Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[Bold Seagull]

Such as?

The second paragraph. It’s hardy obscure or a long reply.

 

[RossyG]

Mainstream media??

David Richards is a big data boss. He's got a massive self interest in condemning other people's code and models

The Daily Telegraph is part of the mainstream media.

I thought you said you were departing this board. How long did that last?

 

[Guinness Boy]

The Daily Telegraph is part of the mainstream media.

I thought you said you were departing this board. How long did that last?

As long as it took the three of you to post even more depressing bollocks. You haven't addressed the point about Richards.

 

[RossyG]

The second paragraph. It’s hardy obscure or a long reply.

If track and tracing isn’t ready now - or within a week or two - then I think we’ll have to do without it.

Perhaps we should’ve had a plan in place and ready to go well before all this started, but that’s something for a public enquiry to look into.

 

[Albion Dan]

Mainstream media??

David Richards is a big data boss. He's got a massive self interest in condemning other people's code and models

Not hard to condemn is it?

 

[RossyG]

As long as it took the three of you to post even more depressing bollocks. You haven't addressed the point about Richards.

You’ve made an inference, but where’s the proof that he’s wrong or lying as you seem to suggest?

 

[RossyG]

and taking it too far. i speak with data scientists and read industry opinion, the feedback is his code is shit, the results vague, but the model is OK. give or take 100k. if you want to argue over 400k or 500k deaths, go ahead, its not really going to change the scale. point is we acted and have brought that down to probably nearer 50k.

you can stop posting the same un-referenced, un-verified anedote, we know the reporting is wonky, but we also know the excess deaths have spiked significantly.

And the same modelling that said Sweden would see 80,000+ deaths by the beginning of June?

 

[Guinness Boy]

Not hard to condemn is it?

View attachment 123772

View attachment 123773

View attachment 123774

Oh FFS.

You're going back 15 years to things that sometime "he" said or sometimes "Imperial". Point 1. Other academics challenged findings? NO SHIT. That's what academics do. It's the very point of them.

So let's move forward to 2020. What we have there is two posts. One widly reported 'worst case scenario' which neither of us will never know since we DID lockdown. But even with it there are over 34,000 official deaths with excess deaths over the same period in previous years far, far higher than that. And statistical models aren't perfect and you have to tweak them all the time as @beorthalem pointed out, a post neither you or [MENTION=30583]RossyG[/MENTION] have challenged.

Meanwhile the second one could be subtitled "man thinks with dick".

But what the two of you still haven't answered is why a challenge from someone who creates data models for profit is a serious piece of evidence based jounalism.

 

[beorhthelm]

And the same modelling that said Sweden would see 80,000+ deaths by the beginning of June?

and Swedes, not under government instruction, have followed the general social distancing guidelines. behaviour changes, the outcomes change.

 

[RossyG]

And

and Swedes, not under government instruction, have followed the general social distancing guidelines. behaviour changes, the outcomes change.

So no lockdown necessary then?

 

[Albion Dan]

As long as it took the three of you to post even more depressing bollocks. .

I'd say our posts are far from depressing, challenge embedded fear mentality, are currently being agreed through the government current strategy of getting things going again, are being lived out by many many people based on what I saw in London yesterday, and currently supported by the low transmission rates in London and hopefully the rest of the country soon. Let's all hope that it continues and we all come out of this in as good a shape as possible.

For some reason lots of people want to go the other way, hide away, be consumed by fear and a media agenda driven by clickbait, want to criticise measures to stop the county and most small business owners going completely bankrupt with resulting widespread social misery for years to come. When you step back and look at it rationally I'd question who the actual cranks are on this debate?

 

[Albion Dan]

Oh FFS.

You're going back 15 years to things that sometime "he" said or sometimes "Imperial". Point 1. Other academics challenged findings? NO SHIT. That's what academics do. It's the very point of them.

So let's move forward to 2020. What we have there is two posts. One widly reported 'worst case scenario' which neither of us will never know since we DID lockdown. But even with it there are over 34,000 official deaths with excess deaths over the same period in previous years far, far higher than that. And statistical models aren't perfect and you have to tweak them all the time as @beorthalem pointed out, a post neither you or [MENTION=30583]RossyG[/MENTION] have challenged.

Meanwhile the second one could be subtitled "man thinks with dick".

But what the two of you still haven't answered is why a challenge from someone who creates data models for profit is a serious piece of evidence based jounalism.

So an expert modeler isn't allowed to challenge the record of another in the profession? That's a ridiculous position to take. Who would be better placed? I work with statistical modelling all the time and if one of our commercial modellers had got predictions as badly wrong as Ferguson we certainly wouldn't be using his analysis for decisions that had such dramatic possibilities. I have also lived through the disastrous outcomes of incorrect modelling and know that it is very dangerous to show blind faith in numbers in the way the government seemed to with the Imperial stats.

