International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Non-USA & General Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=98)
-   -   Covid-19 and Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=342577)

Planigale 28th April 2020 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessie (Post 13071080)
UK the worst hit country in Europe;

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...europe-charts/

"The UK’s five-day average for coronavirus deaths is now the highest of any major European economy at this point in the pandemic’s curve, new analysis has revealed.

At this point in the pandemic, some 42 days since the tenth death, the five-day average for deaths in the UK stands at 598, according to the latest data from Johns Hopkins University. This is far higher than Italy (559), France (509) and Spain (423).

UK coronavirus deaths have been the highest among all major European countries for four days in a row, overtaking France at this stage of the pandemic.

This is despite the international data for the UK only recording deaths in hospitals, in contrast to countries like France which records all community deaths...."

The problem is the assumption that the date of the tenth death puts all countries on the same pandemic curve; https://aatishb.com/covidtrends/ an alternative plot that is not date dependant. Shows trajectories are pretty well identical. It is clearer looking at deaths on the linear rather than the log plot.


If you look at deaths for UK France Italy and Spain, it is fairly clear that the UK is on the same trajectory as the other three countries but is a little earlier. So the UK is just coming off the peak whilst the others are further down the peak, this means the UK daily deaths will be higher than the daily deaths from the other countries, but since in all countries they are falling this just means the UK is not so far down the hill, it does not mean that the trajectory is any different. What you would need to do is not look at deaths in France, Italy, Spain now but a week ago.

I'm afraid all this demonstrates is journalists don't have a great grasp of mathematical issues.

ETA absolute deaths and deaths / million are less in the UK than Spain or Italy or France, so it would be a stretch to say the UK is the worst hit.

Planigale 28th April 2020 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13070919)
See this is your obvious political bias peaking through.

Yep, I vote for the fact party, I think you should stick to addressing the arguments not making ad hominem comments. Can I remind you of the principle this site works on, address the argument not the arguer. I have asked you to do this several times.

Captain_Swoop 28th April 2020 01:54 PM

deleted

Captain_Swoop 28th April 2020 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat (Post 13071566)
They've been effectively 100% isolated on a submarine for a while now, right? That's about as quarantined as you can get. Did they invite a bunch of other people to join their party, or was it just the crew? Because if it was just the crew, they were probably more socially distant on shore than they've been for the last however-long they've been at sea.

Just the crew alongside the boat after a patrol at sea.

Planigale 28th April 2020 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071089)
From Panorama

In March the Govt DOWNGRADED COVID19 from the High Consequence Infectious Disease classification thereby weakening legal PPE requirements for health and care workers.

That is because it did not meet the definition, it had been classified as a HCID in January because its features were unknown. Subsequently when more information was known it was clear it did not see the definition. The fatality rate at around 0.2% is well below e.g. SARS at 30%, so it did not the case fatality definition and a test had become available to test for it.

Quote:

Definition of HCID
  • acute infectious disease
  • typically has a high case-fatality rate
  • may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
  • often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
  • ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
  • requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely


Planigale 28th April 2020 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071622)
Just the crew alongside the boat after a patrol at sea.

I suspect it more the appearance than the actual consequence. Assuming it was just the crew then there was no infection risk. It appears the captain was told / advised not to host a BBQ.

Captain_Swoop 28th April 2020 02:12 PM

People ranting about Panorama last night
Robinson - Conservative.
Kuennsberg - Conservative.
Harding - Conservative.
Humphries - Conservative.
Gibb - Conservative.
Andrew Neil - Conservative.
Tony Hall - Conservative.
Portillo - Conservative
Sandbrook - Conservative

Not one of them has refuted any part of it.

Captain_Swoop 28th April 2020 02:27 PM

I just ordered 12 items of clothing.
Well, 6 pairs of socks.

Planigale 28th April 2020 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071062)
Today the entire workforce of both Guys and St Thomas's hospitals, two of London's biggest will walkout en-masse (emergency cover will be in place) and hold a 30 min rally for action to secure the PPE and proper testing.

