benpointer said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Chameleon said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

snip

snip

Yep. Latest WHO mortality is up today to 3.4% which tallies with the current figure in Italy.

And we know this is now spreading in the US with its minimal testing regime. It's probably rampant in the UK without any lockdown measures.

It's really grim. And obviously far more important than how many delegates Sleepy Joe gets over Bernie Sanders.

I'm bullish about the UK, we're doing a lot of random testing.

Whereas the US... based on 5 days to double, and 20 cases escaping catching end Jan, they're over the 10k mark.

Are we really doing any random testing? I'd assumed that was a luxury we can't really afford and only those with relevant symptoms were being tested.

Plus with current positive rates being so low*, what what would be the point? Chances of getting a positive from random testing must be near zero.

(*"As of 3 March, a total of 13,911 people have been tested in the UK, of which 13,860 were confirmed negative. 51 were confirmed as positive.")

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

If it doesn't include any random testing then that makes the numbers even better and suggests transmission rates are low.

Good point. Maybe you're right, I just don't know. The test numbers do seem impressively high.

Can anyone confirm categorically if random coronavirus testing is taking place in the UK?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51641243

> Tests for coronavirus are being increased to include people displaying flu-like symptoms at 100 GP surgeries and eight hospitals across the UK.

That seems about as random as possible. 108 locations in the UK where if someone walks in with flu symptoms they get tested. It's a damn sight more than almost every other country is doing.

Benpointer said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Chameleon said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

No, there is some tentative evidence, from a German study I lined days ago.

Sadly, some experts think the sun won't necessarily save us:

https://twitter.com/skarlamangla/status/1234552464768000000?s=20

NB: this Harvard guy is one of the early warners I've been watching for a month. He sensed the danger and sounded the klaxon, for a long time he was ignored.

Marc is certainly well plugged into all the national preparedness and policy circles in DC on biological issues. He was prominent in the gain-of-function debate here.

He predicts 40-70% contagion rate around the world.

Which means millions dead in just America, and the UK. Pretty damn sobering.

Yep. Latest WHO mortality is up today to 3.4% which tallies with the current figure in Italy.

And we know this is now spreading in the US with its minimal testing regime. It's probably rampant in the UK without any lockdown measures.

It's really grim. And obviously far more important than how many delegates Sleepy Joe gets over Bernie Sanders.

I'm bullish about the UK, we're doing a lot of random testing.

Whereas the US... based on 5 days to double, and 20 cases escaping catching end Jan, they're over the 10k mark.

Are we

(*"As of 3 March, a total of 13,911 people have been tested in the UK, of which 13,860 were confirmed negative. 51 were confirmed as positive.")

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

If it doesn't include any random testing then that makes the numbers even better and suggests transmission rates are low.

Good point. Maybe you're right, I just don't know. The test numbers do seem impressively high.

Can anyone confirm categorically if random coronavirus testing is taking place in the UK?

Yes, as part of virogical surveillance of cold and flu.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-britain/uk-conducts-random-coronavirus-testing-as-part-of-early-warning-plan-idUSKCN20K1G1

Chameleon said:

Benpointer said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Chameleon said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

snip

snip

Yep. Latest WHO mortality is up today to 3.4% which tallies with the current figure in Italy.

And we know this is now spreading in the US with its minimal testing regime. It's probably rampant in the UK without any lockdown measures.

It's really grim. And obviously far more important than how many delegates Sleepy Joe gets over Bernie Sanders.

I'm bullish about the UK, we're doing a lot of random testing.

Whereas the US... based on 5 days to double, and 20 cases escaping catching end Jan, they're over the 10k mark.

Are we really doing any random testing? I'd assumed that was a luxury we can't really afford and only those with relevant symptoms were being tested.

Plus with current positive rates being so low*, what what would be the point? Chances of getting a positive from random testing must be near zero.

(*"As of 3 March, a total of 13,911 people have been tested in the UK, of which 13,860 were confirmed negative. 51 were confirmed as positive.")

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

If it doesn't include any random testing then that makes the numbers even better and suggests transmission rates are low.

Good point. Maybe you're right, I just don't know. The test numbers do seem impressively high.

Can anyone confirm categorically if random coronavirus testing is taking place in the UK?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51641243

> Tests for coronavirus are being increased to include people displaying flu-like symptoms at 100 GP surgeries and eight hospitals across the UK.

