RugbyRebels

cashead wrote:

Digby wrote:You were seemingly just laughing at Fox New reporters being crowded by protesters, and now you want to judge the actions of others as being unhelpful in an age of Covid. If you want to make a point at least manage to agree with yourself first.

Hm, yes, nothing to do with Mellsblue's craven hypocrisy when he does this shit:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:There do seem to be a number ignoring, for whatever reason, that even small % drops in the economy amongst other things spit out higher numbers of abuse across the board, higher rates of depression, higher rates of families losing their home, higher rates of suicide, and the influence that has is generational. Which I think is rather the point Mells was making, nor as per Mells is it to say Sweden has this right on the lockdown, nor even in the longer term on the economic front, we just don't know.

And whatever the right or more likely least worst decision that can be made is why on earth would we not want counter points to be made, addressing questions that challenge our positions is a healthy thing for anyone that's not a fundy

This.

after doing exactly what you were criticising just a few pages ago?

I just going to assume the sun is well over the yardarm wherever your based, and there's nothing wrong with that, if nothing else it makes up for KK posting less

Stom wrote:

Galfon wrote:

Stom wrote: Notable spike: Austria, Hun
What notable spike?

Ok, leave 'Spike' for Aut, change it to 'Bump' for Hun..

Reading off FT Covid trajectory chart:
Austria peaked at 20 at d20, then steady decline to 1 at d60.. risen back to 5 at d66.

Hun peaked at 12 also d20, steady decline to 3 at d50 then double this d55. (7 day rolling average)

Very low numbers compared to other countries in the mincer, and the graph is logarithmic to best reflect disease pick-up in pandemic.
Could be a lag, and cases (new/admitted) are healthier; just noticable in backdrop of others going towards nil.
I think your safe.

Yeah, when doubling means it stays single figures, that’s within standard deviation. Was out and about recently in a place pretty much untouched.

Best to switch that FT graph to linear now.

There's no reason to use logarithmic at this point, it's just misleading.

Is this how a modern industrialised nation approaches science? By bowing to the illogical whims of evangelical "advisors"?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/w ... ts-wrapper

"The Trump administration with no advance notice removed warnings contained in guidance for the reopening of houses of worship that singing in choirs can spread the coronavirus."

"Earlier this month, the CDC issued a report warning about “superspreader” events where the coronavirus might be “highly transmissible in certain settings, including group singing events.” That report described a choir practice in Washington state in March at which one person ended up infecting 52 other people, including two who died."

Blind faith (and all that donated god-botherer money) is now driving the CDC. It is officially neutered. What a joke.

morepork wrote:Is this how a modern industrialised nation approaches science? By bowing to the illogical whims of evangelical "advisors"?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/w ... ts-wrapper

"The Trump administration with no advance notice removed warnings contained in guidance for the reopening of houses of worship that singing in choirs can spread the coronavirus."

"Earlier this month, the CDC issued a report warning about “superspreader” events where the coronavirus might be “highly transmissible in certain settings, including group singing events.” That report described a choir practice in Washington state in March at which one person ended up infecting 52 other people, including two who died."

Blind faith (and all that donated god-botherer money) is now driving the CDC. It is officially neutered. What a joke.

I also just heard that South Africa has allowed gatherings of up to 50 people, as long as its in a church.

Banquo wrote:

morepork wrote:Is this how a modern industrialised nation approaches science? By bowing to the illogical whims of evangelical "advisors"?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/w ... ts-wrapper

"The Trump administration with no advance notice removed warnings contained in guidance for the reopening of houses of worship that singing in choirs can spread the coronavirus."

"Earlier this month, the CDC issued a report warning about “superspreader” events where the coronavirus might be “highly transmissible in certain settings, including group singing events.” That report described a choir practice in Washington state in March at which one person ended up infecting 52 other people, including two who died."

Blind faith (and all that donated god-botherer money) is now driving the CDC. It is officially neutered. What a joke.

