RugbyRebels

Much faster turnaround too, at least for the initial yes/no question. You could send teams to do entire households and really isolate those infected bastards in the neighbourhood and find out who they came into contact with. In fact, if the sampling design was sound, you could very quickly obtain data for entire populations. I wonder if they are doing this? There should be enough preliminary data out there for the King's College geek squad to get an idea of variance and do a power analysis on minimum sample size needed.

Beats the fuck out of symptomatic people driving up to a tent in the middle of a supermarket car park to get a cotton bud stuck up there nose by a nurse in a plastic rubbish bag and a handkerchief over their face.

morepork wrote:
Beats the fuck out of people driving up to a tent in the middle of a supermarket car park to get a cotton bud stuck up there nose by a nurse in a plastic rubbish bag and a handkerchief over their face.

Essex dogging in a nutshell

"their"

FFS.


Dogging in a car park. Class.

morepork wrote:I wonder if they are doing this? There should be enough preliminary data out there for the King's College geek squad to get an idea of variance and do a power analysis on minimum sample size needed.

They’ve modelled it......obviously. Reading the reports on it, we’re at the point now, ie total numbers are too high, where you’d have to stick an app on everyone’s phone that would automatically tell you if you’ve been in range of a carrier.

Mellsblue wrote:

morepork wrote:I wonder if they are doing this? There should be enough preliminary data out there for the King's College geek squad to get an idea of variance and do a power analysis on minimum sample size needed.

They’ve modelled it......obviously. Reading the reports on it, we’re at the point now, ie total numbers are too high, where you’d have to stick an app on everyone’s phone that would automatically tell you if you’ve been in range of a carrier.

You could have the actual data rather than relying on a model is wot I meant.

morepork wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

morepork wrote:I wonder if they are doing this? There should be enough preliminary data out there for the King's College geek squad to get an idea of variance and do a power analysis on minimum sample size needed.

They’ve modelled it......obviously. Reading the reports on it, we’re at the point now, ie total numbers are too high, where you’d have to stick an app on everyone’s phone that would automatically tell you if you’ve been in range of a carrier.

You could have the actual data rather than relying on a model is wot I meant.

Ah, I see. As you were.

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Banquo wrote:Today's figures make very grim reading.

Shit. Thats a bit of a jump, although you can still argue that those who are dying today caught the illness prior to the lockdown.

also suspect they are recording out of hospital deaths finally. Infections obviously growing in line with acceleration in testing.

In other news, its weird that no regional strategies are that apparent. Currently in the East of England, still lowish infection rates, hospitals eerily quiet, PPE coming out of our ears, staff who have been deployed by me and others into acutes and integrated community teams not hugely busy; whether its the calm before the storm, or whether the NHS should have been deploying into areas of need, time will tell. Its ridiculous that the supply chain of say PPE is so badly managed.

It was announced as hospital deaths. We've got the pain of other deaths still to come.

morepork wrote:Much faster turnaround too, at least for the initial yes/no question. You could send teams to do entire households and really isolate those infected bastards in the neighbourhood and find out who they came into contact with. In fact, if the sampling design was sound, you could very quickly obtain data for entire populations. I wonder if they are doing this? There should be enough preliminary data out there for the King's College geek squad to get an idea of variance and do a power analysis on minimum sample size needed.

Beats the fuck out of symptomatic people driving up to a tent in the middle of a supermarket car park to get a cotton bud stuck up there nose by a nurse in a plastic rubbish bag and a handkerchief over their face.

It's fucking clever isn't it? Wouldn't have occurred to me. I wonder if it came from a biologist or mathematician or some other source (a professional gambler for example).

Mellsblue wrote:This builds on the previous article I linked:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... -abandoned

That's brilliant journalism. Are they making their Covid19 stuff free to air? I keep expecting to hit a paywall.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:This builds on the previous article I linked:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... -abandoned

That's brilliant journalism. Are they making their Covid19 stuff free to air? I keep expecting to hit a paywall.

No idea. I’ve read a couple of their pieces today with no requests for bank details. As tragic as this all is, it’s going to make for fascinating reading as details become clearer.
I read a piece on Colonel Boreham and his management of the construction and resourcing of Nightingale Hospital this evening. Unbelievable stuff. I’m a big fan of democracy but I’d happily have him in charge of the country for the next year or so.

Seemingly some grades of oil are now into negative pricing... which strikes me as spectacularly weird

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/01/business ... index.html

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:This builds on the previous article I linked:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... -abandoned

That's brilliant journalism. Are they making their Covid19 stuff free to air? I keep expecting to hit a paywall.

It still assumes that polling for public opinion is an acceptable substitute for hard data that resolves patterns of a biological phenomenon. This is just wrong on every level. A virus is an elegant product of evolution that, by virtue of that inherent simplicity is entirely predictable in behaviour . To even contemplate promoting public opinion as a defining variable is a slap in the face to the laws of nature and unbelievably arrogant and ignorant in equal measure. I just don’t understand how this didn’t register with heads of state earlier than it has. History is replete with examples.

They're cracking on with things down-under, 2 possible vaccs. (vector, foreign protein coding) - hope the ferreting about gets results..It's a pity the necessary safe-testing takes so long; maybe the explosion of drug testings can deliver something effective. The anti-malarial is in short supply already pending proper testing.The Chinese reckon it's nfg..

Galfon wrote:They're cracking on with things down-under, 2 possible vaccs. (vector, foreign protein coding) - hope the ferreting about gets results..It's a pity the necessary safe-testing takes so long; maybe the explosion of drug testings can deliver something effective. The anti-malarial is in short supply already pending proper testing.The Chinese reckon it's nfg..