That seems about as random as possible. 108 locations in the UK where if someone walks in with flu symptoms they get tested. It's a damn sight more than almost every other country is doing.

People with flu symptoms aren’t random.

IanB2 said:

Mysticrose said:

rottenborough said:

eadric said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

eadric said:

Casino_Royale said:

At least half the comments on this thread should have been flagged for going off-topic so soon.

I am sympathetic to your argument, as you know, but facts are facts. This POTUS election is taking place in a context of a full-on plague, which might, very conceivably, kill millions of Americans and hospitalise millions of others.

These are not fanciful figures, they are reasonable scenarios.

So whenever you start talking about the POTUS elex you will be talking about the virus within about 3 minutes, not least coz it could actually kill half the candidates. Cf Iran's parliament

https://twitter.com/aawsat_eng/status/1234955458194092032?s=20

A fanatic: one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Mate, there is no other subject.

Please explain to me how you could debate the betting opportunities around the Dem primaries WITHOUT referencing a massive global menace which presages intense global death.

Answer, you can't.

It would be like discussing the Grand National betting opportunities without mentioning the fact the race will take place during a bizarre radioactive tornado, which attacks certain kinds of horses.

If you made the slightest link between the democratic primaries (and remember tonight is the biggest bunch of them in this presidential cycle for four years - hence "Super Tuesday") and the betting opportunities then I might be more forgiving.

But you don't. You just tediously wank out apocalyptical posts 24/7.

I see you are still in "this is just the flu" stage. Good luck.

Normalcy bias.

Sad but he will come round.

I'm very nearly done with them. Let them f*cking die. Frankly.

Not sure the virus cares whether it kills those with normalcy bias or the rest.

If we're going all anthropomorphic, what does the virus get out of killing its host? It's something which has always baffled me.

The ones that kill their hosts are still at the design stage.

Ah, okay, thank you. It's HIV which made me curious on this level. But then the timespan from infection to death via AIDS is long, very long, by the standards of coronavirus.

Right, Joey beckons.

I'm sorry you seem so cross, Mr Casino. It's just the most important news event of my lifetime and yours. Your irritation with those of us discussing it is somewhat out of tune.

Mysticrose said:

Benpointer said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Chameleon said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

No, there is some tentative evidence, from a German study I lined days ago.

Sadly, some experts think the sun won't necessarily save us:

https://twitter.com/skarlamangla/status/1234552464768000000?s=20

NB: this Harvard guy is one of the early warners I've been watching for a month. He sensed the danger and sounded the klaxon, for a long time he was ignored.

Marc is certainly well plugged into all the national preparedness and policy circles in DC on biological issues. He was prominent in the gain-of-function debate here.

He predicts 40-70% contagion rate around the world.

Which means millions dead in just America, and the UK. Pretty damn sobering.

Yep. Latest WHO mortality is up today to 3.4% which tallies with the current figure in Italy.

And we know this is now spreading in the US with its minimal testing regime. It's probably rampant in the UK without any lockdown measures.

It's really grim. And obviously far more important than how many delegates Sleepy Joe gets over Bernie Sanders.

I'm bullish about the UK, we're doing a lot of random testing.

Whereas the US... based on 5 days to double, and 20 cases escaping catching end Jan, they're over the 10k mark.

Are we really doing any random testing? I'd assumed that was a luxury we can't really afford and only those with relevant symptoms were being tested.

Plus with current positive rates being so low*, what what would be the point? Chances of getting a positive from random testing must be near zero.

(*"As of 3 March, a total of 13,911 people have been tested in the UK, of which 13,860 were confirmed negative. 51 were confirmed as positive.")

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

If it doesn't include any random testing then that makes the numbers even better and suggests transmission rates are low.

Can anyone confirm categorically if random coronavirus testing is taking place in the UK?

No it isn't.

I am shocked that you are wrong.

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Priti Patel

Drip... drip... drip...

Its much ado about nothing.

The public is far more interested in coronavirus, the party has an 80 seat majority, there's no election due for over 4 years, she's the right person for the job.

She will ride this out comfortably.

An alleged bully is the right person for the job???

