Melbourne. Fvcked.

All things Rugby
User avatar
UncleFB
Posts: 12807
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by UncleFB »

towny wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 8:26 pm
Anonymous 1 wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 7:31 pm
Blackrock Bullet wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 6:58 pm
Anonymous 1 wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 4:02 pm
Blackrock Bullet wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 3:41 pm

And if you listen to the interview, you can hear what she said they did vs. Sweden.

Not that difficult.

What do you mean by unproven theory by the way?
Leave people free to catch Covid-19 and die and enough people will survive to have 60% of the population with antibodies by mid June to have herd immunity.
That wasn't the theory, stop making stuff up.
Yeah they denied that was the goal after they realised they couldn't hit it. A bit like you. Moving the goalposts
21st May

Just 7.3% of Stockholm’s inhabitants had developed Covid-19 antibodies by the end of April, according to a study, raising concerns that the country’s light-touch approach to the coronavirus may not be helping it build up broad immunity.

Tegnell has denied herd immunity is a goal in itself, saying Sweden aims instead to slow the spread of the virus enough for health services to cope. But he has also said countries that imposed strict lockdowns could be more vulnerable to a second wave of infections because a smaller percentage of their populations would be immune.

In April, officials estimated one third of Stockholm residents would have contracted Covid-19 by early May, subsequently suggesting that the capital could reach herd immunity of between 40% and 60% by the middle of June.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... oronavirus
Deliberately killing people
Sweden’s light-touch approach to Covid-19 has come under renewed criticism after emails show the country’s chief epidemiologist appearing to ask whether a higher death rate among older people might be acceptable if it led to faster herd immunity.

Speculation about the views of Sweden’s leading public health officials was further fanned after it also emerged that Anders Tegnell, the architect of the country’s no-lockdown strategy, had deleted some of his emails.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... ity-emails
Since May, less Swedes have died from Covid and pneumonia
than died from pneumonia, flu, etc in the same months last year and the year before that.

Did Sweden kill people last year too, or do you only start caring about people getting sick and dying in 2020?
Have you got the stats for yearly deaths from flu for Sweden? (Genuinely asking because I don't know where to find them).
User avatar
Farva
Posts: 16939
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA PLUM

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Farva »

https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/pub ... nd%20older.

This site suggests that 505 people died from the flu in 2018/19.
That is in line with Australia that sees somewhere between 500 and 2000 deaths a year from the flu.
The flu has a case fatality rate even in the worst seasons of around 0.2% to 0.3%. That is somewhere around 1/10th of what we are seeing with Covid. Sweden has seen over 12 times more death from Covid than a seasonal flu. And Covid probably does more testing than people do with the flu (in Australia for instance, which has a case fatality rate of over 2%, anyone who feels ill gets tested, most people dont get tested for the flu unless they end up in the hospital) so one would assume the case fatality rate for the flu is a greater overestimate of the true IFR than is the case for Covid.
Covid is the flu in the same way Ebola is like the flu.
Having said that, that isnt an argument for or against the Swedish model. Where my criticism for the Swedish model comes in, is that they, like pretty much every society in the world, werent that good at protecting the vulnerable, and so let 6000 people die. And while they did that, there was also a severe economic downturn.
User avatar
UncleFB
Posts: 12807
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by UncleFB »

Farva wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:48 am https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/pub ... nd%20older.

This site suggests that 505 people died from the flu in 2018/19.
That is in line with Australia that sees somewhere between 500 and 2000 deaths a year from the flu.
The flu has a case fatality rate even in the worst seasons of around 0.2% to 0.3%. That is somewhere around 1/10th of what we are seeing with Covid. Sweden has seen over 12 times more death from Covid than a seasonal flu. And Covid probably does more testing than people do with the flu (in Australia for instance, which has a case fatality rate of over 2%, anyone who feels ill gets tested, most people dont get tested for the flu unless they end up in the hospital) so one would assume the case fatality rate for the flu is a greater overestimate of the true IFR than is the case for Covid.
Covid is the flu in the same way Ebola is like the flu.
Having said that, that isnt an argument for or against the Swedish model. Where my criticism for the Swedish model comes in, is that they, like pretty much every society in the world, werent that good at protecting the vulnerable, and so let 6000 people die. And while they did that, there was also a severe economic downturn.
Cheers :thumbup:
User avatar
Zakar
Posts: 16553
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Haunting your dreams

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Zakar »

It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
bimboman
Posts: 65140
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by bimboman »

Farva wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:48 am https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/pub ... nd%20older.

