Army Rumour Service

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

MERS Coronavirus warning

Perhaps deaths from summer flu will start to tail off by sometime in October?
The ONS data is interesting as they publish reported deaths broken down by cause of death in quite precise detail - Deaths involving COVID-19, England and Wales - Office for National Statistics

After the massive April spike COVID deaths have dropped below those cause by cancer and heart disease. The interesting thing is that reported suicides and accidental deaths have decreased by a large proportion (353 in March compared to 18 in June) but that may be waiting for coroners reports and will rise over time as the stats are updated. There's also a small but consistent decrease in cancer and heart disease deaths which would be explained by COVID finishing those people off a few months before they would have normally died.

1600553251288.png
 
It is . Thank you.

At the moment, I think we should try to avoid mass lock down but maintain the ability to lock down locally.

The question of herd immunity and what is more or less adaptive T cell response is subject to further research, ideally longitudinal investigations ( if possible at present). I initially said a herd level of 40-60%. It would be interesting if this proves to be lower.

Please let's be careful.
I mentioned previously that in Ontario there has been a spike in cases, in at least some cases associated with students returning to university and not obeying the social distancing rules. We know it's a real effect and not an artefact of testing because it is concentrated in a few areas rather than randomly across the province, plus the positivity rate (the proportion of positive tests versus negative tests) has increased.

In Ontario we have a multi-level system of pandemic controls, all the way from none to full lock down and various others in between. They are applied region by region. The regions affected have seen their level rolled back a phase to try to tamp down the infection without going to full lock down again.

Public health officials are pretty confident we can keep going like this until a vaccine is available and rolled out across the population. That doesn't mean it will be smooth sailing all the way. There will be outbreaks, but if they are stamped on right away they can be contained before they become widespread.

At this time the main threat that I can see is that it only takes a small minority of bell-ends acting like there isn't a pandemic, having convinced themselves that's "just a hoax", or "it's all over", to spread infection and send us back into lockdown.
 
Interesting interview by Andrew Neil with Anders Tegnell. Seemed well balanced and Neil asked lots of difficult questions covering much what we've discussed in this post:

Interesting how 'we don't know' and 'maybe' aren't negatives and quite reassuring (for the Swedes) as opposed to our we know exactly what is happening until we don't or somehow miss the obvious prediction that anyone not clever could have foreseen - Baroness Dido.
 
I mentioned previously that in Ontario there has been a spike in cases, in at least some cases associated with students returning to university and not obeying the social distancing rules. We know it's a real effect and not an artefact of testing because it is concentrated in a few areas rather than randomly across the province, plus the positivity rate (the proportion of positive tests versus negative tests) has increased.

In Ontario we have a multi-level system of pandemic controls, all the way from none to full lock down and various others in between. They are applied region by region. The regions affected have seen their level rolled back a phase to try to tamp down the infection without going to full lock down again.

Public health officials are pretty confident we can keep going like this until a vaccine is available and rolled out across the population. That doesn't mean it will be smooth sailing all the way. There will be outbreaks, but if they are stamped on right away they can be contained before they become widespread.

At this time the main threat that I can see is that it only takes a small minority of bell-ends acting like there isn't a pandemic, having convinced themselves that's "just a hoax", or "it's all over", to spread infection and send us back into lockdown.

Any related spike in deaths? I get the idea this thing is here to stay and will mutate as it goes along, just like flu. We'll have to learn to live with it, like we do with the annual flu strains, or go back to living under trees.
 