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

Foxy said:

DavidL said:

Andy_JS said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Foxy said:

DavidL said:

Philip_Thompson said:

DavidL said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

Italy is pretty cold and damp in winter, and little central heating.

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

No, there is some tentative evidence, from a German study I lined days ago.

Sadly, some experts think the sun won't necessarily save us:

https://twitter.com/skarlamangla/status/1234552464768000000?s=20

NB: this Harvard guy is one of the early warners I've been watching for a month. He sensed the danger and sounded the klaxon, for a long time he was ignored.

Marc is certainly well plugged into all the national preparedness and policy circles in DC on biological issues. He was prominent in the gain-of-function debate here.

He predicts 40-70% contagion rate around the world.

Which means millions dead in just America, and the UK. Pretty damn sobering.

Yep. Latest WHO mortality is up today to 3.4% which tallies with the current figure in Italy.

And we know this is now spreading in the US with its minimal testing regime. It's probably rampant in the UK without any lockdown measures.

It's really grim. And obviously far more important than how many delegates Sleepy Joe gets over Bernie Sanders.

There's no evidence it's rampant in the UK.

I don't believe for a moment it is. If it was our wide ranging testing would be picking up random cases. Every case today caught it abroad. Every one. So far, we are keeping this in check.

Yes, so far so good, but it is really a matter of time before community spread occurs.

Oh I agree, but the more time the better, the flatter the curve, the less stress on hospitals, the possibility of a vaccine. We are doing the right thing.

Absolutely. The difference between the UK and the USA and the differences between Trump and Johnson have never been more stark.

As astute observers have been saying for a while, Trump is a populist playing politics, Johnson is a politician playing populism.

Chameleon said:

Benpointer said:

another_richard said:

Benpointer said:

Chameleon said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

snip

Yep. Latest WHO mortality is up today to 3.4% which tallies with the current figure in Italy.

And we know this is now spreading in the US with its minimal testing regime. It's probably rampant in the UK without any lockdown measures.

It's really grim. And obviously far more important than how many delegates Sleepy Joe gets over Bernie Sanders.

I'm bullish about the UK, we're doing a lot of random testing.

Whereas the US... based on 5 days to double, and 20 cases escaping catching end Jan, they're over the 10k mark.

Are we really doing any random testing? I'd assumed that was a luxury we can't really afford and only those with relevant symptoms were being tested.

Plus with current positive rates being so low*, what what would be the point? Chances of getting a positive from random testing must be near zero.

(*"As of 3 March, a total of 13,911 people have been tested in the UK, of which 13,860 were confirmed negative. 51 were confirmed as positive.")

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

If it doesn't include any random testing then that makes the numbers even better and suggests transmission rates are low.

Good point. Maybe you're right, I just don't know. The test numbers do seem impressively high.

Can anyone confirm categorically if random coronavirus testing is taking place in the UK?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51641243

> Tests for coronavirus are being increased to include people displaying flu-like symptoms at 100 GP surgeries and eight hospitals across the UK.

That seems about as random as possible. 108 locations in the UK where if someone walks in with flu symptoms they get tested. It's a damn sight more than almost every other country is doing.

Mmmm doesn't seem random to me. It's just testing people with symptoms.

https://twitter.com/LadPolitics/status/1234975132562575360

Watching CNN. If you've got a red number next to Joe Biden it's time to panic

TGOHF666 said:

Gallowgate said:

Priti Patel

Drip... drip... drip...

She’s going nowhere.

The only drips are the melted snowflakes leaving here department.

Describing victims of alleged bullying as snowflakes...

Wow. Ok.

Gallowgate said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Gallowgate said:

Priti Patel

Drip... drip... drip...

Its much ado about nothing.

The public is far more interested in coronavirus, the party has an 80 seat majority, there's no election due for over 4 years, she's the right person for the job.

She will ride this out comfortably.

An alleged bully is the right person for the job???

Someone whose objectives are the same as the government's objectives and is prepared to rock the boat to get there is the right person for the job right now.

Beibheirli_C said:

rcs1000 said:

TimT said:

eristdoof said:

Beibheirli_C said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

@HYUFD

May I use an analogy?

On your street are five houses. In House Number One, an electric blanket catches fire. All five houses burn down.

In Houses One through Four, the residents fitted smoke detectors. The consequence of which is that - although the houses were burnt down - everyone survived.