How ungrateful, they are getting a minutes silence for the staff that have died, what more do they want?

Did this happen or is this more fake news? I can find no report, was this something on twitter? If this was a never event this post and my reply are probably more suited to a CT thread.

Planigale 28th April 2020 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071662)
I just ordered 12 items of clothing.
Well, 6 pairs of socks.

I've always wondered why when I buy a pair of pants (or tights), (no topology references please) I only get one. As others have said gloves come in boxes of e.g. 40, they are not paired as they do not come as a right and a left glove.

Captain_Swoop 28th April 2020 02:44 PM

neither do socks

Captain_Swoop 28th April 2020 03:08 PM

Coronavirus has now killed more Uk citizens in 2 months than the Luftwaffe achieved in 5 years.

Darat 28th April 2020 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Planigale (Post 13071615)
Yep, I vote for the fact party, I think you should stick to addressing the arguments not making ad hominem comments. Can I remind you of the principle this site works on, address the argument not the arguer. I have asked you to do this several times.


You are the one that keeps bring up the idea that one can only criticise Dyson because of political affiliation. My criticisms of him have not been based on any political affiliation.

quadraginta 28th April 2020 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13071307)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071239)
Victoria Atkins, the minister for safeguarding...asked whether officials had been double counting in classing each single glove as one item, she said: "I have got a box of gloves at home, and they are not in pairs."


To be fair that is how they are usually sold, Iíve an old box of 40 disposable gloves, that was 40 single gloves not 40 pairs of gloves.

I did much the same thing. I have a box or two from when the late Mrs. qg was bedridden, and I went to check them out.

The label proclaims;
Exam Gloves
Fits either hand
150 gloves

quadraginta 28th April 2020 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Planigale (Post 13071540)
It may be that when people agreed to participate in SAGE they were told that this would be confidential and discussion would be confidential (Chatham house rules). Members can say they are members if they wish, that few have done so implies they do not wish their identities to be published. Now it may have been wrong for the government to offer confidentiality in the first place, but if the government has done so it would be equally wrong to go back on a commitment.


Not familiar with this expression I decided to look it up. Wiki quoth thus;
Quote:

The rule was created in 1927 and refined in 1992. Since its most recent refinement in 2002, the rule states:[1]

When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed.

Sometimes the reference is made to Chatham House rules.[2] However, Chatham House states that the singular should be used as there is only one rule.[3]

This suggests to me that although one shouldn't mention who else was there, it is not understood that the content of the meeting will be considered confidential.

Is this not a fact? Or is there some other variation of the Rule?

quadraginta 28th April 2020 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071685)
neither do socks


And sometimes socks are sold in bags without being labelled as pairs.

I would buy these in what ultimately turned out to be a futile attempt at eliminating mismatched socks. The idea being that when the sock monster snatched one it wouldn't matter, because none of them were actually paired with anything.

Sadly, it didn't work. After a few washes they started turning different shades, and if anything it became harder to find two that looked alike.

It seems they actually weren't paired with anything.

:) :(

Squeegee Beckenheim 29th April 2020 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Planigale (Post 13071546)
Of course they could just google it!

https://www.gov.uk/government/groups...id-19-response

Can you quote the relevant part? I've skimmed all the documents purporting to deal with behavioural and social aspects and none of them that I've seen provide evidence for the conclusion that instilling a lockdown too early would lead to people breaking it due to "fatigue" . In fact, none of them even seem to contain the word "fatigue".

Squeegee Beckenheim 29th April 2020 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071685)
neither do socks

Mine do. I wear socks with toes.

EHocking 29th April 2020 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim (Post 13072115)
Mine do. I wear socks with toes.

As do running / sports socks with specifically placed cushioning for ball, heel and also arch support. Sold as a pair, since there is a left and a right sock.

Garrison 29th April 2020 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071522)
British Airways is set to make up to 12,000 workers redundant, its parent company has said.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/b...-a4426456.html

Difference between them and Virgin is that they have worked with their staff, furloughing them or agreeing pay cuts to mitigate the impact, also their parent company appears to have been solvent before the crisis. My guess is that BA comes through this and finds itself facing a reduced market but also reduced competition because it will be a brave minister who suggests bailing out Virgin.

