Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

All things Rugby
User avatar
Saint
Posts: 15685
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: South Oxfordshire

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Saint »

Sounds like pretty much all of UK retail is shutting up shop even without a government order
de_Selby
Posts: 3792
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 5:47 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by de_Selby »

so in the good news corner we have 12k ventilators coming on stream in the UK :thumbup:

but in the bad news corner we have tensions fraying and everyone at each others throat after only 1 week of social distancing :thumbdown:
User avatar
paddyor
Posts: 19214
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by paddyor »

https://necpluribusimpar.net/are-we-hea ... -disaster/

Interesting read particularly about the limits of models and in particular the model used by the ICL team in their paper. What if it just leads to group think? We could end up talking ourselves into a deeper depression if it's only a little bit off.
User avatar
Sards
Posts: 30072
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Innie Kaap

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Sards »

All this aggression...
User avatar
ScarfaceClaw
Posts: 12245
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by ScarfaceClaw »

backrow wrote:
Salanya wrote:
backrow wrote:Maybe

I'm also a stupid sexist pig who has no sense of 'doing the right thing', as I don't understand such concepts
Sucks to be you.
Hey, nice edit - should have recalled it as you that Harped on about quitting numerous jobs because managers were nasty blah blah blah
Perhaps you just don’t understand the concept of respinsabilty, public office, overcoming challenges , making tough decisions ?

My comments on your crappy ex health minister stand whether they are a woman or a man so I wasn’t being sexist for once , it’s cowards softcock behaviour of the highest order there by your elected official.
Jaysus Yeeb. You’ve dropped a bollock on this one. Step back and let Mog and Bimbo run with it for a few pages. It’s not your finest hour...
User avatar
TheFrog
Posts: 12605
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by TheFrog »

Varsity Way wrote:
Lobby wrote:
Varsity Way wrote:
backrow wrote:
danny_fitz wrote:I have just driven past a 'drive through' Maccie D's near me and it was somewhat disturbing to see a queue of vehicles wrapping around the block and the restaurant itself rammed with people. What the f*ck is wrong with people.
The Cheam one was the same, a pal told me about this - bonkers behaviour
I thought they had shut every outlet??
I think they are shutting today, so the idiots all headed out so they could get their last fix of Maccy Ds before the shut down.
I do like one, but will not be having one! I am hoping to lose a few pounds in these troubling times.

I just heard that a guy that I have dealt with professionally (lettings manager) has died aged 50 from Covid-19 - no underlying health issues as far as I know. :((
A colleague of mine lost a friend- the second death in Ontario and that guy was healthy too before catching the virus.
User avatar
The Man Without Fear
Posts: 11126
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: The centre of The Horrendous Space Kablooie!

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by The Man Without Fear »

Sards wrote:All this aggression...
Up yours!
Nolanator
Posts: 38830
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Nolanator »

Staying in such an important job at a time like this while clearly unfit for it and in poor health would be fúcking stupid.


All the fatties queuing for their Maccie D's are probably vulnerable to the virus, but are still congregating and probably spreading it amongst themselves.
User avatar
clementinfrance
Posts: 3607
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: France

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by clementinfrance »

ScarfaceClaw wrote:
backrow wrote:
Salanya wrote:
backrow wrote:Maybe

I'm also a stupid sexist pig who has no sense of 'doing the right thing', as I don't understand such concepts
Sucks to be you.
Hey, nice edit - should have recalled it as you that Harped on about quitting numerous jobs because managers were nasty blah blah blah
Perhaps you just don’t understand the concept of respinsabilty, public office, overcoming challenges , making tough decisions ?

My comments on your crappy ex health minister stand whether they are a woman or a man so I wasn’t being sexist for once , it’s cowards softcock behaviour of the highest order there by your elected official.
Jaysus Yeeb. You’ve dropped a bollock on this one. Step back and let Mog and Bimbo run with it for a few pages. It’s not your finest hour...
Typical Yeeb.