I also just heard that South Africa has allowed gatherings of up to 50 people, as long as its in a church.

Imagine them all packed in shoulder to shoulder, belting out aerosol pathogen as they sing jebus songs. Madness.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Best to switch that FT graph to linear now.
There's no reason to use logarithmic at this point, it's just misleading.

There are some good reasons for logarithmic graphs in pandemics:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/ ... mic-graph/
as long as they are used with that understanding.There are plenty of linear graphs also, so you can have it both ways..
There are so many variables at play here in scale, space and time so it's good to catch it in a wide view -
we can possibly follow SA's exponential growth in the next few weeks with an appropriate grimace...!

morepork wrote:

Banquo wrote:

morepork wrote:Is this how a modern industrialised nation approaches science? By bowing to the illogical whims of evangelical "advisors"?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/w ... ts-wrapper

"The Trump administration with no advance notice removed warnings contained in guidance for the reopening of houses of worship that singing in choirs can spread the coronavirus."

"Earlier this month, the CDC issued a report warning about “superspreader” events where the coronavirus might be “highly transmissible in certain settings, including group singing events.” That report described a choir practice in Washington state in March at which one person ended up infecting 52 other people, including two who died."

Blind faith (and all that donated god-botherer money) is now driving the CDC. It is officially neutered. What a joke.

I also just heard that South Africa has allowed gatherings of up to 50 people, as long as its in a church.

Imagine them all packed in shoulder to shoulder, belting out aerosol pathogen as they sing jebus songs. Madness.

Indeed. God help us. Oh....

India also has it's hands full - cases on the up, lock-down easing, efforts undermined by agents within..

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... rker-india

Galfon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Best to switch that FT graph to linear now.
There's no reason to use logarithmic at this point, it's just misleading.

There are some good reasons for logarithmic graphs in pandemics:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/ ... mic-graph/
as long as they are used with that understanding.There are plenty of linear graphs also, so you can have it both ways..
There are so many variables at play here in scale, space and time so it's good to catch it in a wide view -
we can possibly follow SA's exponential growth in the next few weeks with an appropriate grimace...!

Agreed, at early stages of the pandemic it makes some sense. But most countries aren't at that stage.
Even Brazil and Peru's numbers - increasing as they are - look pretty linear to me.

The fundamental problem with anything other than a linear scale is that it treats some deaths as more important than others.
In particular, the log (base 10) scale, suggests that the first death is as significant as the next 9, which are as significant as the next 90, which are as significant as the next 900, etc. which is a heavy price to pay, in terms of understanding. If a country is 10 times worse than another, I want it to look that way, not just 1 point higher on the graph.

If you understand the scale, that's fine, but how many really do? Even if 75% of readers understand how the scale works (which I doubt) that leaves an enormous number misled by the image.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:..Even if 75% of readers understand how the scale works (which I doubt) that leaves an enormous number misled by the image.

It depends who looks at it and what they are looking for. FT will hope/expect their readers are reasonably tuned in; I would be surprised if numbers reading this thread are that large and can make reasonable deductions from information on show ...remember it's GIGO and death reporting from regions with relatively loose health systems or high on state control are unlikely to be either accurate or transparent, perhaps.See your point though.

Galfon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:..Even if 75% of readers understand how the scale works (which I doubt) that leaves an enormous number misled by the image.

It depends who looks at it and what they are looking for. FT will hope/expect their readers are reasonably tuned in; I would be surprised if numbers reading this thread are that large and can make reasonable deductions from information on show ...remember it's GIGO and death reporting from regions with relatively loose health systems or high on state control are unlikely to be either accurate or transparent, perhaps.See your point though.

I appreciate that worrying about linear vs log graphs is a minority concern, though.