JCC

War Hero
From The former scientific advisor at Pfizer, Dr Mike Yeadon:


"

Allow me to explain the impact of a false positive rate of 0.8% on Pillar 2. We return to our 10,000 people who’ve volunteered to get tested, and the expected ten with virus (0.1% prevalence or 1:1000) have been identified by the PCR test. But now we’ve to calculate how many false positives are to accompanying them. The shocking answer is 80. 80 is 0.8% of 10,000. That’s how many false positives you’d get every time you were to use a Pillar 2 test on a group of that size.
The effect of this is, in this example, where 10,000 people have been tested in Pillar 2, could be summarised in a headline like this: “90 new cases were identified today” (10 real positive cases and 80 false positives). But we know this is wildly incorrect. Unknown to the poor technician, there were in this example, only 10 real cases. 80 did not even have a piece of viral RNA in their sample. They are really false positives.
I’m going to explain how bad this is another way, back to diagnostics. If you’d submitted to a test and it was positive, you’d expect the doctor to tell you that you had a disease, whatever it was testing for. Usually, though, they’ll answer a slightly different question: “If the patient is positive in this test, what is the probability they have the disease?” Typically, for a good diagnostic test, the doctor will be able to say something like 95% and you and they can live with that. You might take a different, confirmatory test, if the result was very serious, like cancer. But in our Pillar 2 example, what is the probability a person testing positive in Pillar 2 actually has COVID-19? The awful answer is 11% (10 divided by 80 + 10). The test exaggerates the number of covid-19 cases by almost ten-fold (90 divided by 10). Scared yet? That daily picture they show you, with the ‘cases’ climbing up on the right-hand side? Its horribly exaggerated. Its not a mistake, as I shall show.
Earlier in the summer, the ONS showed the virus prevalence was a little lower, 1 in 2000 or 0.05%. That doesn’t sound much of a difference, but it is. Now the Pillar 2 test will find half as many real cases from our notional 10,000 volunteers, so 5 real cases. But the flaw in the test means it will still find 80 false positives (0.8% of 10,000). So its even worse. The headline would be “85 new cases identified today”. But now the probability a person testing positive has the virus is an absurdly low 6% (5 divided by 80 + 5). Earlier in the summer, this same test exaggerated the number of COVID-19 cases by 17-fold (85 divided by 5). Its so easy to generate an apparently large epidemic this way. Just ignore the problem of false positives. Pretend its zero. But it is never zero.
This test is fatally flawed and MUST immediately be withdrawn and never used again in this setting unless shown to be fixed. The examples I gave are very close to what is actually happening every day as you read this."
from Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics – the Deadly Danger of False Positives – Lockdown Sceptics
 
**** getting tested or giving (accurate) test and trace details then

And that perfectly predictable and natural response is why it wont work and if anything may lead to more cases.
Yet the Government who don't seem to have met a human will get all confused and try to legislate some more.
 

GDog

Old-Salt
And that perfectly predictable and natural response is why it wont work and if anything may lead to more cases.
Yet the Government who don't seem to have met a human will get all confused and try to legislate some more.

How have we ended up with people in charge that are making such obvious mistakes they can be seen from space, but not from Whitehall?
 

GDog

Old-Salt
I've already had the virus, tested positive and done the ten days quarantine period last month.

If I now get an SMS because I went to a pub last night do they want to fine me £10k if I don't stay in for another 14 days?
 
**** getting tested or giving (accurate) test and trace details then

Change your name to Cummings by deed poll, you'll be reet...
How have we ended up with people in charge that are making such obvious mistakes they can be seen from space, but not from Whitehall?
They sacked everyone in the CS who would say "With all due respect, that's a load of bollocks" Dido, top selection eh?
I've already had the virus, tested positive and done the ten days quarantine period last month.

If I now get an SMS because I went to a pub last night do they want to fine me £10k if I don't stay in for another 14 days?
Basically it's a "Yes" to that I think, because they don't have enough data on reinfection. Odds on the chances are very low but they don't know. But...I'd check, they change the guidance
 
And that perfectly predictable and natural response is why it wont work and if anything may lead to more cases.
Yet the Government who don't seem to have met a human will get all confused and try to legislate some more.
I've read that they change the legislation in order to stop it being challenged, as legally the legislation being challenged no longer exists....

The remedy sought is an order quashing the regulation. But the restrictions contained in those regulations are no longer in force as they have been replaced. In those circumstances, a claim for judicial review of those regulations in their original form would serve no practical purposes.

Lockdown challenge - permission refused - UK Human Rights Blog
 
Last edited:

GDog

Old-Salt
Change your name to Cummings by deed poll, you'll be reet...