Heavy doses of mysogyny, a sprinkling of victim complex together with loads of uninformed opinion and clichés...
User avatar
6.Jones
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by 6.Jones »

paddyor wrote:https://necpluribusimpar.net/are-we-hea ... -disaster/

Interesting read particularly about the limits of models and in particular the model used by the ICL team in their paper. What if it just leads to group think? We could end up talking ourselves into a deeper depression if it's only a little bit off.
A good article for modeling geeks, and kudos to him for digging into the assumptions in the IC model, but as he concludes:
I think the risk of a worst case scenario is enough to suggest the pretty radical strategy I briefly described above
That strategy is lockdown. His point is we can't know the worst case. Lockdown is prudent.
If the predictions made by those simulations are correct or even if they’re not but they’re also not completely off the mark, then we are headed toward an unprecedented health disaster. This would mean that we should not only build ventilators, we should probably build ventilator factories .
I like this:
First, even if the probability that an individual is infected because he goes to a polling station is not greater than the probability that he is infected because he goes to the supermarket to buy groceries, it’s quite obvious that the probability that he is infected if he does both is greater than if he just goes to the supermarket to buy groceries. Similarly, someone who goes to the supermarket twice a week is more likely to be infected than someone who goes only once a week. Indeed, if that were not the case, the government would not be asking us today to limit the number of times we go out in order to minimize the risk of being infected or infecting others. This is totally obvious and one has to be a complete idiot not to understand it, but unfortunately I fear that we are being governed by idiots, because even though they lie a lot, I have little doubt that they still believe a lot of the nonsense they are saying.
Bravo.
User avatar
paddyor
Posts: 19214
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by paddyor »

What a piece of shit. he's citing a (dubious at best) study which held a goct he was once part of responsible for 130k deaths

https://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/124 ... 17216?s=20
User avatar
CM11
Posts: 60087
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by CM11 »

Another 'good' day for Italy. Below 5000 new cases and fewer deaths again for the second day. Below 10% growth rate now.
User avatar
ManInTheBar
Posts: 5918
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 12:40 pm
Location: Suffolk ba

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by ManInTheBar »

CM11 wrote:Another 'good' day for Italy. Below 5000 new cases and fewer deaths again for the second day. Below 10% growth rate now.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... try/italy/

If you squint at the cases table on the logarithmic scale you could JUST imagine that it is flattening out.

But we must also be aware that it has been the North that has been worst affected so far and that there may be another surge from the mezzogiorno and the south

Ach, we're all experts now :(
User avatar
CM11
Posts: 60087
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by CM11 »

ManInTheBar wrote:
CM11 wrote:Another 'good' day for Italy. Below 5000 new cases and fewer deaths again for the second day. Below 10% growth rate now.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... try/italy/

If you squint at the cases table on the logarithmic scale you could JUST imagine that it is flattening out.

But we must also be aware that it has been the North that has been worst affected so far and that there may be another surge from the mezzogiorno and the south

Ach, we're all experts now :(
Graph won't be updated until tomorrow so you'll need to squint less then!

But fair point. :((
de_Selby
Posts: 3792
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 5:47 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by de_Selby »

paddyor wrote:https://necpluribusimpar.net/are-we-hea ... -disaster/

Interesting read particularly about the limits of models and in particular the model used by the ICL team in their paper. What if it just leads to group think? We could end up talking ourselves into a deeper depression if it's only a little bit off.
This is really great, good to have some detail on the model, so the simulation was essentially a monte carlo model. It seems like a good way to go about modelling it, though the outcomes are a bit frightening obviously.

Obviously it's not a perfect model, but I'm not sure all his criticisms of it are valid - eg: you wouldn't need to account for the hours worked/at home surely that could just be incorporated into the transmission coefficients.
He also mentions a few times that he thinks a big failing of the model is that it doesn't account for an increased transmission when hospital beds are saturated, I don't really see why that would be the case.
User avatar
Petej
Posts: 4506
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Monmouthshire

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Petej »

CM11 wrote:
ManInTheBar wrote:
CM11 wrote:Another 'good' day for Italy. Below 5000 new cases and fewer deaths again for the second day. Below 10% growth rate now.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... try/italy/

If you squint at the cases table on the logarithmic scale you could JUST imagine that it is flattening out.