This site suggests that 505 people died from the flu in 2018/19.
That is in line with Australia that sees somewhere between 500 and 2000 deaths a year from the flu.
The flu has a case fatality rate even in the worst seasons of around 0.2% to 0.3%. That is somewhere around 1/10th of what we are seeing with Covid. Sweden has seen over 12 times more death from Covid than a seasonal flu. And Covid probably does more testing than people do with the flu (in Australia for instance, which has a case fatality rate of over 2%, anyone who feels ill gets tested, most people dont get tested for the flu unless they end up in the hospital) so one would assume the case fatality rate for the flu is a greater overestimate of the true IFR than is the case for Covid.
Covid is the flu in the same way Ebola is like the flu.
Having said that, that isnt an argument for or against the Swedish model. Where my criticism for the Swedish model comes in, is that they, like pretty much every society in the world, werent that good at protecting the vulnerable, and so let 6000 people die. And while they did that, there was also a severe economic downturn.
Sorry, but Covid 19 isn’t killing 2-3% of its infected. That’s clearly silly.
User avatar
MungoMan
Posts: 13055
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Coalfalls

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by MungoMan »

bimboman wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:51 am
Farva wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:48 am https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/pub ... nd%20older.

This site suggests that 505 people died from the flu in 2018/19.
That is in line with Australia that sees somewhere between 500 and 2000 deaths a year from the flu.
The flu has a case fatality rate even in the worst seasons of around 0.2% to 0.3%. That is somewhere around 1/10th of what we are seeing with Covid. Sweden has seen over 12 times more death from Covid than a seasonal flu. And Covid probably does more testing than people do with the flu (in Australia for instance, which has a case fatality rate of over 2%, anyone who feels ill gets tested, most people dont get tested for the flu unless they end up in the hospital) so one would assume the case fatality rate for the flu is a greater overestimate of the true IFR than is the case for Covid.
Covid is the flu in the same way Ebola is like the flu.
Having said that, that isnt an argument for or against the Swedish model. Where my criticism for the Swedish model comes in, is that they, like pretty much every society in the world, werent that good at protecting the vulnerable, and so let 6000 people die. And while they did that, there was also a severe economic downturn.
Sorry, but Covid 19 isn’t killing 2-3% of its infected. That’s clearly silly.
Bimbo, I suspect is Farva talking about the percentage of fatalities per diagnosed case rather than per infection, with the latter not knowable with precision right now. It may reasonably be assumed to larger than the number of diagnosed cases; possibly much larger, depending on the testing rate.

FWIW (v. little, of course), my own guess would be that Covid's infection fatality rate will be in the 0.1 to 0.25% range.

EDIT

If I've misconstrued what Farva is saying, he'll likely say so.
bimboman
Posts: 65140
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by bimboman »

Mungo, even if that’s his premise it makes no sense, we’ve been recording 4-7k cases with tests in France for example with not even 2% of those being hospitalised let alone dying.

The disease takes the old and infirm.
User avatar
MungoMan
Posts: 13055
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Coalfalls

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by MungoMan »

bimboman wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:10 am Mungo, even if that’s his premise it makes no sense, we’ve been recording 4-7k cases with tests in France for example with not even 2% of those being hospitalised let alone dying.

The disease takes the old and infirm.
Broadly, I agree. I don't think case fatality rate will say much that is of general use since it is so reliant on the testing rate and, to an extent, on the protocols for showing (or not showing) Covid on death certificates.

For example, the rate for Australia is roughly 2.89%, being derived from 762 deaths out of 26,322 diagnosed cases. If Australia had a greatly different testing rate and /or different protocols re displaying Covid on death certificates, the case fatality rate too would be different.
bimboman
Posts: 65140
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by bimboman »

MungoMan wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:54 am
bimboman wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 6:10 am Mungo, even if that’s his premise it makes no sense, we’ve been recording 4-7k cases with tests in France for example with not even 2% of those being hospitalised let alone dying.

