Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[Bakero]

I hate these daily releases of numbers. I really don’t see what good they do for the general public.

I know what you mean but for some people, me for example, it's nice to know the numbers. May seem weird but it's good to know what's happening.

Imagine if tomorrow they decided not to release the figures.

 

[Triggaaar]

5 point pedantry. Top work.

Thanks

Again, I hope you’re right and I’ll be very happy to come back in a fortnight and admit I was unduly alarmed.

Yes of course we all hope the article is incorrect.

I guess my concern is that we do indeed end up with a lot of deaths, and the model is only wrong because they have underestimated the number of deaths in other countries.

I have empathy with anyone who used China's completely fabricated stats as a basis for their estimates, and worse their course of actions. China's lies will have caused the deaths of thousands of people around the world. ****s.

 

[beorhthelm]

What I'd like is for a team who's ran the data through their new model to stop and look at the results, and ask themselves if the results are even a little realistic. If they're not, I'd like them to double check their model to work out what's gone wrong. I get the feeling that the Oxford team ended up with their preposterous conclusion (that 50% were infected over 2 weeks ago) and thought 'well that's clearly bollox, but **** it, I don't want to admit that our work was for nothing so let's send it anyway'. Cretins.

have you found evidence to prove the claims are false, or still basing this view on a hunch?

 

[Triggaaar]

have you found evidence to prove the claims are false, or still basing this view on a hunch?

Prove to whose satisfaction? It would be easy to prove if you were allowed access to China and people there were allowed to talk freely, but obviously that's not going to happen.

There is still evidence though.

I think our government believe China have had between 50 and 130 thousand deaths. It sure as hell ain't 3 thousand.

 

[Machiavelli]

Ah - thanks for the info [MENTION=2589]Robdinho[/MENTION]. Maybe the FT should flag them as such, to avoid misinterpretation by cretins like yours truly? We hear a lot about flattening the curve, but I guess these type of graphs aren't designed to show that?

Without wanting to create the impression that I'm stalking you, the scales used within these graphs precisely are designed to (incorrectly) illustrate a flattening curve.

 

[Machiavelli]

What I'd like is for a team who's ran the data through their new model to stop and look at the results, and ask themselves if the results are even a little realistic. If they're not, I'd like them to double check their model to work out what's gone wrong. I get the feeling that the Oxford team ended up with their preposterous conclusion (that 50% were infected over 2 weeks ago) and thought 'well that's clearly bollox, but **** it, I don't want to admit that our work was for nothing so let's send it anyway'. Cretins.

They're really not cretins; they're some of the leading modellers around. I'd imagine that they're updating or ditching their prior modelling currently. Your recent posts indicate that you haven't quite grasped what modelling entails.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

They're really not cretins; they're some of the leading modellers around. I'd imagine that they're updating or ditching their prior modelling currently. Your recent posts indicate that you haven't quite grasped what modelling entails.

Here we go again.....

 

[beorhthelm]

Prove to whose satisfaction? It would be easy to prove if you were allowed access to China and people there were allowed to talk freely, but obviously that's not going to happen.

There is still evidence though.

I think our government believe China have had between 50 and 130 thousand deaths. It sure as hell ain't 3 thousand.

i'd wait for widespread antibody testing across the population, rather than double down with wildly inaccurate claims.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Those FT graphs are very misleading. The distance between 100 and 200 deaths is exactly the same as between 500 to 1000 (or for that matter between 1000 to 2000). The US curve should be heading practically vertically at the moment, but looks like it's only gradually rising.

And they don't reflect the recent upturn in deaths in Italy and Spain. See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-51235105

 

[BN41Albion]

View attachment 121923

View attachment 121924

Thanks. Still following a similar path to italy, then. Really hope we see a drop soon...

USA, though!

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I hadn't noticed that, that is a particularly shit graph scale...

As [MENTION=28490]Machiavelli[/MENTION] noted this is a log scale. This is the best way to show these types of data.

I am still trying to get my head round the China data. I don't buy [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]'s increasing supposition that there is a massive cover up their over deaths. I have enough contacts in China who would tell me if was a massive cover up to be confident there isn't. Edit, looking again at the data on a log scale, China looks unremarkable. The really odd graphs are South Korea's. I'd almost be tempted to suggest the Koreans have an innate resistance to COVID. Or their numbers are seriously false.

Something else while I'm ranting. Bahaviour down here in Faversham has been great. Apart from one daft bint today who stood too close to me in Macknade then apologised when I had a word, everyone has clearly been making an effort. Yet on R5 earlier they interviewed a supermarket worker from up north somehwhere who said that almost everyone is flagrantly breaching the guidance, innoring space restrictions, making repeat visits to the stores with trails of kids in tow, just to buy sweets and icecreams, aggressive stroppy refusal to follow instructions, and hostile denial that this is a proper epidemic. I sat listening in increasing incredulity. Sometimes one can forget what people are like in the gammony rump of our country.

 

[darkwolf666]

As [MENTION=28490]Machiavelli[/MENTION] noted this is a log scale. This is the best way to show these types of data.

I am still trying to get my head round the China data. I don't buy [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]'s increasing supposition that there is a massive cover up their over deaths. I have enough contacts in China who would tell me if was a massive cover up to be confident there isn't.

Something else while I'm ranting. Bahaviour down here in Faversham has been great. Apart from one daft bint today who stood too close to me in Macknade then apologised when I had a word, everyone has clearly been making an effort. Yet on R5 earlier they interviewed a supermarket worker from up north somehwhere who said that almost everyone is flagrantly breaching the guidance, innoring space restrictions, making repeat visits to the stores with trails of kids in tow, just to buy sweets and icecreams, aggressive stroppy refusal to follow instructions, and hostile denial that this is a proper epidemic. I sat listening in increasing incredulity. Sometimes one can forget what people are like in the gammony rump of our country.