Captain_Swoop 29th April 2020 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 13071777)
I did much the same thing. I have a box or two from when the late Mrs. qg was bedridden, and I went to check them out.

The label proclaims;
Exam Gloves
Fits either hand
150 gloves

but should the govt count each individual glove or just the box of gloves? It's deceptive.

Captain_Swoop 29th April 2020 02:37 AM

Remember folks we have a High Court-certified career liar as PM being worked by Cummings described as "a serial psychopath" by a previous PM.
They thought we could achieve "herd immunity" by letting people catch this virus and they let it happen.
Followed the science? No they picked and chose to suit their agenda.

Darat 29th April 2020 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13072167)
but should the govt count each individual glove or just the box of gloves? It's deceptive.


Individual number of course as that is the important metric for a stockpile. That way it also doesn't require a standard sized box so you can buy from a range of suppliers.

Elaedith 29th April 2020 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim (Post 13072111)
Can you quote the relevant part? I've skimmed all the documents purporting to deal with behavioural and social aspects and none of them that I've seen provide evidence for the conclusion that instilling a lockdown too early would lead to people breaking it due to "fatigue" . In fact, none of them even seem to contain the word "fatigue".

I had a look and couldn't find anything relevant either. It takes a lot of clicking to find reports, some have no reference list, and of those that do I couldn't see any citations to research directly related to the issues discussed in the letter.

Captain_Swoop 29th April 2020 03:00 AM

The secrecy
The evasions
The misdirections
The obsession with using and blaming the media
The priority of easy measures over thought-through policy
The dogmatism
The wretched British exceptionalism

Brexit repeated and amplified

Squeegee Beckenheim 29th April 2020 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13072169)
Remember folks we have a High Court-certified career liar as PM being worked by Cummings described as "a serial psychopath" by a previous PM.

That's "career psychopath".

Captain_Swoop 29th April 2020 03:14 AM

Can anybody tell me why we have thousands of people dying of coronavirus in care homes at the same time as we have a series of very expensive new empty nightingale hospitals?
Why are they dying in the care homes and not being taken to hospital?
It's the Tory Way, pick the science that makes you the most money and follow it. Then you build hospitals when you have no staff to work them.
Incompetence and greed make a murderous combination.

People are being written off, left in care homes to keep the hospital death figures looking lower than they really are.
We weren't supposed to notice until this had all blown over, and we could be distracted by a royal wedding, VE Day and the new Boris baby.

ceptimus 29th April 2020 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13071522)
British Airways is set to make up to 12,000 workers redundant, its parent company has said.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/b...-a4426456.html


Despite the name, it's Spanish owned, with a lot of the funding coming from Qatar. The Spanish managers, as you'd expect, are trying to conserve jobs in their home Spanish carrier, Iberia, so British Airways was always likely suffer the (first) cuts.

It's probably just the start of huge job losses in the whole Airline/Airport/Plane manufacturing plus travel/hospitality sectors. No one is likely to travel much over the next year or so. If and when the pandemic begins to subside, lots of people will have lost their jobs or be in debt, and taxes will be raised to pay back all the government debt built up during lock down. People will have less cash to spend on leisure travel, and businesses will have learned during the lock down that many business meetings can be adequately handled via teleconference.

If there is a lot less air travel for the next few years, that means the third runway expansion for Heathrow will also likely be scrapped, or put on indefinite hold.

Captain_Swoop 29th April 2020 04:17 AM

Boris is missing PM questions as he has a new baby.
I wonder what his excuse will be next week.

ceptimus 29th April 2020 04:47 AM

Under UK law, he's entitled to two weeks paternity leave. But I doubt he'll take all of it.

He's probably not filled in the necessary form to request paternity leave, which should have been completed fifteen weeks before the expected week of childbirth - but that sort of thing isn't necessary for someone as important as Boris.