The disease takes the old and infirm.
Broadly, I agree. I don't think case fatality rate will say much that is of general use since it is so reliant on the testing rate and, to an extent, on the protocols for showing (or not showing) Covid on death certificates.

For example, the rate for Australia is roughly 2.89%, being derived from 762 deaths out of 26,322 diagnosed cases. If Australia had a greatly different testing rate and /or different protocols re displaying Covid on death certificates, the case fatality rate too would be different.


Most of those test as diagnosed cases would be from ill people presenting themselves though. The test and trace (haha, except for Germany) here in Europe is finding 1,000’s of cases a day now and has been for months with no corresponding rise in even hospital admissions let alone deaths.

The disease is dreadful for the old, infirm and fat diabetics, the young and pissed are fine. It’s actually a desirable spread.
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 4510
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ellafan »

bimboman wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:17 am
The disease is dreadful for the old, infirm and fat diabetics, the young and pissed are fine. It’s actually a desirable spread.
Image
User avatar
Ali's Choice
Posts: 28431
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Queensland

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ali's Choice »

bimboman wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:17 am The disease is dreadful for the old, infirm and fat diabetics, the young and pissed are fine. It’s actually a desirable spread.
Comments like this are usually a sign that a troll isn't getting enough attention. That he's not inciting enough negative responses. So he desperately up's the ante, even if it means posting something utterly ridiculous.
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 19110
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by CrazyIslander »

The problem I have about the Swedish approach is the lack of humanity. A government must always appear and try to protect the most vulnerable in society.
User avatar
towny
Posts: 17901
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by towny »

UncleFB wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 3:18 am
towny wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 8:26 pm
Anonymous 1 wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 7:31 pm
Blackrock Bullet wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 6:58 pm
Anonymous 1 wrote: Mon Sep 07, 2020 4:02 pm
Leave people free to catch Covid-19 and die and enough people will survive to have 60% of the population with antibodies by mid June to have herd immunity.
That wasn't the theory, stop making stuff up.
Yeah they denied that was the goal after they realised they couldn't hit it. A bit like you. Moving the goalposts
21st May

Just 7.3% of Stockholm’s inhabitants had developed Covid-19 antibodies by the end of April, according to a study, raising concerns that the country’s light-touch approach to the coronavirus may not be helping it build up broad immunity.

Tegnell has denied herd immunity is a goal in itself, saying Sweden aims instead to slow the spread of the virus enough for health services to cope. But he has also said countries that imposed strict lockdowns could be more vulnerable to a second wave of infections because a smaller percentage of their populations would be immune.

In April, officials estimated one third of Stockholm residents would have contracted Covid-19 by early May, subsequently suggesting that the capital could reach herd immunity of between 40% and 60% by the middle of June.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... oronavirus
Deliberately killing people
Sweden’s light-touch approach to Covid-19 has come under renewed criticism after emails show the country’s chief epidemiologist appearing to ask whether a higher death rate among older people might be acceptable if it led to faster herd immunity.

Speculation about the views of Sweden’s leading public health officials was further fanned after it also emerged that Anders Tegnell, the architect of the country’s no-lockdown strategy, had deleted some of his emails.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... ity-emails
Since May, less Swedes have died from Covid and pneumonia
than died from pneumonia, flu, etc in the same months last year and the year before that.

Did Sweden kill people last year too, or do you only start caring about people getting sick and dying in 2020?
Have you got the stats for yearly deaths from flu for Sweden? (Genuinely asking because I don't know where to find them).
I don’t. It was on the news the other day. Reckon it could be sourced pretty easy - I’ll have a dig around later with google translate and come back.
bimboman
Posts: 65140
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by bimboman »

Ali's Choice wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:45 am
bimboman wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:17 am The disease is dreadful for the old, infirm and fat diabetics, the young and pissed are fine. It’s actually a desirable spread.
Comments like this are usually a sign that a troll isn't getting enough attention. That he's not inciting enough negative responses. So he desperately up's the ante, even if it means posting something utterly ridiculous.


