Indeed, your population nearly doubled.What half-wit was put in charge of that table?? Wales has the exact same population as N. Ireland....Really? !
Lies, damn lies and statistics!
.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Lies, damn lies and statistics!
.
What half-wit was put in charge of that table?? Wales has the exact same population as N. Ireland....Really? !
Tommie, its the population of wits. As you know NI is full of wits and Wales are only half that.What half-wit was put in charge of that table?? Wales has the exact same population as N. Ireland....Really? !
Not good news at all
"
There is currently "no evidence" that proves coronavirus survivors automatically develop immunity to the disease, the World Health Organisation has said.
Senior epidemiologists at the organisation warned there is no proof that Covid-19 patients cannot be infected again.
This woke the most Bots yet!
"
There is currently "no evidence" that proves coronavirus survivors automatically develop immunity to the disease, the World Health Organisation has said.
Senior epidemiologists at the organisation warned there is no proof that Covid-19 patients cannot be infected again.
This woke the most Bots yet!
this means only treatments, no vaccine.
This will make us forever dependent on drug companies.
Provision of PPE for health care workers continues to be an absolute shambles with the rules constantly being re written to fit what’s available. Combined with the lack of testing, this mix is nothing short of the government playing Russian Roulette with the lives of health care professionals. How patronising that the idiot Handcock decides to give them a badge.
I‘ve read in the Telegraph this morning that our inadequate government has now awarded a contract to source the supply PPE to the accountancy firm Deloitte!!! Are they mental? This isn’t an accountant’s job. Don‘t they realise that accounts become accounts because they are incapable of doing anything practical? This task needs to be handed to military logistics. The task needs doing now, not being talked into failure by a bunch of clowns over weeks and weeks of inaction.
I‘ve read in the Telegraph this morning that our inadequate government has now awarded a contract to source the supply PPE to the accountancy firm Deloitte!!! Are they mental? This isn’t an accountant’s job. Don‘t they realise that accounts become accounts because they are incapable of doing anything practical? This task needs to be handed to military logistics. The task needs doing now, not being talked into failure by a bunch of clowns over weeks and weeks of inaction.
Last edited:
What’s going on with PPE?
I’ve watched most Downing Street briefings and listened to many news articles. The following is how I understand this clusterfuck to have panned out.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We are ramping up supply of PPE
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We have millions of PPE items that will go out to the front line.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: Supply to the front line is being ramped up.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We have enough PPE in stock, the logistics of getting it to where it’s needed is now underway.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We have all the PPE we need and a Herculean effort is underway to deliver millions of items to the NHS.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock. Stop wasting PPE The shortages are your fault for using PPE.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: Have a badge.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: There is plenty of PPE now that we have re written the safety guidelines based around what’s available.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We don’t have enough PPE, so I’ve asked a firm of accountants to get you some.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: Shut up, get on with it and if you die, well that’s tough. You knew what you were taking on when you signed up to the job
I’ve watched most Downing Street briefings and listened to many news articles. The following is how I understand this clusterfuck to have panned out.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We are ramping up supply of PPE
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We have millions of PPE items that will go out to the front line.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: Supply to the front line is being ramped up.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We have enough PPE in stock, the logistics of getting it to where it’s needed is now underway.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We have all the PPE we need and a Herculean effort is underway to deliver millions of items to the NHS.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock. Stop wasting PPE The shortages are your fault for using PPE.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: Have a badge.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: There is plenty of PPE now that we have re written the safety guidelines based around what’s available.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: We don’t have enough PPE, so I’ve asked a firm of accountants to get you some.
NHS: We have insufficient PPE
Handcock: Shut up, get on with it and if you die, well that’s tough. You knew what you were taking on when you signed up to the job
Not a new situation for many I'm afraid!
On Twitter
British Society for Immunology explain that there's no evidence of long-term immunity and that other related viruses do not offer this... https://immunology.org/news/bsi-open-letter-government-sars-cov-2-outbreak-response…
Replying to @brexit_sham
oldgroaner@oldgroaner
However to be fair that is the current situation with existing Flu strains where the available vaccines are at best helpful some of the time and about as effective as Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock the rest of the time
"Just little pricks"
Last edited:
Paul Johnson
@paul__johnson
·
1h
‘Public and media pressure pushed the lockdown. We didn’t want it’ -Cabinet Minister via
@Telegraph
-Astonishing
First of all update on my wife, she had an uncomfortable night, stomach ack and back pain. Felt better this morning and has had some breakfast. She thinks she probably does have the virus I originally thought she did not. Neither I or my grandson that lives with us have had any symptoms at all, this was mainly why I thought the wife did not have the virus.
This was the main reason why I thought she did not have it, I assumed that if she did have it then either I or the grandson would also start to feel unwell, but perhaps she is a few days ahead of us and we have that to look forward to!
Anyway here is what I wanted you folks to take a look at.