Another proud day for the UK government, though with Cummings in place they will have seen this coming:

The UK's statistics watchdog has criticised the government over its handling of coronavirus testing data. The chairman of the UK Statistics Authority says presentation of figures appeared to be aimed at showing "the largest possible number of tests, even at the expense of understanding". Sir David Norgrove has written to Health Secretary Matt Hancock saying the information is "far from complete".

Story taken from the Beeb site - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52889103

Digby wrote:Another proud day for the UK government, though with Cummings in place they will have seen this coming:

The UK's statistics watchdog has criticised the government over its handling of coronavirus testing data. The chairman of the UK Statistics Authority says presentation of figures appeared to be aimed at showing "the largest possible number of tests, even at the expense of understanding". Sir David Norgrove has written to Health Secretary Matt Hancock saying the information is "far from complete".

Story taken from the Beeb site - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52889103

Yep, pretty shameless ambiguity, spinning and exaggerating, no great surprise from the team that gave us the "50,000 extra nurses" in the GE campaign.

So blatant that Norgrove has criticised them for the second time, his first attempt having achieved nothing.

New numbers from the ONS:
Up to 22 May, we have:
Positive test UK Covid-19 deaths: 36,393
All UK Covid-19 deaths (ONS number): 48,106
So the total UK number is 32% higher than the government number.

Assuming this ratio holds to date, we have as of 1 Jun:
Positive test UK Covid-19 deaths: 39,045
All UK Covid-19 deaths (extrapolated): 51,612

Ultimately a more important number is the excess deaths for any cause, if we assume Covid-19 is the main driver of the excess.
Recently, the excess deaths per week have approximately equalled the "Covid-19 death certificate" ONS number,
So to estimate the excess deaths to 1 Jun I'll use the 22 May excess number and add the subsequent estimated ONS number:
Excess deaths compared with 5 year average to 22 May: 61,727
Estimated increase in all UK Covid-19 deaths from 22 May to 1 Jun: 51,612 - 48,106 = 3,506
Therefore:
All UK excess deaths (presumably due to Covid-19) to 1 Jun: 65,233
which is 67% higher than the government number.

Last week's prediction:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Prediction for 22 May (based on 15 May ONS + 22 May gov numbers):
All UK, positive tests only: actual = 36,393
All UK, deaths involving COVID-19: prediction: 48,417
All UK, excess deaths: prediction: 63,311

Comparing with today's actual figures (for 22 May):
All UK, positive tests only: actual = 36,393
All UK, deaths involving COVID-19: prediction: 48,417 actual: 48,106 actual/prediction: -0.6%
All UK, excess deaths: prediction: 63,311 actual: 61,727 actual/prediction: -2.6%

For next week:
Prediction for 29 May (based on 22 May ONS + 29 May gov numbers):
All UK, positive tests only: actual = 38,593
All UK, deaths involving Covid-19: prediction: 51,014
All UK, excess deaths: prediction: 64,324

If you need a jaw dropping moment today, or least one that doesn't involve police violence in America, try this for size.

The result of an FOI request that was looking for written communications between Sturgeon and her medical advisors between the end of Jan and 2nd week of March...

Ggnnnnnnfffckin tech doesn't work!! Won't let me upload a screenshot

Anyway, it turns out there is not one single briefing paper to Sturgeon from either the Chief Medical Officer nor the National Clinical Director between the dates of 24th Jan and 9th March.

Are Nicola or her staff being far too literal in responding to that FOI request? Was it from a deputy, was it addressed to the party/government rather than Nicola, was the briefing given via the medium of interpretative dance rather than a written document? There must be something, they surely can't just have been working off wider UK advice?

Digby wrote:Are Nicola or her staff being far too literal in responding to that FOI request? Was it from a deputy, was it addressed to the party/government rather than Nicola, was the briefing given via the medium of interpretative dance rather than a written document? There must be something, they surely can't just have been working off wider UK advice?