There’s nothing about the post that’s ridiculous. I’m not worried about attention. It’s a simple facts.
User avatar
towny
Posts: 17901
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by towny »

Farva wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:48 am https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/pub ... nd%20older.

This site suggests that 505 people died from the flu in 2018/19.
That is in line with Australia that sees somewhere between 500 and 2000 deaths a year from the flu.
The flu has a case fatality rate even in the worst seasons of around 0.2% to 0.3%. That is somewhere around 1/10th of what we are seeing with Covid. Sweden has seen over 12 times more death from Covid than a seasonal flu. And Covid probably does more testing than people do with the flu (in Australia for instance, which has a case fatality rate of over 2%, anyone who feels ill gets tested, most people dont get tested for the flu unless they end up in the hospital) so one would assume the case fatality rate for the flu is a greater overestimate of the true IFR than is the case for Covid.
Covid is the flu in the same way Ebola is like the flu.
Having said that, that isnt an argument for or against the Swedish model. Where my criticism for the Swedish model comes in, is that they, like pretty much every society in the world, werent that good at protecting the vulnerable, and so let 6000 people die. And while they did that, there was also a severe economic downturn.
No one is saving it’s the flu. Sweden did make mistakes but that doesn’t mean they were wrong. And are you prepared to discuss all the costs associated with lockdowns? Not just financial - what about the other impacts. The binary money v life argument is tired.
btw, your data doesn’t include all those other deaths from pneumonia that I mentioned.

I’ll say again in another way, since May, it seems that less people have died in Sweden than in previous years of any cause.
Last edited by towny on Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:58 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
towny
Posts: 17901
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by towny »

Zakar wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:43 am It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
User avatar
towny
Posts: 17901
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by towny »

CrazyIslander wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:47 am The problem I have about the Swedish approach is the lack of humanity. A government must always appear and try to protect the most vulnerable in society.
Incorrect.

Firstly, the Swedish govt is not setting the policy. Expert public servants are calling the shots.

Secondly, they are considering all of the vulnerable in society - not just the old. Since day 1, they’ve spoken about the importance of education, mental health and reducing domestic violence.

The economic argument is not what’s driving the policy.
User avatar
towny
Posts: 17901
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:53 pm
Location: Perth

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by towny »

Farva wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 4:48 am https://www.folkhalsomyndigheten.se/pub ... nd%20older.

This site suggests that 505 people died from the flu in 2018/19.
That is in line with Australia that sees somewhere between 500 and 2000 deaths a year from the flu.
The flu has a case fatality rate even in the worst seasons of around 0.2% to 0.3%. That is somewhere around 1/10th of what we are seeing with Covid. Sweden has seen over 12 times more death from Covid than a seasonal flu. And Covid probably does more testing than people do with the flu (in Australia for instance, which has a case fatality rate of over 2%, anyone who feels ill gets tested, most people dont get tested for the flu unless they end up in the hospital) so one would assume the case fatality rate for the flu is a greater overestimate of the true IFR than is the case for Covid.
Covid is the flu in the same way Ebola is like the flu.
Having said that, that isnt an argument for or against the Swedish model. Where my criticism for the Swedish model comes in, is that they, like pretty much every society in the world, werent that good at protecting the vulnerable, and so let 6000 people die. And while they did that, there was also a severe economic downturn.
Sweden’s economy is built on exports. The economy is down for this reason. Norway, Denmark and Finland don’t have nearly the same economic structure, so that comparison is worthless. Sweden is a manufacturing powerhouse - Volvo, SAAB, Ericsson, Epiroc, Atlas Copco, Scania, DynoNobel, ABB, Sandvik, Electrolux, etc. - which should explain why the financials are bad.

If they locked down they’d of course, be far, far worse.

Most of what’s been said on this thread anouy Sweden and in the media is easily disproven nonsense. Almost every post is cab-driver level ignorance.
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 19110
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by CrazyIslander »

towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:02 am
CrazyIslander wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:47 am The problem I have about the Swedish approach is the lack of humanity. A government must always appear and try to protect the most vulnerable in society.
Incorrect.

Firstly, the Swedish govt is not setting the policy. Expert public servants are calling the shots.

