RugbyRebels

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:In other news, my car broke yesterday, apparently known fault and should have been recalled. Limped to garage this am, they are closing today post lockdown and can't fix it. And they can't put me in another car, despite it being manufacturing fault. Yay! First world problems abound!

Luckily I got my MOT done a month back... they're still a requirement apparently, although for how long, who knows. I guess the risk of transmission (I'm sure there's a joke there) is fairly low.

I think you would have a justifiable argument here. As long as the vehicle is only being used for essential travel.

I hope everyone on RR and their families are keeping safe.

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:In other news, my car broke yesterday, apparently known fault and should have been recalled. Limped to garage this am, they are closing today post lockdown and can't fix it. And they can't put me in another car, despite it being manufacturing fault. Yay! First world problems abound!

I’d always assumed Aston Martin’s customer service would be better than this.

close but no cigar Mr Bond

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Banquo wrote:In other news, my car broke yesterday, apparently known fault and should have been recalled. Limped to garage this am, they are closing today post lockdown and can't fix it. And they can't put me in another car, despite it being manufacturing fault. Yay! First world problems abound!

Luckily I got my MOT done a month back... they're still a requirement apparently, although for how long, who knows. I guess the risk of transmission (I'm sure there's a joke there) is fairly low.

They said MOT's would be suspended. I'm quite surprised at garages closing tbh. They said that key workers vehicles would have their own repair centres....yeah right.

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Banquo wrote:In other news, my car broke yesterday, apparently known fault and should have been recalled. Limped to garage this am, they are closing today post lockdown and can't fix it. And they can't put me in another car, despite it being manufacturing fault. Yay! First world problems abound!

I’d always assumed Aston Martin’s customer service would be better than this.

close but no cigar Mr Bond

Some Bond

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: I’d always assumed Aston Martin’s customer service would be better than this.

close but no cigar Mr Bond

Some Bond

Still in better health than govt bonds will be in 12 months.

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Banquo wrote: close but no cigar Mr Bond

Some Bond

Still in better health than govt bonds will be in 12 months.

negative yield time

It's going to be very important nobody asks if what's happening financially makes any sense

Digby wrote:It's going to be very important nobody asks if what's happening financially makes any sense

I've had that thought as well. Money and markets and government spending are mostly a figment of the imagination at the best of times, but now would be a really bad occasion for people to start questioning where the money is actually coming from.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:It's going to be very important nobody asks if what's happening financially makes any sense

I've had that thought as well. Money and markets and government spending are mostly a figment of the imagination at the best of times, but now would be a really bad occasion for people to start questioning where the money is actually coming from.

Puja

We'll stop juggling for 12 months and hopefully the balls will still be up there**.


** best not to ask

Digby wrote:It's going to be very important nobody asks if what's happening financially makes any sense

People already are.

Puja wrote:.. questioning where the money is actually coming from.
Puja

or where it's gone.
My wee side pension pot ( low-risk fund, reputable provider ) dropped 25% in 3 weeks.
Obvs. it's index linked, and 'can go up or down' innit, but can't help thinking some of the vanishing was real dough that's now sitting in a 'trousered' pot ready to plough back in when the markets can't go any lower...

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:It's going to be very important nobody asks if what's happening financially makes any sense

People already are.

These people will sadly succumb to the virus

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:It's going to be very important nobody asks if what's happening financially makes any sense

I've had that thought as well. Money and markets and government spending are mostly a figment of the imagination at the best of times, but now would be a really bad occasion for people to start questioning where the money is actually coming from.

Puja

You're spot on about the markets, the secondary markets anyway. But at lot of the rest can usually be found to correlate reasonably enough

ITS ALL OK boffins at Oxford uni tell us we are already immune. Ha!!

https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd ... bea055720b

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

A story about modelling to calm people

On the other hand...



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Donny osmond wrote:ITS ALL OK boffins at Oxford uni tell us we are already immune. Ha!!

https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd ... bea055720b

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

I can't read the ft, but I think the article is here:
https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/cor ... st_5465580

If true* new infections should slow down soon rather than grow exponentially. But with the sudden shutdown, hopefully new infections will slow down anyway, so how can we tell? Someone needs to do some random testing of the population soon!