But we must also be aware that it has been the North that has been worst affected so far and that there may be another surge from the mezzogiorno and the south

Ach, we're all experts now :(
Graph won't be updated until tomorrow so you'll need to squint less then!

But fair point. :((
Hopefully this means full suppression might be achievable ala Taiwan and South Korea.
User avatar
ManInTheBar
Posts: 5918
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2016 12:40 pm
Location: Suffolk ba

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by ManInTheBar »

CM11 wrote:
ManInTheBar wrote:
CM11 wrote:Another 'good' day for Italy. Below 5000 new cases and fewer deaths again for the second day. Below 10% growth rate now.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavir ... try/italy/

If you squint at the cases table on the logarithmic scale you could JUST imagine that it is flattening out.

But we must also be aware that it has been the North that has been worst affected so far and that there may be another surge from the mezzogiorno and the south

Ach, we're all experts now :(
Graph won't be updated until tomorrow so you'll need to squint less then!

But fair point. :((
I'll be a day older and have had several more w@ks by then (it's a comfort) so my sight...

But thanks for drawing my attention to the date issue which I had not been aware of
goeagles
Posts: 8638
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by goeagles »

6.Jones wrote:
paddyor wrote:https://necpluribusimpar.net/are-we-hea ... -disaster/

Interesting read particularly about the limits of models and in particular the model used by the ICL team in their paper. What if it just leads to group think? We could end up talking ourselves into a deeper depression if it's only a little bit off.
A good article for modeling geeks, and kudos to him for digging into the assumptions in the IC model, but as he concludes:
I think the risk of a worst case scenario is enough to suggest the pretty radical strategy I briefly described above
That strategy is lockdown. His point is we can't know the worst case. Lockdown is prudent.
If the predictions made by those simulations are correct or even if they’re not but they’re also not completely off the mark, then we are headed toward an unprecedented health disaster. This would mean that we should not only build ventilators, we should probably build ventilator factories .
I like this:
First, even if the probability that an individual is infected because he goes to a polling station is not greater than the probability that he is infected because he goes to the supermarket to buy groceries, it’s quite obvious that the probability that he is infected if he does both is greater than if he just goes to the supermarket to buy groceries. Similarly, someone who goes to the supermarket twice a week is more likely to be infected than someone who goes only once a week. Indeed, if that were not the case, the government would not be asking us today to limit the number of times we go out in order to minimize the risk of being infected or infecting others. This is totally obvious and one has to be a complete idiot not to understand it, but unfortunately I fear that we are being governed by idiots, because even though they lie a lot, I have little doubt that they still believe a lot of the nonsense they are saying.
Bravo.
Good post and it hits home for a really frustrating reason. My wife's father is a control freak and part of how that manifests itself is that he goes to the grocery store every single day, sometimes multiple times per day. He is 68 with existing comorbidities. My wife's mother is 80 and also in a high risk group. Her father refuses to change his behavior and continues to go to the grocery store every single day. My wife has begged him to stop going to the grocery store so much and he refuses, which results in her yelling at him and telling him that if he gives her mom COVID and she dies that she will never talk to him again. Of course, on a societal level, that's also really bad behavior as if he gets it and is asymptomatic for a week, he's 7x as likely to spread it at a grocery store as someone who only goes once a week.
User avatar
Raggs
Posts: 18569
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Raggs »

de_Selby wrote:
paddyor wrote:https://necpluribusimpar.net/are-we-hea ... -disaster/

Interesting read particularly about the limits of models and in particular the model used by the ICL team in their paper. What if it just leads to group think? We could end up talking ourselves into a deeper depression if it's only a little bit off.
This is really great, good to have some detail on the model, so the simulation was essentially a monte carlo model. It seems like a good way to go about modelling it, though the outcomes are a bit frightening obviously.