Secondly, they are considering all of the vulnerable in society - not just the old. Since day 1, they’ve spoken about the importance of education, mental health and reducing domestic violence.

The economic argument is not what’s driving the policy.
If economics isnt dtiving the policy, what is?
User avatar
MungoMan
Posts: 13055
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Coalfalls

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by MungoMan »

Ali's Choice wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:45 am
bimboman wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:17 am The disease is dreadful for the old, infirm and fat diabetics, the young and pissed are fine. It’s actually a desirable spread.
Comments like this are usually a sign that a troll isn't getting enough attention. That he's not inciting enough negative responses. So he desperately up's the ante, even if it means posting something utterly ridiculous.
Provocative, maybe. But ridiculous?

If we consider the modern era to encompass the lifetime of some people still living, then the last major pandemic of the modern era was the so-called Spanish influenza. There were successive waves separated by time and geography, but all killed far, far more than Covid-19 has to date. And the difference between the two pandemics isn't confined to how many died, since the Spanish flu killed far more young people than old.

This may be because, like Covid-19, young adults - the most socially active group - were more likely to contract it in the first place; whereas, unlike Covid-19, Spanish flu killed a significant proportion of everyone who was infected.

But leaving speculation aside, if I had to choose between a blockbuster remake of Spanish flu and the actual ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, I'd plump for the latter; and I say that as a 68 year old.

Of course if my choice was had a bit more latitude, the virus would infect damned near everybody, make them fart hideously and giggle inappropriately for about a week and then disappear, leaving no trace but a lingering feeling of embarrassment.
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37871
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Anonymous 1 »

In an email Anders Tegnell never intended the public to see he said
One point would be to keep schools open to reach herd immunity faster,” Tegnell commented. Salminen replied that the Finnish health agency had considered this but rejected it because “over time, the children are still going to spread the infection” to other age groups.

Finland’s modelling suggested closing schools would reduce the spread of Covid-19 among elderly people by about 10%, Salminen said in the email. Tegnell replied: “10% might be worth it?
Sweden kept schools open for under 16's

According to some condescending tosser on PR only people of "cab driver ignorance" would even consider that might mean Tegnell is a lying toerag and his denial of herd immunity as a goal was bullshit.


Below is a pointless graph showing the number of deaths in the 4 most populous nordic countries.

Image
User avatar
Ellafan
Posts: 4510
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Ellafan »

MungoMan wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 12:05 pm
Ali's Choice wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 9:45 am
bimboman wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 8:17 am The disease is dreadful for the old, infirm and fat diabetics, the young and pissed are fine. It’s actually a desirable spread.
Comments like this are usually a sign that a troll isn't getting enough attention. That he's not inciting enough negative responses. So he desperately up's the ante, even if it means posting something utterly ridiculous.
Provocative, maybe. But ridiculous?

If we consider the modern era to encompass the lifetime of some people still living, then the last major pandemic of the modern era was the so-called Spanish influenza. There were successive waves separated by time and geography, but all killed far, far more than Covid-19 has to date. And the difference between the two pandemics isn't confined to how many died, since the Spanish flu killed far more young people than old.

This may be because, like Covid-19, young adults - the most socially active group - were more likely to contract it in the first place; whereas, unlike Covid-19, Spanish flu killed a significant proportion of everyone who was infected.

But leaving speculation aside, if I had to choose between a blockbuster remake of Spanish flu and the actual ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, I'd plump for the latter; and I say that as a 68 year old.

Of course if my choice was had a bit more latitude, the virus would infect damned near everybody, make them fart hideously and giggle inappropriately for about a week and then disappear, leaving no trace but a lingering feeling of embarrassment.
So, Mungo, are you telling us you got it and it gave you diarrhea? Personally, I thought i had just eaten too much phaal.
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 3866
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 19110
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by CrazyIslander »

Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
They'd probably figure out what causes the death and withhold the vaccine from people at risk. Unless the death is quaranteed regardless of medical condition....ie 500,000th recepient gets shot.
User avatar
Zakar
Posts: 16553
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Haunting your dreams

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Zakar »

towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:55 am
Zakar wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:43 am It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
I assume so. I've got the flu and I felt like death on the weekend. Covid free though so there is that.
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 3866
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