 

[Justice]

I'd say our posts are far from depressing, challenge embedded fear mentality, are currently being agreed through the government current strategy of getting things going again, are being lived out by many many people based on what I saw in London yesterday, and currently supported by the low transmission rates in London and hopefully the rest of the country soon. Let's all hope that it continues and we all come out of this in as good a shape as possible.

For some reason lots of people want to go the other way, hide away, be consumed by fear and a media agenda driven by clickbait, want to criticise measures to stop the county and most small business owners going completely bankrupt with resulting widespread social misery for years to come. When you step back and look at it rationally I'd question who the actual cranks are on this debate?

Have MP’s gone back to work properly? No they are still hiding behind zoom. Telling other people to mix at factories etc is only beneficial to the wealthy who are still probably hiding away at home.

Almost every business survives on selling something just going back and sitting in an office is not going to generate income it will take ages to get back to full steam.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Have MP’s gone back to work properly? No they are still hiding behind zoom. Telling other people to mix at factories etc is only beneficial to the wealthy you are still probably hiding away at home.

Interesting that Eton and Harrow don't open until September, but it is OK for the cannon fodder to send their children back to school.

 

[Bold Seagull]

If track and tracing isn’t ready now - or within a week or two - then I think we’ll have to do without it.

Perhaps we should’ve had a plan in place and ready to go well before all this started, but that’s something for a public enquiry to look into.

If only we’d undertaken a modeling exercise with recommendations 3 or 4 years ago and prepared accordingly.

 

[Guinness Boy]

So an expert modeler isn't allowed to challenge the record of another in the profession? That's a ridiculous position to take. Who would be better placed? I work with statistical modelling all the time and if one of our commercial modellers had got predictions as badly wrong as Ferguson we certainly wouldn't be using his analysis for decisions that had such dramatic possibilities. I have also lived through the disastrous outcomes of incorrect modelling and know that it is very dangerous to show blind faith in numbers in the way the government seemed to with the Imperial stats.

Of course he can challenge but he has an agenda, one that will make him money. That needs pointing out. [MENTION=30583]RossyG[/MENTION] didn't, he just stated that disputes of Feguson's work were now making the "mainstream media". And indeed they are, via people who would make a shit load of cash if they got a government data modelling contract.

As for "disasterous outcomes" 34,000 people are dead. Imagine someone turned up at a capacity Amex and slaughtered every single person in there and then went into town and topped another 4,000 on top. Not great is it? Are you saying that there would have been fewer deaths than that without a lockdown? What's your proof there?

 

[RossyG]

If only we’d undertaken a modeling exercise with recommendations 3 or 4 years ago and prepared accordingly.

Oh, definitely.

 

[Justice]

Interesting that Eton and Harrow don't open until September, but it is OK for the cannon fodder to send their children back to school.

Quite, they are pretending to care about under privileged kids now. I mean how thick do they think we are ffs.

If you want your child to be a lab rat then send them back in June if mine were still at School age they wouldn’t be going.

 

[Albion Dan]

Of course he can challenge but he has an agenda, one that will make him money. That needs pointing out. [MENTION=30583]RossyG[/MENTION] didn't, he just stated that disputes of Feguson's work were now making the "mainstream media". And indeed they are, via people who would make a shit load of cash if they got a government data modelling contract.

As for "disasterous outcomes" 34,000 people are dead. Imagine someone turned up at a capacity Amex and slaughtered every single person in there and then went into town and topped another 4,000 on top. Not great is it? Are you saying that there would have been fewer deaths than that without a lockdown? What's your proof there?

I'm not saying there would be fewer deaths without lockdown, and I agree an element of lockdown was required to protect NHS capacity but it's time to start the recovery. What I do think is totally plausible is the countries that have gone to much more extreme lockdown and border closure (that many have called for) still have a much much bigger problem to come. It is still a credible possibility we will never have a vaccine.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I'm not saying there would be fewer deaths without lockdown, and I agree an element of lockdown was required to protect NHS capacity but it's time to start the recovery. What I do think is totally plausible is the countries that have gone to much more extreme lockdown and border closure (that many have called for) still have a much much bigger problem to come. It is still a credible possibility we will never have a vaccine.

So the prediction of the model was a widely reported worst case scenario of 250k deaths without lockdown and a possible best case 20k with. We're at 34 - 50k depending on whose figures you believe against a very (and necessarily) hastily produced model, where all of them have margins for error. It's not disasterous at all is it?

And we are starting the recovery. However, populism seems to be driving it rather than evidence and common sense. Reopening schools to 4 to 6 year olds with social distancing!! Have you ever tried to social distance a couple of 4 year olds?And there is no evidence at all that reopening schools is safe (there is no evidence, either that it is not but the heads will still have to confirm they are happy to open, putting pressure on them and not the government). And that's one thing!

I'm all for not killing the economy but I'm all for not killing old people as well.