Obviously it's not a perfect model, but I'm not sure all his criticisms of it are valid - eg: you wouldn't need to account for the hours worked/at home surely that could just be incorporated into the transmission coefficients.
He also mentions a few times that he thinks a big failing of the model is that it doesn't account for an increased transmission when hospital beds are saturated, I don't really see why that would be the case.
Didn't see that, but didn't read it all. Are you sure it's not that he's repeatedly saying that morbidity rate goes up a lot more when hospitals are saturated, and that wasn't taken into account (because to my reading, he said that a lot).
de_Selby
Posts: 3792
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 5:47 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by de_Selby »

Raggs wrote:
de_Selby wrote:
paddyor wrote:https://necpluribusimpar.net/are-we-hea ... -disaster/

Interesting read particularly about the limits of models and in particular the model used by the ICL team in their paper. What if it just leads to group think? We could end up talking ourselves into a deeper depression if it's only a little bit off.
This is really great, good to have some detail on the model, so the simulation was essentially a monte carlo model. It seems like a good way to go about modelling it, though the outcomes are a bit frightening obviously.

Obviously it's not a perfect model, but I'm not sure all his criticisms of it are valid - eg: you wouldn't need to account for the hours worked/at home surely that could just be incorporated into the transmission coefficients.
He also mentions a few times that he thinks a big failing of the model is that it doesn't account for an increased transmission when hospital beds are saturated, I don't really see why that would be the case.
Didn't see that, but didn't read it all. Are you sure it's not that he's repeatedly saying that morbidity rate goes up a lot more when hospitals are saturated, and that wasn't taken into account (because to my reading, he said that a lot).
My bad, he uses the term "infection fatality rate" which I parsed as infection rate.
User avatar
Boobs not Moobs
Posts: 6437
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Boobs not Moobs »

BBC news just shut down Alistair Campbell saying we're out of time, and then instead of going to new news it just carried on reshowing clips from earlier :lol:
User avatar
Saint
Posts: 15685
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: South Oxfordshire

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Saint »

Boobs not Moobs wrote:BBC news just shut down Alistair Campbell saying we're out of time, and then instead of going to new news it just carried on reshowing clips from earlier :lol:
Shame it's taken an event like this to put Campbell where he deserves to be
User avatar
Raggs
Posts: 18569
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Raggs »

Up by nearly 1000 again for the UK.
User avatar
Boobs not Moobs
Posts: 6437
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Boobs not Moobs »

Saint wrote:
Boobs not Moobs wrote:BBC news just shut down Alistair Campbell saying we're out of time, and then instead of going to new news it just carried on reshowing clips from earlier :lol:
Shame it's taken an event like this to put Campbell where he deserves to be
He was having a good rant.
goeagles
Posts: 8638
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by goeagles »

New cases down and new deaths down again from yesterday in Italy.

3/23: 4789, 601
3/22: 5560, 651
3/21: 6557, 793

May this trend continue.
backrow
Posts: 22389
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by backrow »

goeagles wrote:New cases down and new deaths down again from yesterday in Italy.

3/23: 4789, 601
3/22: 5560, 651
3/21: 6557, 793

May this trend continue.
Deffo
Have seen on the worldometer site that a few European counties seem to have slightly decreased the rate, like a rollercoaster nearing the top
User avatar
6.Jones
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by 6.Jones »

goeagles wrote:New cases down and new deaths down again from yesterday in Italy.

3/23: 4789, 601
3/22: 5560, 651
3/21: 6557, 793

May this trend continue.
That's one for the good news thread. Social distancing having an effect.
User avatar
tabascoboy
Posts: 10801
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: 曇りの街

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by tabascoboy »

So, BoJo's going to address the nation at 20.30. Presumably a stepping up of restrictions...
User avatar
Frodder
Posts: 10516
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 1:25 pm
Location: Leafy Cheshire (West)

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Frodder »

tabascoboy wrote:So, BoJo's going to address the nation at 20.30. Presumably a stepping up of restrictions...
Public parks, golf courses, beaches etc...for the chop. Further measures?
User avatar
message #2527204
Posts: 12666
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Ultracrepidaria

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by message #2527204 »

Frodder wrote:
tabascoboy wrote:So, BoJo's going to address the nation at 20.30. Presumably a stepping up of restrictions...
Public parks, golf courses, beaches etc...for the chop. Further measures?
More likely close down all but essential business?

