Army Rumour Service

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

If we ever needed convincing any further that no matter what the majority of sensible people do to follow the guidelines, there will always be some fuckwits who will balls it up fir all the rest.

Anders Tegnell says there's evidence that wearing masks allows some to think that they can't spread the corona' even if they are ill. So they go out in public, wearing a mask, ill.

It's one of the reasons why Sweden's not made them compulsory.
 
Road injuries are number 11 on your list of causes of death world wide. How can you justify the immense cost and loss of liberty involved in driving restrictions?

Shouldn't you be advocating for the following?
  • Remove the requirement for a driver's license or test.
  • Remove any minimum age limits on driving.
  • Repeal the laws limiting people from driving while drunk.
  • Rip down all the guard rails on highways.
  • Repeal all the regulations requiring seat belts or air bags.
  • Remove any requirement for car makers to have their cars approved as safe before they are allowed to be sold.
  • Drop requirements for having to register your car and display license plates.
  • Drop requirements for mandatory insurance.
  • Etc.
How can you justify having these things if road injuries are only number 11 on your list?
@Whey_Aye_Banzai has already given my answer pretty much word for word.

My post was a response to @DaveDaffe stating that we should be looking at COVID as an emotive issue. That's fine but if you take that approach then you have to treat all deaths as an emotive issue. Personally, the fact that we are prepared to tolerate millions of deaths worldwide every single year from diarrhoea should be making people far more outraged. If people genuinely believe human life has the intrinsic value that they are going to get upset over ONE MILLION deaths due to COVID then they should be upset over everything that kills ONE MILLION people.

In my opinion the fact that we are prepared to tolerate millions of people dying of totally preventable disease is fine. There are lots of people in the world, a lot of whom live in shitty (pun intended) conditions and we cannot save everyone. Everyone has to die of something at some point.

All I'm saying is that we have classic first world syndrome. People have been dying of diarrhoea worldwide since the year dot and none of us gave a **** as it doesn't affect us. Diarrhoea. Something we get a bit annoyed about, take a few days off work and then crack on kills people in other poorer countries. We have tolerated that death toll for decades without a second thought. Now that something stands a chance of affecting us suddenly it's a big deal and we should treat human life as having value because it's not some anonymous poverty-stricken child in India or Africa but granny Mabel's the one at risk.

Either COVID deaths are a statistical issue or an emotive one but all deaths deserve to be treated in the same way. Diarrhoea for fucks sake, a disease that can be cured with a few sachets of dioralyte and not drinking contaminated water and we tolerate that killing millions.

Edit - just for clarity, part of the reason I am pissed off is I lost a relative this week. They were terminally ill but had been given a potential lifespan in months to years. On an emotional level I'm sad they're gone and have a lot of empathy for their kids. On a rational level I accept that it was their time to go and it's probably better to have got it over with than dragging out a slow painful and undignified exit in a hospice bed.

On a statistical level they will be part of a data point on various tables and graphs and then be forgotten. That's not denying the human impact, just a statement of fact. You cannot deal with individual human effects on a country or world scale, it just doesn't work.

Edit again - I might as well chuck it in here, the lockdown has had significant negative impacts. Just from my own professional experience the number of school refusers has increased. The number of students with serious mental health issues (not the contagious teenage girl 'anxiety' but proper conditions diagnosed by head doctors) has increased. The rate of alopecia and tics has increased.

Is the lockdown judged to be successful if we give a dozen 90 year olds an extra 2 years but condemn a couple of previously healthy teenager to involuntary tics and self harm? I'd argue no.
 
Last edited:

JCC

War Hero
1601621822406.png

1601621802028.png

1601621778260.png

Source: Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK
 
You're making a strawman argument. No-one's saying - as far as I'm aware - that we shouldn't take sensible precautions to limit the spread of this corona'.

Just like no-one's saying we ought to ban driving outright because it's a massive killer.

We impose sensible rules for driving and we ACCEPT the deaths that come from it.

A bit like what we should've done with the coronavirus.

The driving analogy is a pertinent one @terminal . As @Whey_Aye_Banzai points out though, we impose rules and accept deaths in a cost/benefit or risk matrix way.

As opposed to equating those who are advocating a proper risk analysis to be done on COVID deaths with them advocating getting rid of seatbelts, the equivalency is more those advocating for further lockdown with imposing a national 20mph speed limit.
 
The driving analogy is a pertinent one @terminal . As @Whey_Aye_Banzai points out though, we impose rules and accept deaths in a cost/benefit or risk matrix way.