Most of the reports I have read suggest the death rate from Covid 19 is in the region of 0.5 to 1.0%, but every now and again a survey pops up indicating the rate could be much lower than that.
Stanford University has just published a survey linked below which has not yet been peer reviewed suggesting that death rates could be in the region of 0.12 to 0.2%. I think this is a similar death rate to conventual flu. Its surprising that after nearly 4 months of some of the best brains in the world working on the virus that we don't really have much idea of the actual death rate.
The difference between say 0.12 and 1% does not at first appear very large, but it is huge when one starts to think of how many less people would die of the virus if 0.12 is the more accurate figure.
Anyone got any thoughts on this?
Here is the link
www.theguardian.com
This was the main reason why I thought she did not have it, I assumed that if she did have it then either I or the grandson would also start to feel unwell, but perhaps she is a few days ahead of us and we have that to look forward to!
Anyway here is what I wanted you folks to take a look at.
Most of the reports I have read suggest the death rate from Covid 19 is in the region of 0.5 to 1.0%, but every now and again a survey pops up indicating the rate could be much lower than that.
Stanford University has just published a survey linked below which has not yet been peer reviewed suggesting that death rates could be in the region of 0.12 to 0.2%. I think this is a similar death rate to conventual flu. Its surprising that after nearly 4 months of some of the best brains in the world working on the virus that we don't really have much idea of the actual death rate.
The difference between say 0.12 and 1% does not at first appear very large, but it is huge when one starts to think of how many less people would die of the virus if 0.12 is the more accurate figure.
Anyone got any thoughts on this?
Here is the link
Antibody study suggests coronavirus may be far more widespread than previously thought
Non-peer reviewed study from Stanford found virus may be 50 to 85 times more common than official figures indicate
www.theguardian.com
The only possible response is that the Government will do everything it possibly can to NOT find out the true scale of the outbreak, since the last thing their policy can take is two things and they are both extensionsFirst of all update on my wife, she had an uncomfortable night, stomach ack and back pain. Felt better this morning and has had some breakfast. She thinks she probably does have the virus I originally thought she did not. Neither I or my grandson that lives with us have had any symptoms at all, this was mainly why I thought the wife did not have the virus.
This was the main reason why I thought she did not have it, I assumed that if she did have it then either I or the grandson would also start to feel unwell, but perhaps she is a few days ahead of us and we have that to look forward to!
Anyway here is what I wanted you folks to take a look at.
Most of the reports I have read suggest the death rate from Covid 19 is in the region of 0.5 to 1.0%, but every now and again a survey pops up indicating the rate could be much lower than that.
Stanford University has just published a survey linked below which has not yet been peer reviewed suggesting that death rates could be in the region of 0.12 to 0.2%. I think this is a similar death rate to conventual flu. Its surprising that after nearly 4 months of some of the best brains in the world working on the virus that we don't really have much idea of the actual death rate.
The difference between say 0.12 and 1% does not at first appear very large, but it is huge when one starts to think of how many less people would die of the virus if 0.12 is the more accurate figure.
Anyone got any thoughts on this?
Here is the link
Antibody study suggests coronavirus may be far more widespread than previously thought
Non-peer reviewed study from Stanford found virus may be 50 to 85 times more common than official figures indicate
- Coronaviris lockdown
- Brexit
In fairness, the death rate as a percentage can only be reliably calculated if all cases of Coronavirus are counted. If official positive tests indicate X people have Coronavirus, the number who have had it, recovered and never been near a test, a doctor or a hospital could be 10, 100, 1000 times that number, we just don't know. Obviously, the higher the number of such cases, the lower the death percentage. It could well be 0.1%, let's hope it is, or lower still.First of all update on my wife, she had an uncomfortable night, stomach ack and back pain. Felt better this morning and has had some breakfast. She thinks she probably does have the virus I originally thought she did not. Neither I or my grandson that lives with us have had any symptoms at all, this was mainly why I thought the wife did not have the virus.
This was the main reason why I thought she did not have it, I assumed that if she did have it then either I or the grandson would also start to feel unwell, but perhaps she is a few days ahead of us and we have that to look forward to!
Anyway here is what I wanted you folks to take a look at.
Most of the reports I have read suggest the death rate from Covid 19 is in the region of 0.5 to 1.0%, but every now and again a survey pops up indicating the rate could be much lower than that.
Stanford University has just published a survey linked below which has not yet been peer reviewed suggesting that death rates could be in the region of 0.12 to 0.2%. I think this is a similar death rate to conventual flu. Its surprising that after nearly 4 months of some of the best brains in the world working on the virus that we don't really have much idea of the actual death rate.
The difference between say 0.12 and 1% does not at first appear very large, but it is huge when one starts to think of how many less people would die of the virus if 0.12 is the more accurate figure.
Anyone got any thoughts on this?