They've already said they want to keep parks open and given reasons?
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12309
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by sorCrer »

message #2527204 wrote:
Frodder wrote:
tabascoboy wrote:So, BoJo's going to address the nation at 20.30. Presumably a stepping up of restrictions...
Public parks, golf courses, beaches etc...for the chop. Further measures?
More likely close down all but essential business?

They've already said they want to keep parks open and given reasons?

Everyone lockdown in homes from midnight Thursday in Saffaland. :(
User avatar
Boobs not Moobs
Posts: 6437
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Boobs not Moobs »

FFS :lol: :? :(
The Taliban have pledged their readiness to cooperate with healthcare workers instead of killing them, as fear of a coronavirus epidemic spreads in Afghanistan.

Whatever reservations the militants previously held over eradicating the crippling disease, they have now clearly grasped the dangers posed by the pandemic sweeping the rest of the world.

In the past the military organisation have been accused of impeding the work of doctors.

'The Islamic Emirate via its Health Commission assures all international health organizations and WHO of its readiness to cooperate and coordinate with them in combating the coronavirus,' said Suhail Shaheen, the Taliban's spokesman, on Twitter, using the term the group uses to describe itself.
User avatar
Raggs
Posts: 18569
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 8:49 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Raggs »

Thought France was improving, but looks like they've updated their numbers, almost 25% increase again.
C69
Posts: 40067
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 1:44 pm
Location: For Wales the Welsh and aproppriate pronouns

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by C69 »

Feck me that was a dire day in work.
Since this virus began we have a chronic shortage of PPE and loads of staff being given terrible advice by ward staff.
:( the real figures and predictions are potentially much much worse than projected
I have banged on about ventilation for weeks before it became fashionable.
We are fecked in this matter.
User avatar
eldanielfire
Posts: 30445
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by eldanielfire »

TheFrog wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Spoiler: show
Image
Shows that centuries after, ways of fighting pandemic remain centuries old methods rather than high tech solutions
Even providing the protection in Vaccination is a centuries old method.
quarter2four
Posts: 656
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2018 10:20 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by quarter2four »

TheFrog wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Spoiler: show
Image
Shows that centuries after, ways of fighting pandemic remain centuries old methods rather than high tech solutions
Its fake.

From here https://twitter.com/Pepys_Diaries
User avatar
eldanielfire
Posts: 30445
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by eldanielfire »

de_Selby wrote:so in the good news corner we have 12k ventilators coming on stream in the UK :thumbup:

but in the bad news corner we have tensions fraying and everyone at each others throat after only 1 week of social distancing :thumbdown:
Government hoping for 30,000 in 2 weeks:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... olls-royce
User avatar
happyhooker
Posts: 23124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by happyhooker »

eldanielfire wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Spoiler: show
Image
Shows that centuries after, ways of fighting pandemic remain centuries old methods rather than high tech solutions
Even providing the protection in Vaccination is a centuries old method.
You know it's bollocks, right? A fake quote from a normally decent twitter feed
User avatar
Derwyn
Posts: 2710
Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2019 11:08 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Derwyn »

backrow wrote:
goeagles wrote:New cases down and new deaths down again from yesterday in Italy.

3/23: 4789, 601
3/22: 5560, 651
3/21: 6557, 793

May this trend continue.
Deffo
Have seen on the worldometer site that a few European counties seem to have slightly decreased the rate, like a rollercoaster nearing the top
Then what happens when the restrictions lift?
User avatar
CM11
Posts: 60087
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by CM11 »

Derwyn wrote:
backrow wrote:
goeagles wrote:New cases down and new deaths down again from yesterday in Italy.

3/23: 4789, 601
3/22: 5560, 651
3/21: 6557, 793

May this trend continue.
Deffo
Have seen on the worldometer site that a few European counties seem to have slightly decreased the rate, like a rollercoaster nearing the top
Then what happens when the restrictions lift?
There'll be no one left to infect!
Post Reply