In House Five, the owner thought fitting smoke alarms was "fear mongering". When his house burnt down, his wife and child died.

Does the owner of House Five have any responsibility for the deaths, or does it all fall on House One?

Ultimately it falls on House One as he caused the fire and used an electric blanket in a dangerous condition.

Of course it might have been advisable for House 5 to buy a smoke alarm to limit the damage but that does not absolve the owner of House 1 of ultimate responsibility

What about the builder who built the houses so close together and of combustible material? What about the manufacturer of the electric blanket. Or the fire service - was their response up to scratch? Or the politicians and media that put such silly notions into the head of Mr no. 5?

You are way too quick to jump to conclusions.

It is actually the fault of the electric blanket manufacturer for making such a rubbish product.

it is actually the fault of George Westinghouse for developing the high voltage AC electricity system in the 1880's, allowing the development of national electricit grids. Without this the electric blanket would never have been invented, and the poor residents at No.5 would never have died.

Clearly, you're on the right track with your root cause analysis. But have you gone back quite far enough? Is Mr Faraday blameless?

I hereby solemnly promise to never use an analogy on PB ever again.

Why?

I posted an analogy about a fire in a house, and before long, people had extended the analogy all the way back to Thomas Edison, Nikolai Tesla, and the invention of alternating current.

Pulpstar said:

Watching CNN. If you've got a red number next to Joe Biden it's time to panic

I'm liking your posts tonight!

Benpointer said:

Chameleon said:

Mysticrose said:

eadric said:

TimT said:

eadric said:

Omnium said:

eadric said:

Foxy said:

Italy is pretty cold and damp in winter, and little central heating.

Also north Italy - the Veneto and Lombardy - is notoriously dank and humid in winter. And this virus likes that.

Nice story - surely no evidence though?

Let's hope it doesn't like the warm.

No, there is some tentative evidence, from a German study I lined days ago.

Sadly, some experts think the sun won't necessarily save us:

https://twitter.com/skarlamangla/status/1234552464768000000?s=20

NB: this Harvard guy is one of the early warners I've been watching for a month. He sensed the danger and sounded the klaxon, for a long time he was ignored.

Marc is certainly well plugged into all the national preparedness and policy circles in DC on biological issues. He was prominent in the gain-of-function debate here.

He predicts 40-70% contagion rate around the world.

Which means millions dead in just America, and the UK. Pretty damn sobering.

Yep. Latest WHO mortality is up today to 3.4% which tallies with the current figure in Italy.

And we know this is now spreading in the US with its minimal testing regime. It's probably rampant in the UK without any lockdown measures.

It's really grim. And obviously far more important than how many delegates Sleepy Joe gets over Bernie Sanders.

I'm bullish about the UK, we're doing a lot of random testing.

Whereas the US... based on 5 days to double, and 20 cases escaping catching end Jan, they're over the 10k mark.

Are we really doing any random testing? I'd assumed that was a luxury we can't really afford and only those with relevant symptoms were being tested.

Plus with current positive rates being so low*, what what would be the point? Chances of getting a positive from random testing must be near zero.

(*"As of 3 March, a total of 13,911 people have been tested in the UK, of which 13,860 were confirmed negative. 51 were confirmed as positive.")

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

I'm not sure but I think the "random testing" was specifically to see if there was any sign of it being in the general population at the time it started spreading out of China. The figure of 13.9 thousand does not seem much higer than the number at the start of last week, so the "under the radar" testing has more or less ended and now the focus is on checking the freinds and aquaintances of those who test positive.

Beibheirli_C said:

IanB2 said:

Beibheirli_C said:

rcs1000 said:

TimT said:

eristdoof said:

Beibheirli_C said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

@HYUFD

May I use an analogy?

On your street are five houses. In House Number One, an electric blanket catches fire. All five houses burn down.

In Houses One through Four, the residents fitted smoke detectors. The consequence of which is that - although the houses were burnt down - everyone survived.

In House Five, the owner thought fitting smoke alarms was "fear mongering". When his house burnt down, his wife and child died.

Does the owner of House Five have any responsibility for the deaths, or does it all fall on House One?

Ultimately it falls on House One as he caused the fire and used an electric blanket in a dangerous condition.