CrazyIslander wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:08 am
Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
They'd probably figure out what causes the death and withhold the vaccine from people at risk. Unless the death is quaranteed regardless of medical condition....ie 500,000th recepient gets shot.
That is not the hypothetical that I posted. You can't try and shift goal posts. It is the scenario. 1 in 500 000. What would you do?
User avatar
CrazyIslander
Posts: 19110
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by CrazyIslander »

Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:26 am
CrazyIslander wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:08 am
Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
They'd probably figure out what causes the death and withhold the vaccine from people at risk. Unless the death is quaranteed regardless of medical condition....ie 500,000th recepient gets shot.
That is not the hypothetical that I posted. You can't try and shift goal posts. It is the scenario. 1 in 500 000. What would you do?
Yes. After all there's 500,000 - 1 chance of dying.
User avatar
MungoMan
Posts: 13055
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Coalfalls

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by MungoMan »

Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:26 am
CrazyIslander wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:08 am
Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
They'd probably figure out what causes the death and withhold the vaccine from people at risk. Unless the death is quaranteed regardless of medical condition....ie 500,000th recepient gets shot.
That is not the hypothetical that I posted. You can't try and shift goal posts. It is the scenario. 1 in 500 000. What would you do?
I'd seek clarifying information on the incidence and nature of severe but non-fatal adverse reactions to vaccination. Rigorous cost / benefit analyses should include all costs, not merely the headline items; relevantly, it is beginning to appear that certain people may experience long-term adverse effects consequent to contracting Covid-19.
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37871
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Anonymous 1 »

Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
It's not the first time they have paused the trial when someone has become ill and it probably won't be the last. If a vaccine can have a severe reaction in a small number of cases don't they normally just screen the susceptible people if out if they've identified the issue.
User avatar
Farva
Posts: 16939
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA PLUM

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Farva »

Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:01 am
towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:55 am
Zakar wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:43 am It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
I assume so. I've got the flu and I felt like death on the weekend. Covid free though so there is that.
Genuinely feck all flu cases at the moment.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-23/ ... a/12480190
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 3866
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

Anonymous 1 wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 3:33 am
Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
It's not the first time they have paused the trial when someone has become ill and it probably won't be the last. If a vaccine can have a severe reaction in a small number of cases don't they normally just screen the susceptible people if out if they've identified the issue.
That would be the sensible course of action. If they can screen it out.

Now you get to play the hypothetical game. Your only options are yes/no. What is your decision?
User avatar
Farva
Posts: 16939
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA PLUM

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Farva »

Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
In that hypothetical, it makes sense to roll it out.
This would result in 50 deaths in Australia. There have been 650 so far, as well as significant side effects on top of that.
But this sort of hypothetical will never happen - we will figure out why that one person dies and then they don't take the vaccine.
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 3866
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

Farva wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:35 am
Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:01 am
towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:55 am
Zakar wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:43 am It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
I assume so. I've got the flu and I felt like death on the weekend. Covid free though so there is that.
Genuinely feck all flu cases at the moment.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-23/ ... a/12480190
Is it possible that this isolation improved hygenie could have an added benefit of significantly impacting on inluenza long term? Or is it typical feast famine cycles like most things in nature?
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37871
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Anonymous 1 »

Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:38 am
Anonymous 1 wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 3:33 am
Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
It's not the first time they have paused the trial when someone has become ill and it probably won't be the last. If a vaccine can have a severe reaction in a small number of cases don't they normally just screen the susceptible people if out if they've identified the issue.
That would be the sensible course of action. If they can screen it out.

Now you get to play the hypothetical game. Your only options are yes/no. What is your decision?
My guess is they have some sort of formula for their risk assessment......... However taking into account just how many vaccines there are in development they may be less inclined to take risks than they otherwise would have been.
User avatar
Zakar
Posts: 16553
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Haunting your dreams

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Zakar »

Farva wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:35 am
Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:01 am
towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:55 am
Zakar wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:43 am It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
I assume so. I've got the flu and I felt like death on the weekend. Covid free though so there is that.
Genuinely feck all flu cases at the moment.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-23/ ... a/12480190
That's not what that data says.