I’m only getting no fucking good for nfg?

not for Gaijin if it were the Japanese

Apols..
'disappointed in a China clinical trial on mild COVID-19 patients.' (no fc'kin good, correct.)
..meantime, approaching 1 million:
- Confirmed cases worldwide
- New benefit claims in last 2 weeks.

Some progress in China animal meat markets
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-52131940 (bear bile ? ffs).
need total ban on the likes of bats & civets, shewerly..

A bit more info on that pooled testing idea from Germany.

https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/new ... -over.html#

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Shit. Thats a bit of a jump, although you can still argue that those who are dying today caught the illness prior to the lockdown.

also suspect they are recording out of hospital deaths finally. Infections obviously growing in line with acceleration in testing.

In other news, its weird that no regional strategies are that apparent. Currently in the East of England, still lowish infection rates, hospitals eerily quiet, PPE coming out of our ears, staff who have been deployed by me and others into acutes and integrated community teams not hugely busy; whether its the calm before the storm, or whether the NHS should have been deploying into areas of need, time will tell. Its ridiculous that the supply chain of say PPE is so badly managed.

It was announced as hospital deaths. We've got the pain of other deaths still to come.

morepork wrote:Much faster turnaround too, at least for the initial yes/no question. You could send teams to do entire households and really isolate those infected bastards in the neighbourhood and find out who they came into contact with. In fact, if the sampling design was sound, you could very quickly obtain data for entire populations. I wonder if they are doing this? There should be enough preliminary data out there for the King's College geek squad to get an idea of variance and do a power analysis on minimum sample size needed.

Beats the fuck out of symptomatic people driving up to a tent in the middle of a supermarket car park to get a cotton bud stuck up there nose by a nurse in a plastic rubbish bag and a handkerchief over their face.

It's fucking clever isn't it? Wouldn't have occurred to me. I wonder if it came from a biologist or mathematician or some other source (a professional gambler for example).

ah ok, ta. Looking for a tiny sliver of hope, damn.

morepork wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:This builds on the previous article I linked:

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... -abandoned

That's brilliant journalism. Are they making their Covid19 stuff free to air? I keep expecting to hit a paywall.

It still assumes that polling for public opinion is an acceptable substitute for hard data that resolves patterns of a biological phenomenon. This is just wrong on every level. A virus is an elegant product of evolution that, by virtue of that inherent simplicity is entirely predictable in behaviour . To even contemplate promoting public opinion as a defining variable is a slap in the face to the laws of nature and unbelievably arrogant and ignorant in equal measure. I just don’t understand how this didn’t register with heads of state earlier than it has. History is replete with examples.

I think arrogance and incompetence sums up the mean of the approaches; I'll offer up a couple of honourable national exceptions, possibly.

Donny osmond wrote:

Tobylerone has a point, albeit one that you would prob only know about if you're inside the Scottish bubble. In the last year it has come to light that the Scot govt are using ministers and spin doctors to redact politically sensitive FOI responses. They have been held to task several times by the ICO for deliberately incomplete or inaccurate responses. From outside the FOI extension looks, as Eug says, a bit meh, but from within Scotland it's part of a pattern that is starting to be troubling.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

"Social Distancing" arrangements at Holyrood yesterday reduced MSP`s attendance, giving minority SNP Gov. an easier ride.

Managed to push through "Emergency" (ha) FOI legislation allowing up to 200 days delay for release.

Tobylerone wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

Tobylerone has a point, albeit one that you would prob only know about if you're inside the Scottish bubble. In the last year it has come to light that the Scot govt are using ministers and spin doctors to redact politically sensitive FOI responses. They have been held to task several times by the ICO for deliberately incomplete or inaccurate responses. From outside the FOI extension looks, as Eug says, a bit meh, but from within Scotland it's part of a pattern that is starting to be troubling.

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

"Social Distancing" arrangements at Holyrood yesterday reduced MSP`s attendance, giving minority SNP Gov. an easier ride.

Managed to push through "Emergency" (ha) FOI legislation allowing up to 200 days delay for release.

Yeah 200 days per FOI should see them nicely thru next year's elections without any dirty laundry seeing the light of day.

Without wishing to derail a covid thread I'm starting to have the same visceral reaction to the SNP that some have to the Tories

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Roughly the same numbers today. Post Easter is when the acutes are gearing up for 'peak'.

They are just starting to talk about non hospital deaths.

Sandydragon wrote:

Stom wrote:

morepork wrote:FuckBook growing a pair?

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52106321

Bolsonaro seems a right odious little cunt.

Little?

He’s one of the holy septuplets of cuntdom, along with Trump, Modi, Duterte, Putin, Erdogan, and my glorious Viktator.

Duterte Harry has been a bit quiet of late. I’m surprised he hasn’t ordered the shooting of anyone with a sniff.

Any chance of tomorrow’s lottery numbers?

https://www.france24.com/en/20200402-sh ... -violators

So the Nightingale is up an running. Got to hand it to Boris, I never believed he would follow through in that election pledge to build 40 new hospitals but we’re under way.

Anyone know where I can buy a back Boris T-Shirt and a union flag?

From The Economist, via Twitter, showing discrepancies in figures from various places.


Also people seem to be amazed etc by Spanish Services PMI being announced this morning as a figure of 23. Can anyone enlighten me as to what PMI is and why a figure of 23 is so ultra.... something?

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Donny osmond wrote:From The Economist, via Twitter, showing discrepancies in figures from various places.


Also people seem to be amazed etc by Spanish Services PMI being announced this morning as a figure of 23. Can anyone enlighten me as to what PMI is and why a figure of 23 is so ultra.... something?

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

https://tradingeconomics.com/spain/manufacturing-pmi