As opposed to equating those who are advocating a proper risk analysis to be done on COVID deaths with them advocating getting rid of seatbelts, the equivalency is more those advocating for further lockdown with imposing a national 20mph speed limit.
The problem comes with the circular reasoning involved in saying that "only 'x' number of peopled died, therefore the measures taken to ensure that more didn't die weren't necessary".
 

It would be more useful if you included the number of tests performed each day along with the percentage of tests confirmed as positive.

There is far more widespread testing available now than there was back at the start of the year. In my neck of the woods, only patients admitted to hospital were tested back in March/April, now anyone can get tested. Numbers from March/April are likely a huge undercount.
 

JCC

War Hero
It would be more useful if you included the number of tests performed each day along with the percentage of tests confirmed as positive.

There is far more widespread testing available now than there was back at the start of the year. In my neck of the woods, only patients admitted to hospital were tested back in March/April, now anyone can get tested. Numbers from March/April are likely a huge undercount.

If you can find a good offical source for those figures, which I agree are vital in setting context, please share.

 
Which figures to you mean? The amount of tests performed per day or the suspected amount of unreported cases? If it's the latter there is no data, that's why it's unknown...
 

JCC

War Hero
You asked about " number of tests performed each day along with the percentage of tests confirmed as positive "so I dug around for these data sets:

1601628573038.png


Back in April the percentage of tests that returned postive was about 20%+.

1601629173634.png

Now its bouncing around 2%
 

Attachments

  • data_2020-Oct-01.zip
    7.7 KB · Views: 2
  • data_2020-Oct-01(1).zip
    8.4 KB · Views: 1
Was just doing some looking myself using the Scot Gov numbers Coronavirus (COVID-19): trends in daily data - gov.scot
Date notifiedNew casesReported
Daily% +
02/04/20202921,11826
03/04/20203991,52626
04/04/20203441,52223
05/04/20203613,01812
06/04/20202551,00625
07/04/20202681,09724
08/04/20203361,55522
09/04/20203921,64424
10/04/20203181,39123
11/04/20203151,58020
21/09/2020​
255​
3,330​
8
22/09/2020​
383​
4,492​
9
23/09/2020​
486​
5,900​
8
24/09/2020​
465​
5,896​
8
25/09/2020​
558​
5,834​
10
26/09/2020​
714​
5,668​
13
27/09/2020​
344​
3,992​
9
28/09/2020​
222​
3,753​
6
29/09/2020​
806​
3,607​
22
30/09/2020​
640​
5,349​
12
01/10/2020​
668​
7,321​
9
 
You asked about " number of tests performed each day along with the percentage of tests confirmed as positive "so I dug around for these data sets:

View attachment 508965

Back in April the percentage of tests that returned postive was about 20%+.

View attachment 508973
Now its bouncing around 2%

Makes you wonder how many people had this at the start of the year....

No idea why the X axis on those runs backwards though.
 

JCC

War Hero
Makes you wonder how many people had this at the start of the year....

No idea why the X axis on those runs backwards though.

Which the Herd Immunity people would argue was the reason that both the 1st and 2nd "outbreaks" seemed to naturally peak then decline with or without lockdowns.

Easy enough to resort the data by date but I couldn't be bothered.
 
Which the Herd Immunity people would argue was the reason that both the 1st and 2nd "outbreaks" seemed to naturally peak then decline with or without lockdowns.

Easy enough to resort the data by date but I couldn't be bothered.

Decided to do some more digging to try and get some idea of how many people may have actually had this, it's not as easy to find and I've been distracted by actually having to do some work.

Sero prevalence in London estimated at 15% which is 1.35 million people against a UK Gov confirmed positive total for UK of 453,000.... And that's just London.

Fair to assume the true number of positives in UK could be measured in the millions.
 

JCC

War Hero
Decided to do some more digging to try and get some idea of how many people may have actually had this, it's not as easy to find and I've been distracted by actually having to do some work.

Sero prevalence in London estimated at 15% which is 1.35 million people against a UK Gov confirmed positive total for UK of 453,000.... And that's just London.

Fair to assume the true number of positives in UK could be measured in the millions.

Truely I haven't a clue. When you introduce T-cell immunity, immunity for previous exposure to coronoviruses, and False Negatives then I'm not sure anybody does.

I think the Belgiums have scrapped PCR tests as a metric and have reverted to hospitalisations.

For UK/Ireland I'm not sure what the strategy is - lockdowns only postpone cases so are useful for managing the load on the medical resources?
 

Niamac

GCM
It’s still one MILLION grandmothers, grandfathers, uncles, aunts, mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, friends, colleagues. One million deaths of loved ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
True but I did say statistically. Remember the Stalin quote; "One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic."
 
Wee Cranky fae Scortlaend sticking the boot in to Margaret Ferrier saying she should resign as an MP. And so she should.
 
Top