* Seems too good to be...

The national emergency text alert's gone out - something else UK wusnae ready for; it's worked well in SK etc to get important info. out there, just need peeps to be wary of spammers, scammers, scummers etc.

Donny osmond wrote:On the other hand...



Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Think this is a few days old. We dipped below Italy yesterday. Admittedly, that’s not much to write home about. Like boasting about beating Scotland in any sport played above freezing.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:ITS ALL OK boffins at Oxford uni tell us we are already immune. Ha!!

https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd ... bea055720b

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

I can't read the ft, but I think the article is here:
https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/cor ... st_5465580

If true* new infections should slow down soon rather than grow exponentially. But with the sudden shutdown, hopefully new infections will slow down anyway, so how can we tell? Someone needs to do some random testing of the population soon!

* Seems too good to be...

As they say, "neutralisation assays which provide reliable readout of protective immunity", would provide that data, but these are not trivial assays. I've done lots of them for viral gene therapy vectors. You would need to collect serum from an appropriately sampled population, expose cultured cells to the serum then expose those cells to live, virulent coronovirus (you could use a pseudotyped attenuated viral capsid but given the virus is new to science, this would take as long as a vaccine), then assay for the viral genome inside the cells some days later. The idea being pre-existing antibodies to the virus in serum will block entry of the capsid into cells. There are so many technical variables here I don't know where to start. What cell type most closely models the cells infected by the virus in humans (vital for the structure-function relationship between a viral antigen, the host cell surface entity that antigen binds to, and an antibody), and on and on and on. All of this technical variance combined with the unknown natural variance in host immune response in an infected population that has arisen mere months ago would make it outrageously difficult to determine the sample size (number of patients needed to be sampled to give a true representation of the actual population mean) required to give the data appropriate statistical power (i.e. minimise the chances of a false negative result). More pointedly, all of this relies on an assumption that seropositivity confers resistance to infection. That is a fucking big gamble in the middle of an exponential rise in deaths and, frankly, not something that resources should be allocated to.

morepork wrote:

Puja wrote:

morepork wrote:Want to bet some toilet paper on it?

Whoah, whoah, guys calm down. Let's not go gambling things we can't afford to lose.

Puja

Shit just got real.

Should that be reel?

Roll.

morepork wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:ITS ALL OK boffins at Oxford uni tell us we are already immune. Ha!!

https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd ... bea055720b

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

I can't read the ft, but I think the article is here:
https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/cor ... st_5465580

If true* new infections should slow down soon rather than grow exponentially. But with the sudden shutdown, hopefully new infections will slow down anyway, so how can we tell? Someone needs to do some random testing of the population soon!

* Seems too good to be...

As they say, "neutralisation assays which provide reliable readout of protective immunity", would provide that data, but these are not trivial assays. I've done lots of them for viral gene therapy vectors. You would need to collect serum from an appropriately sampled population, expose cultured cells to the serum then expose those cells to live, virulent coronovirus (you could use a pseudotyped attenuated viral capsid but given the virus is new to science, this would take as long as a vaccine), then assay for the viral genome inside the cells some days later. The idea being pre-existing antibodies to the virus in serum will block entry of the capsid into cells. There are so many technical variables here I don't know where to start. What cell type most closely models the cells infected by the virus in humans (vital for the structure-function relationship between a viral antigen, the host cell surface entity that antigen binds to, and an antibody), and on and on and on. All of this technical variance combined with the unknown natural variance in host immune response in an infected population that has arisen mere months ago would make it outrageously difficult to determine the sample size (number of patients needed to be sampled to give a true representation of the actual population mean) required to give the data appropriate statistical power (i.e. minimise the chances of a false negative result). More pointedly, all of this relies on an assumption that seropositivity confers resistance to infection. That is a fucking big gamble in the middle of an exponential rise in deaths and, frankly, not something that resources should be allocated to.

So we're some way from knowing what antibodies to Covid-19 look like? We can't just test for the presence of them, we need to use more indirect methods?

I'm sure they could do it in Star Trek. C'mon guys, raise your game.

morepork wrote:Roll.

Still got the accent

canta_brian wrote:

morepork wrote:Roll.

Still got the accent

You better believe it baby.