It is possible. Here the story in the Herald, it ends with an excuse from an SNP spokesperson who uses an... erm... *slightly* weird sounding reason. The sort that is as plausible as DCs eye exam.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/184 ... id-months/

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Donny osmond wrote:

Digby wrote:Are Nicola or her staff being far too literal in responding to that FOI request? Was it from a deputy, was it addressed to the party/government rather than Nicola, was the briefing given via the medium of interpretative dance rather than a written document? There must be something, they surely can't just have been working off wider UK advice?

It is possible. Here the story in the Herald, it ends with an excuse from an SNP spokesperson who uses an... erm... *slightly* weird sounding reason. The sort that is as plausible as DCs eye exam.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/184 ... id-months/

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Either they've really fecked up, or they're going to the Bill Clinton version of truth which as Cummings illustrated is so dramatically inappropriate at this time they've really fecked up

Most odd - it's dangerous times, life and death - 'work from home if you can', 'use technology to do business'...
unless you're an MP willing to vote, in which case you now need to be physically present in Parliament.
....queues around the block, 3 hours per vote, distancing questionnable, those shielding or isolating don't count, long distance travelling now essential.
Almost Pythonesque, so there must be a reason above the petty or londoncentric that isn't obvious.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52895430

It's just very weird why we even need to try and have Parliament sit, vote, speak with people actually in the Commons as things stand

Galfon wrote:Most odd - it's dangerous times, life and death - 'work from home if you can', 'use technology to do business'...
unless you're an MP willing to vote, in which case you now need to be physically present in Parliament.
....queues around the block, 3 hours per vote, distancing questionnable, those shielding or isolating don't count, long distance travelling now essential.
Almost Pythonesque, so there must be a reason above the petty or londoncentric that isn't obvious.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52895430

Sadly, the reason is completely obvious.

It's no surprise to see this government putting momentary political advantage ahead of 1) a coherent message which includes "work from home if you can" and 2) the lives of MPs, civil servants, Westminster staff and all their families.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Galfon wrote:Most odd - it's dangerous times, life and death - 'work from home if you can', 'use technology to do business'...
unless you're an MP willing to vote, in which case you now need to be physically present in Parliament.
....queues around the block, 3 hours per vote, distancing questionnable, those shielding or isolating don't count, long distance travelling now essential.
Almost Pythonesque, so there must be a reason above the petty or londoncentric that isn't obvious.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52895430

Sadly, the reason is completely obvious.

It's no surprise to see this government putting momentary political advantage ahead of 1) a coherent message which includes "work from home if you can" and 2) the lives of MPs, civil servants, Westminster staff and all their families.

This is fucking crazy. I suspect the main reason is that without the baying mob to back him up,Boris is looking a bit lightweight.

Digby wrote:Are Nicola or her staff being far too literal in responding to that FOI request? Was it from a deputy, was it addressed to the party/government rather than Nicola, was the briefing given via the medium of interpretative dance rather than a written document? There must be something, they surely can't just have been working off wider UK advice?

It's a surprisingly narrow FoI request and the spokesperson's response suggests they went fully literal.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them running off the UK advice at this point though. A verbal briefing along the lines of "we don't have any reason to think the UK Govt have got this wrong" might not be inappropriate. Though obviously the UK government had screwed up massively.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Digby wrote:Are Nicola or her staff being far too literal in responding to that FOI request? Was it from a deputy, was it addressed to the party/government rather than Nicola, was the briefing given via the medium of interpretative dance rather than a written document? There must be something, they surely can't just have been working off wider UK advice?

It's a surprisingly narrow FoI request and the spokesperson's response suggests they went fully literal.

I wouldn't be surprised to see them running off the UK advice at this point though. A verbal briefing along the lines of "we don't have any reason to think the UK Govt have got this wrong" might not be inappropriate. Though obviously the UK government had screwed up massively.

I'd expect them to be using the UK briefings, I just wouldn't only expect that. They do owe an explanation though, even if it's damning