treetree Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 54 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said: And this: https://lockdownsceptics.org/code-review-of-fergusons-model/ https://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2020/05/09/imperial-covid-model/ Yet more disbelief of the modelling that has led to this draconian overreaction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stumfelter Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 (edited) The stochastic implementation of the inputs/outputs certainly seems expotentionally large given the fundamental erroneous neocese of this virus. Edited May 11, 2020 by stumfelter To add the word erroneous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treetree Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, Lord v said: What stood out to me is the 'willing to roll up his sleeves and still code and run models'. While on a treadmill! That bit really did make me laugh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walker570 Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 What percentage of 65 million give or take a couple of unknowns just landed on the beach at Dover, is 32,000. What percentage is 230,000 of 65 mill. What is the percentage chance of anykof us, hopefully just taking sensible common sense precautions of catching it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 58 minutes ago, treetree said: Disobedience! That is the kind of language straight out of 1984; the fact it is willingly being used by the public to demand the continued lockdown of the population is really beyond depressing. Just so pleased to have given some amusement. 😀 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 4 minutes ago, Walker570 said: What percentage of 65 million give or take a couple of unknowns just landed on the beach at Dover, is 32,000. What percentage is 230,000 of 65 mill. What is the percentage chance of anykof us, hopefully just taking sensible common sense precautions of catching it? It’s more like 70 million and broadly you’re looking at 0.00045714% and 0.00328571%. Would you consign two generations to economic chaos based on either? Don’t forget to factor in deaths caused by the lockdown and future poverty etc. Oh and don’t forget that the greatest proportion of those small percentages is made up of the very elderly and those already at end of life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 16 minutes ago, treetree said: https://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2020/05/09/imperial-covid-model/ Yet more disbelief of the modelling that has led to this draconian overreaction News this evening in Scotland is asking questions about why Scotland wasn't locked down earlier. A family have lost 3 elderly members after a party in February iirc and although it was confirmed they died of C19, NS followed the UK advice! Now she is wanting to delay unlocking! If I was a conspiracy theorist... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 11 minutes ago, treetree said: https://chrisvoncsefalvay.com/2020/05/09/imperial-covid-model/ Yet more disbelief of the modelling that has led to this draconian overreaction You lost me with the draconian overreaction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walker570 Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 38 minutes ago, Mungler said: It’s more like 70 million and broadly you’re looking at 0.00045714% and 0.00328571%. Would you consign two generations to economic chaos based on either? Don’t forget to factor in deaths caused by the lockdown and future poverty etc. Oh and don’t forget that the greatest proportion of those small percentages is made up of the very elderly and those already at end of life. I rest my case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 34 minutes ago, Mungler said: It’s more like 70 million and broadly you’re looking at 0.00045714% and 0.00328571%. Would you consign two generations to economic chaos based on either? Don’t forget to factor in deaths caused by the lockdown and future poverty etc. Oh and don’t forget that the greatest proportion of those small percentages is made up of the very elderly and those already at end of life. Psst, you're two orders of magnitude out with those percentages squire! Correct numbers are 0.045714% and 0.328571% respectively 😉 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treetree Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 43 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said: You lost me with the draconian overreaction? The locking up healthy people and crashing the economy, you know the one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 13 minutes ago, treetree said: The locking up healthy people and crashing the economy, you know the one. That's what I hoped you were going to say 👍 Thanks for clarifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Raja Clavata said: Psst, you're two orders of magnitude out with those percentages squire! Correct numbers are 0.045714% and 0.328571% respectively 😉 How so? It’s been a long day for me 😆 Edit Just re-done the calc and you’re right; not sure I’d get Professor Ferguson’s job... oh hang on, I might 😆 I still wouldn’t crash an economy on those percentages (and because it’s not as though though percentages are stacked with fit twenty year olds). Edited May 11, 2020 by Mungler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 36 minutes ago, Mungler said: How so? It’s been a long day for me 😆 Edit Just re-done the calc and you’re right; not sure I’d get Professor Ferguson’s job... oh hang on, I might 😆 I still wouldn’t crash an economy on those percentages (and because it’s not as though though percentages are stacked with fit twenty year olds). You couldn't afford the pay cut 😛 Nope, neither would I 👍 And neither could I, lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 Quote News this evening in Scotland is asking questions about why Scotland wasn't locked down earlier. A family have lost 3 elderly members after a party in February iirc and although it was confirmed they died of C19, NS followed the UK advice! Now she is wanting to delay unlocking! I am unclear as to why Sturgeon didn't lock down Scotland weeks before the rest of the UK. She does her own thing, when it suits. When it doesn't, she blames the UK Government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mice! Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 2 hours ago, Walker570 said: What percentage of 65 million give or take a couple of unknowns just landed on the beach at Dover, is 32,000. What percentage is 230,000 of 65 mill. What is the percentage chance of anykof us, hopefully just taking sensible common sense precautions of catching it? I've been trying to find a break down of the age groups that have died in the UK, they come up for other countries, lots of articles about lower income workers being more affected, the same with the BAME group, but not a table of ages affected in the UK Looking at the numbers you can see why the government wants "older" people to stay home its obviously affecting that age group more, but I think this is why they have decided to start getting people back to work. Still a small percentage Walker, but keep your head down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 (edited) So that’s 12% of deaths recorded were under 65 and totalled 3347 (out of a total population of ball park 70,000,000 people). I don’t think we have the stats on how many of those 3347 had underlying pre-existing health conditions but I bet it’s more than 50%. It’s a brutal assessment / equation, but nonetheless an equation a government has to carry out and that is at what possible death rate to call for a lockdown and alas that decision making process appears to have been based on a massively flawed computer model. Edit I would add that my family and I have stuck to the lockdown. I have seen no one other than my immediate household family and 5 members of skeleton staff in 7 weeks and I have tried to work from home. My 18 year old, 15 year old and 13 year old haven’t been out at all. When lockdown lifts, I don’t have the urge to put myself in harms way and won’t needlessly be going out or extending my social circle ie I will apply common sense. However, from my own business I know that we will be making at least 10% of staff redundant and from my discussions I believe pretty much every other business will be doing that as a minimum. We are so economically screwed it hurts (and we don’t even seem to know it) Edited May 11, 2020 by Mungler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mice! Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 4 minutes ago, Mungler said: So that’s 12% of deaths recorded were under 65 and totalled 3347 (out of a total population of ball park 70,000,000 people). I don’t think we have the stats on how many of those 3347 had underlying pre-existing health conditions but I bet it’s more than 50%. Still a lot of people who have died but I think that's why they have said go back to work if it's safe to do so. And your probably right on the 50% being higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord v Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 https://andrewlilico.wordpress.com/2020/05/11/a-sense-of-proportion/ Worth a little read. TL:DR. Even a 100,000 extra deaths this year would get us back to a mortality rate last experienced in.... 1996.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 2 minutes ago, Lord v said: https://andrewlilico.wordpress.com/2020/05/11/a-sense-of-proportion/ Worth a little read. TL:DR. Even a 100,000 extra deaths this year would get us back to a mortality rate last experienced in.... 1996.... Spot on and there were probably 5 million less people in the country in 1996 than now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVB Posted May 11, 2020 Author Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 11 minutes ago, Mungler said: Spot on and there were probably 5 million less people in the country in 1996 than now. Which is why I get depressed. Not through the loss of life, which is sad but meh, but the futility of why we are destroying the economy for something that impacts a low percentage of the population who can be isolated. And then reading the many posts on social media about how we should be having a stricter lockdown and “lives before the economy”. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mice! Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 19 minutes ago, Lord v said: https://andrewlilico.wordpress.com/2020/05/11/a-sense-of-proportion/ Worth a little read. TL:DR. Even a 100,000 extra deaths this year would get us back to a mortality rate last experienced in.... 1996.... Makes a lot of sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 11, 2020 Report Share Posted May 11, 2020 (edited) 15 minutes ago, AVB said: Which is why I get depressed. Not through the loss of life, which is sad but meh, but the futility of why we are destroying the economy for something that impacts a low percentage of the population who can be isolated. And then reading the many posts on social media about how we should be having a stricter lockdown and “lives before the economy”. Unfortunately people are a bit thick and a bit binary / black and white. You see it on here - the very suggestion of going outside and it’s seen as a capital offence but with no regard for the fact that we will all have to go back outside at some point in the near future and we will have to get the econony working again very very soon. Everyone thinks ‘bit of a recession like 2008, a couple of quid off the house value that will bounce back anyway and maybe no pay rise at Xmas but broadly it’s all going to be fine’. Oh no it’s not. I know the people I am about to make redundant have zero chance of getting re-hired for years and not months and what really worries me is that 10% may only be the start. And my business is rounded and resilient and we’re not even at the sharp end of this. Edited May 11, 2020 by Mungler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raja Clavata Posted May 12, 2020 Report Share Posted May 12, 2020 A bit like the facebook lot previously spouting stuff about those bending the guidelines - guess what - the people breaking the rules aren't going to change their behaviour based on someone telling them it's wrong on FB. Then yesterday, one of the same people suggesting there's no common sense because the statement made by Boris on Sunday night was 100% crystal clear and then went on to incorrectly quote the first point about returning to work, d'oh! I'm seeing common sense stated / posted everywhere 🙄 and now apparently a special kind of common sense "British common sense" - I do wonder what the qualifying criteria for this "gift" might be... OK, rant over. In other news Oxford Uni are saying that Coronavirus does not qualify as an epidemic in the UK - queue the suggestion that they are over-educated, snow flake, precious types who clearly lack the most basic form of common sense let alone the "special" British version ... 😛 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
udderlyoffroad Posted May 12, 2020 Report Share Posted May 12, 2020 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said: I'm seeing common sense stated / posted everywhere 🙄 and now apparently a special kind of common sense "British common sense" - I do wonder what the qualifying criteria for this "gift" might be... Gah, that perfect commodity, 'Common sense'. Everybody thinks they have enough of it, but apparently there's a chronic shortage. Walk calmly (don't run) a mile away from those who spout off the loudest about common sense. They are usually dangerous ejiots who will get you killed. Edited May 12, 2020 by udderlyoffroad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.