Of course it might have been advisable for House 5 to buy a smoke alarm to limit the damage but that does not absolve the owner of House 1 of ultimate responsibility

What about the builder who built the houses so close together and of combustible material? What about the manufacturer of the electric blanket. Or the fire service - was their response up to scratch? Or the politicians and media that put such silly notions into the head of Mr no. 5?

You are way too quick to jump to conclusions.

It is actually the fault of the electric blanket manufacturer for making such a rubbish product.

it is actually the fault of George Westinghouse for developing the high voltage AC electricity system in the 1880's, allowing the development of national electricit grids. Without this the electric blanket would never have been invented, and the poor residents at No.5 would never have died.

Clearly, you're on the right track with your root cause analysis. But have you gone back quite far enough? Is Mr Faraday blameless?

I hereby solemnly promise to never use an analogy on PB ever again.

Why?

It’s like he designed a great car and then it spun off the road.

It hit black ice or something....

Exactly. Rcs designed the car to be fast and luxurious but didn’t consider safety or road handling. When he took it out on the road it ran into unexpected conditions and the rest is history.

Pulpstar said:

Watching CNN. If you've got a red number next to Joe Biden it's time to panic

Smithson and Herdson ?

Gallowgate said:

TGOHF666 said:

Gallowgate said:

Priti Patel

Drip... drip... drip...

She’s going nowhere.

The only drips are the melted snowflakes leaving here department.

Describing victims of alleged bullying as snowflakes...

Wow. Ok.

Yes - someone who apparently tried to commit suicide is a “snowflake”. The lack of empathy is shocking.

Gallowgate said:

TGOHF666 said:

Gallowgate said:

Priti Patel

Drip... drip... drip...

She’s going nowhere.

The only drips are the melted snowflakes leaving here department.

Describing victims of alleged bullying as snowflakes...

Wow. Ok.

"victims".

You could have put the word "alleged" or "supposed" or even "apparent" before "victims".

There have been a grand total of ZERO formal complaints levied via the formal complaint mechanism against Patel. So yeah, I'm going with no victims here. If you're a victim and there's a complaint mechanism the first step is to put in a complaint. 🙄

rcs1000 said:

Beibheirli_C said:

rcs1000 said:

TimT said:

eristdoof said:

Beibheirli_C said:

IanB2 said:

HYUFD said:

rcs1000 said:

@HYUFD

May I use an analogy?

On your street are five houses. In House Number One, an electric blanket catches fire. All five houses burn down.

In Houses One through Four, the residents fitted smoke detectors. The consequence of which is that - although the houses were burnt down - everyone survived.

In House Five, the owner thought fitting smoke alarms was "fear mongering". When his house burnt down, his wife and child died.

Does the owner of House Five have any responsibility for the deaths, or does it all fall on House One?

Ultimately it falls on House One as he caused the fire and used an electric blanket in a dangerous condition.

Of course it might have been advisable for House 5 to buy a smoke alarm to limit the damage but that does not absolve the owner of House 1 of ultimate responsibility

What about the builder who built the houses so close together and of combustible material? What about the manufacturer of the electric blanket. Or the fire service - was their response up to scratch? Or the politicians and media that put such silly notions into the head of Mr no. 5?

You are way too quick to jump to conclusions.

It is actually the fault of the electric blanket manufacturer for making such a rubbish product.

it is actually the fault of George Westinghouse for developing the high voltage AC electricity system in the 1880's, allowing the development of national electricit grids. Without this the electric blanket would never have been invented, and the poor residents at No.5 would never have died.

Clearly, you're on the right track with your root cause analysis. But have you gone back quite far enough? Is Mr Faraday blameless?

I hereby solemnly promise to never use an analogy on PB ever again.

Why?

I posted an analogy about a fire in a house, and before long, people had extended the analogy all the way back to Thomas Edison, Nikolai Tesla, and the invention of alternating current.

I tried to move the discussion on to an analogy about your analogy. Is this better?

I think there Patel is the victim of misogynistic racism. People don't like a Conservative female ethnic minority so pick on her in a way they wouldn't with a white man.

There we go, now Patel is a victim. I mean no formal complaint has been levied by Patel and I just made that up [sort of] but apparently we don't need formal complaints for there to be victims that people should lose their jobs over.