Here is the link
Antibody study suggests coronavirus may be far more widespread than previously thought
Non-peer reviewed study from Stanford found virus may be 50 to 85 times more common than official figures indicate
It's just a typo in the population column. The figures in the other columns are correct for N.I.s population of 1.88 million.What half-wit was put in charge of that table?? Wales has the exact same population as N. Ireland....Really? !
.
There are so many issues in collection of the statistics we can only see a part of the picture.First of all update on my wife, she had an uncomfortable night, stomach ack and back pain. Felt better this morning and has had some breakfast. She thinks she probably does have the virus I originally thought she did not. Neither I or my grandson that lives with us have had any symptoms at all, this was mainly why I thought the wife did not have the virus.
This was the main reason why I thought she did not have it, I assumed that if she did have it then either I or the grandson would also start to feel unwell, but perhaps she is a few days ahead of us and we have that to look forward to!
Anyway here is what I wanted you folks to take a look at.
Most of the reports I have read suggest the death rate from Covid 19 is in the region of 0.5 to 1.0%, but every now and again a survey pops up indicating the rate could be much lower than that.
Stanford University has just published a survey linked below which has not yet been peer reviewed suggesting that death rates could be in the region of 0.12 to 0.2%. I think this is a similar death rate to conventual flu. Its surprising that after nearly 4 months of some of the best brains in the world working on the virus that we don't really have much idea of the actual death rate.
The difference between say 0.12 and 1% does not at first appear very large, but it is huge when one starts to think of how many less people would die of the virus if 0.12 is the more accurate figure.
Anyone got any thoughts on this?
Here is the link
Antibody study suggests coronavirus may be far more widespread than previously thought
Non-peer reviewed study from Stanford found virus may be 50 to 85 times more common than official figures indicate
If, despite us not having immunity, a reasonable proportion of us are not going to have serious symptoms, that could swing everything, dramatically. As could failure to develop immunity. Consider the two issues together - how will we ever know?
I think it's somewhat exaggerated. Many of the normal illnesses at this time are being initially assessed as possible Covid-19 from ambulance stage on as a precaution and the patients dying before test results are known. That's true of the only two Covid-19 cases I know of so far. I'm not confident that the records are always being updated with actual outcomes.
So it could be similar to normal 'flus and if it subsides in the warmer Summer period it will support that possibility.
.
Absence of proof is not proof of absence. The concern is that some people who were originally identified as having the virus and recovered were subsequently struck down with a serious dose.
Now that presumes a number of things.
1. The first diagnosis was correct and not a malfunction of the test
2. That any antibodies from the first ..and milder infection disappeared
3. That the first infection was sufficient to induce a proper immune response.
Obviously all these are of concern.
It concerns me that things like excessive IL-6 (as in the much talked about cytokine storm) could occur in a second infection - with the first having primed the systems for that to happen.
If we simply cannot achieve immunity (for whatever reasons) from a single infection episode, I fear that a second or subsequent episode could go way over the top.
(Based only on my extremely limited appreciation of possibilities. More as a thought that a seriously grounded suggestion.)
Sort this out, Hancock. I don't think we have ever intended to have kamikaze medical staff. And I mean that strictly in the sense of sacrifice.
NHS frontline workers may walk over lack of PPE, says union
Molly Blackall
NHS frontline staff may refuse to work if there is not enough personal protective equipment (PPE) to ensure their safety, the UK’s biggest union has warned.
The warning came in response to new guidance from Public Health England, revealed by the Guardian on Friday, which instructs healthcare workers to reuse disposable PPE. The guidelines also recommended that medics wear aprons if they are unable to access full-length gowns, and there are concerns that some PPE supplies are close to running out.
Sara Gorton, the head of health at Unison, said:
If gowns run out, staff in high-risk areas may well decide that it’s no longer safe for them to work.
No part of the NHS should use this move as an excuse to ration supplies of gowns when they still have stocks. That would cause a damaging breakdown of trust at a time when staff are working under intense pressure.
NHS frontline workers may walk over lack of PPE, says union
Molly Blackall
NHS frontline staff may refuse to work if there is not enough personal protective equipment (PPE) to ensure their safety, the UK’s biggest union has warned.
The warning came in response to new guidance from Public Health England, revealed by the Guardian on Friday, which instructs healthcare workers to reuse disposable PPE. The guidelines also recommended that medics wear aprons if they are unable to access full-length gowns, and there are concerns that some PPE supplies are close to running out.
Sara Gorton, the head of health at Unison, said:
If gowns run out, staff in high-risk areas may well decide that it’s no longer safe for them to work.
No part of the NHS should use this move as an excuse to ration supplies of gowns when they still have stocks. That would cause a damaging breakdown of trust at a time when staff are working under intense pressure.
I think Handcock’s “Magic Wand” statement regarding his duty to protect NHS workers was stupid and will create further despair and lack of confidence in his leadership, as if it could sink any lower.