I think the expression you may be looking for is thick as shit...

As for the graph scale, there are clearly some learned people on NSC (I know, came as a surprise to me too), but I would imagine the average Joe would have more chance of recognising a Yule log then a log scale.

The scale presents - to the layman - a bit of a false picture, in particular when looking at the US of A's figures...

 

[Triggaaar]

i'd wait for widespread antibody testing across the population, rather than double down with wildly inaccurate claims.

Eh? How is antibody testing going to tell you how many deaths there have been in China?

 

[Triggaaar]

They're really not cretins; they're some of the leading modellers around. I'd imagine that they're updating or ditching their prior modelling currently.

Ditching it? Now why would they need to do that?

Your recent posts indicate that you haven't quite grasped what modelling entails.

I respectfully disagree.

 

[AZ Gull]

Those FT graphs are very misleading. The distance between 100 and 200 deaths is exactly the same as between 500 to 1000 (or for that matter between 1000 to 2000). The US curve should be heading practically vertically at the moment, but looks like it's only gradually rising.

It's a logarithmic scale, so a straight line means cases are going up by multiples, e.g. doubling every 2, 3 or 4 days, rather than even steps of, say, 100 per day

I hadn't noticed that, that is a particularly shit graph scale...

I think it's slightly more that it's easy to be misled by them, rather than they are misleading. I noticed that Johns Hopkins are also using this irregular scaling, which isn't too helpful with their figures. There must be a reason why they're using this scaling, but I can't offer it. What I can say is that these guys are at the cutting edge of mathematical modelling, so I'd trust them for using it (rather than insisting upon me being right in dismissing them as being 'misleading')

I think the expression you may be looking for is thick as shit...

As for the graph scale, there are clearly some learned people on NSC (I know, came as a surprise to me too), but I would imagine the average Joe would have more chance of recognising a Yule log then a log scale.

The scale presents - to the layman - a bit of a false picture, in particular when looking at the US of A's figures...

Surely one of the main reasons for using a log scale to show this data is that using a linear scale would make the charts virtually useless and unreadable. The numbers in the countries with the highest counts (USA, France) are so much bigger than the counts in the likes of Japan and Ireland that on a linear scale most of the countries would be squished in the lowest portion of the chart and indistinguishable.

 

[darkwolf666]

Surely one of the main reasons for using a log scale to show this data is that using a linear scale would make the charts virtually useless and unreadable. The numbers in the countries with the highest counts (USA, France) are so much bigger than the counts in the likes of Japan and Ireland that on a linear scale most of the countries would be squished in the lowest portion of the chart and indistinguishable.

Understood, but does your average Joe? I'm guessing they see these graphs and think a lot of the progress is similar.

I guess the problem is we're not comparing like with like, bit like putting my monthly wages on the same graph as a Premier League footballers (touchy subject).

 

[Triggaaar]

I am still trying to get my head round the China data. I don't buy [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]'s increasing supposition that there is a massive cover up their over deaths. I have enough contacts in China who would tell me if was a massive cover up to be confident there isn't.

And your colleagues in China are all free to tell each other, and you, everything, and to challenge the governments figures on deaths? What exactly are they doing to check the total number of deaths?

China's openness about the virus:
December 30: Dr. Li Wenliang sent a message to a group of other doctors warning them about a possible outbreak of an illness that resembled severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), urging them to take protective measures against infection.

January 1: The Wuhan Public Security Bureau issued summons to Dr. Li Wenliang, accusing him of “spreading rumors.” Two days later, at a police station, Dr. Li signed a statement acknowledging his “misdemeanor” and promising not to commit further “unlawful acts.”

If China are being open and honest, why did Dr Li have to pretend he was spreading rumours, when he clearly wasn't?

The virus passed from human to human in the first week of December, but at the end of December, China were still saying that hadn't happened. They were still maintaining this lie well into January.

 

[Eeyore]

I'm not, and will never be, a Conservative. But I do feel that Rishi Sunak has the air of a proper statesman.

 

[Notters]

As [MENTION=28490]Machiavelli[/MENTION] noted this is a log scale. This is the best way to show these types of data.

I am still trying to get my head round the China data. I don't buy [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]'s increasing supposition that there is a massive cover up their over deaths. I have enough contacts in China who would tell me if was a massive cover up to be confident there isn't. Edit, looking again at the data on a log scale, China looks unremarkable. The really odd graphs are South Korea's. I'd almost be tempted to suggest the Koreans have an innate resistance to COVID. Or their numbers are seriously false.

Something else while I'm ranting. Bahaviour down here in Faversham has been great. Apart from one daft bint today who stood too close to me in Macknade then apologised when I had a word, everyone has clearly been making an effort. Yet on R5 earlier they interviewed a supermarket worker from up north somehwhere who said that almost everyone is flagrantly breaching the guidance, innoring space restrictions, making repeat visits to the stores with trails of kids in tow, just to buy sweets and icecreams, aggressive stroppy refusal to follow instructions, and hostile denial that this is a proper epidemic. I sat listening in increasing incredulity. Sometimes one can forget what people are like in the gammony rump of our country.

The only people who fragrantly ignore the rules in supermarkets round here seem to be the staff who huddle in groups for a natter.

 

[Bodian]

Here's an explanation about why FT (and others) use log scales https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1247245188625575937

But if you want to see a linear representation, you can choose this here (you can make whatever you want on this site - but it is a day behind) https://flattenthecurve.co.nz/