They sacked everyone in the CS who would say "With all due respect, that's a load of bollocks" Dido, top selection eh?
Basically it's a "Yes" to that I think, because they don't have enough data on reinfection. Odds on the chances are very low but they don't know. But...I'd check, they change the guidance

They can get stuffed. It isn't difficult to block an 0300 number either.
 
Interesting how 'we don't know' and 'maybe' aren't negatives and quite reassuring (for the Swedes) as opposed to our we know exactly what is happening until we don't or somehow miss the obvious prediction that anyone not clever could have foreseen - Baroness Dido.
I watch the Joe Rogan Podcasts and he gets some very smart people on for long form discussions - there's a trend as the conversations develop and they go off on loads of tangents - the more clever the person, the more often they say, 'I don't know', 'I'll have to investigate/look that up' etc...

You then have others who just open their mouth and make shit up to look knowledgeable about everything, ending up looking foolish. You then wonder if they know anything.

Sir Roger Penrose was a good example of the former.
 
I've already had the virus, tested positive and done the ten days quarantine period last month.

If I now get an SMS because I went to a pub last night do they want to fine me £10k if I don't stay in for another 14 days?
Have you had it, or was your result one of the many false positives? And even if you did have it, why would you think that you couldn't get it again?
 
I watch the Joe Rogan Podcasts and he gets some very smart people on for long form discussions - there's a trend as the conversations develop and they go off on loads of tangents - the more clever the person, the more often they say, 'I don't know', 'I'll have to investigate/look that up' etc...

You then have others who just open their mouth and make shit up to look knowledgeable about everything, ending up looking foolish. You then wonder if they know anything.
It's the same on here.
 

GDog

Old-Salt
I've read that they change the legislation in order to stop it being challenged, as legally the legislation being challenged no longer exists....

The remedy sought is an order quashing the regulation. But the restrictions contained in those regulations are no longer in force as they have been replaced. In those circumstances, a claim for judicial review of those regulations in their original form would serve no practical purposes.

Lockdown challenge - permission refused - UK Human Rights Blog

It should be ignored. Eventually the regulations in one form or another will be used to justify a prosecution and they can be challenged at that point, it would no longer be "academic".


Have you had it, or was your result one of the many false positives? And even if you did have it, why would you think that you couldn't get it again?

I'd been in a hospital to visit a sick relative and 5 days later developed a persistent dry cough which was confirmed as covid-19 a week later by a PCR test, so yes, I have caught the disease.

I don't care if I get it again. Either my immune system handles it in the future or it doesn't. I'm not going to spend the rest of my life shutting myself away from society every time the clowns running the government send me a text message.
 
It should be ignored. Eventually the regulations in one form or another will be used to justify a prosecution and they can be challenged at that point, it would no longer be "academic".
It will be interesting if and when it happens. The courts will remain sympathetic to the government IMO, because of the difficulty and international perspective. Regardless of Dido and other stuff.
I'd been in a hospital to visit a sick relative and 5 days later developed a persistent dry cough which was confirmed as covid-19 a week later by a PCR test, so yes, I have caught the disease.

I don't care if I get it again. Either my immune system handles it in the future or it doesn't. I'm not going to spend the rest of my life shutting myself away from society every time the clowns running the government send me a text message.
I believe I've had it but haven't been tested, looking for a test recently I've found that the test centre is being moved to make way for a lorry park :D

I don't think staying in for a few days is hard personally.
 
It should be ignored. Eventually the regulations in one form or another will be used to justify a prosecution and they can be challenged at that point, it would no longer be "academic".




I'd been in a hospital to visit a sick relative and 5 days later developed a persistent dry cough which was confirmed as covid-19 a week later by a PCR test, so yes, I have caught the disease.

I don't care if I get it again. Either my immune system handles it in the future or it doesn't. I'm not going to spend the rest of my life shutting myself away from society every time the clowns running the government send me a text message.
You might not care, others might, it's not just about you.
 
Top