I'll take the point that there is fudge all flu deaths though.
User avatar
Anonymous 1
Posts: 37871
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 3:15 pm
Location: Planet Rock

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Anonymous 1 »

Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:28 am
Farva wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:35 am
Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:01 am
towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:55 am
Zakar wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:43 am It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
I assume so. I've got the flu and I felt like death on the weekend. Covid free though so there is that.
Genuinely feck all flu cases at the moment.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-23/ ... a/12480190
That's not what that data says.

I'll take the point that there is fudge all flu deaths though.
I wonder if the average age of people catching flu will be younger than normal
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 3866
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

Anonymous 1 wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:03 am
Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:38 am
Anonymous 1 wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 3:33 am
Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:42 am Bit of a bummer that the Oxford vaccine has hit a bit of a hurdle. Hope it is a random outlier that doesn't derail it.


It does however pose an interesting hypothetical dilemma. What if the vaccine caused an adverse (deadly) reaction in 1 in 500 000 people. It would kill that person but save the 499 999 others. Would you be prepared to support widespread roll out?
It's not the first time they have paused the trial when someone has become ill and it probably won't be the last. If a vaccine can have a severe reaction in a small number of cases don't they normally just screen the susceptible people if out if they've identified the issue.
That would be the sensible course of action. If they can screen it out.

Now you get to play the hypothetical game. Your only options are yes/no. What is your decision?
My guess is they have some sort of formula for their risk assessment......... However taking into account just how many vaccines there are in development they may be less inclined to take risks than they otherwise would have been.
So. Yes/no?
User avatar
Farva
Posts: 16939
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA PLUM

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Farva »

Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:56 am
Farva wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:35 am
Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:01 am
towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:55 am
Zakar wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:43 am It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
I assume so. I've got the flu and I felt like death on the weekend. Covid free though so there is that.
Genuinely feck all flu cases at the moment.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-23/ ... a/12480190
Is it possible that this isolation improved hygenie could have an added benefit of significantly impacting on inluenza long term? Or is it typical feast famine cycles like most things in nature?
It most likely has. But the biggest reason would be (based on my laypersons view) the reduced interaction between people. When attempting to flatten the Covid curve we inadvertantly flattened the flu curve.
User avatar
Farva
Posts: 16939
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: STRAYA PLUM

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Farva »

Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:28 am
Farva wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:35 am
Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:01 am
towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:55 am
Zakar wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 5:43 am It's good thing that the regular flu has completely disappeared so we can make these comparisons in a meaningful way. :|
Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
I assume so. I've got the flu and I felt like death on the weekend. Covid free though so there is that.
Genuinely feck all flu cases at the moment.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-23/ ... a/12480190
That's not what that data says.

I'll take the point that there is fudge all flu deaths though.
It doesnt? The second graph shows the laboritory confirmed cases dropping significantly as we went in to isolation.
I appreciate that its an extrapolation that the drop was associated with a general drop and not solely driven by people not getting tested (it might partially but surely its not the only reason?), but figure that is one I was on reasonably firm ground making.
Have I misread that?
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 3866
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Melbourne. Fvcked.

Post by Clogs »

Farva wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 5:56 am
Clogs wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:56 am
Farva wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 4:35 am
Zakar wrote: Wed Sep 09, 2020 2:01 am
towny wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2020 10:55 am

Are people still dying from the flu? Where? How are they getting it?
I assume so. I've got the flu and I felt like death on the weekend. Covid free though so there is that.
Genuinely feck all flu cases at the moment.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-23/ ... a/12480190
Is it possible that this isolation improved hygenie could have an added benefit of significantly impacting on inluenza long term? Or is it typical feast famine cycles like most things in nature?
It most likely has. But the biggest reason would be (based on my laypersons view) the reduced interaction between people. When attempting to flatten the Covid curve we inadvertantly flattened the flu curve.
Well they are spread in a similar fashion so that would definitely have an impact. I was wondering though, as a disease, would this reduced spread have longer term implications on influenza? Less spread for a year or two could spell the end of it, or alternatively it may toughen up in this 'lean' phase where there are less carriers and turn into a longer form of the disease in order to survive. My mind works in mysterious ways sometimes.
Post Reply