Captain_Swoop 29th April 2020 04:55 AM

“We shall name him Damian”.

Captain_Swoop 29th April 2020 04:58 AM

Spare a thought for Marina Wheeler. Lied to, spurned and ditched. The child Boris fans are celebrating was conceived outside of the knowledge of a wife who was suffering from cervical cancer at the time.
Marina Wheeler should have seen it coming, she was banging him during his first marriage, and was in fact pregnant when he left his wife for her.
Nice story.

Darat 29th April 2020 05:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ceptimus (Post 13072248)
Under UK law, he's entitled to two weeks paternity leave. But I doubt he'll take all of it.

He's probably not filled in the necessary form to request paternity leave, which should have been completed fifteen weeks before the expected week of childbirth - but that sort of thing isn't necessary for someone as important as Boris.

Or he'll work from one of his homes for a little while and his girlfriend will again be allowed to ignore the restrictions on travel. That aside he should take whatever leave he is entitled to and wants to take.

Darat 29th April 2020 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13072264)
Spare a thought for Marina Wheeler. Lied to, spurned and ditched. The child Boris fans are celebrating was conceived outside of the knowledge of a wife who was suffering from cervical cancer at the time.
Marina Wheeler should have seen it coming, she was banging him during his first marriage, and was in fact pregnant when he left his wife for her.
Nice story.

It is a common cognitive dissonance that many people suffer from. If they cheated to be with you they are quite capable of cheating on you.

Darat 29th April 2020 05:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ceptimus (Post 13072213)
Despite the name, it's Spanish owned, with a lot of the funding coming from Qatar. The Spanish managers, as you'd expect, are trying to conserve jobs in their home Spanish carrier, Iberia, so British Airways was always likely suffer the (first) cuts.

It's probably just the start of huge job losses in the whole Airline/Airport/Plane manufacturing plus travel/hospitality sectors. No one is likely to travel much over the next year or so. If and when the pandemic begins to subside, lots of people will have lost their jobs or be in debt, and taxes will be raised to pay back all the government debt built up during lock down. People will have less cash to spend on leisure travel, and businesses will have learned during the lock down that many business meetings can be adequately handled via teleconference.

If there is a lot less air travel for the next few years, that means the third runway expansion for Heathrow will also likely be scrapped, or put on indefinite hold.

I think we will find that some countries will insist on quarantine for people travelling from countries with the disease, so I can imagine the number of business people who would have flown out short-haul for a meeting will no longer be able to do so. Video conferencing is (because of the various lock downs) rapidly becoming the norm even with senior execs (who in my experience are usually the most resistant to video conferencing) and once it does become the norm even if there are not quarantine periods I doubt people will want to start the short-haul business flights.

I think there will also be a hell of a lot of pressure to continue working from home for those that can, I know quite a few people who have realised how nice it is to have 3 hours a day back. Several of my friends have said they feel almost like they are bunking off because they'll start at 8 and switch the computer off at 4 and it feels like a half day.

Captain_Swoop 29th April 2020 06:31 AM

Government rushes out request for experts to bolster Sage panel
Quote:

The government has rushed out a request to universities to help expand the pool of scientific experts who are advising ministers during the coronavirus crisis, following concerns about the lack of expertise in some areas.

Researchers at British universities received requests on Wednesday morning to join the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) international and behavioural teams and were asked to declare their interest by the end of Thursday.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ter-sage-panel

The Don 29th April 2020 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darat (Post 13072274)
I think we will find that some countries will insist on quarantine for people travelling from countries with the disease, so I can imagine the number of business people who would have flown out short-haul for a meeting will no longer be able to do so. Video conferencing is (because of the various lock downs) rapidly becoming the norm even with senior execs (who in my experience are usually the most resistant to video conferencing) and once it does become the norm even if there are not quarantine periods I doubt people will want to start the short-haul business flights.

I think there will also be a hell of a lot of pressure to continue working from home for those that can, I know quite a few people who have realised how nice it is to have 3 hours a day back. Several of my friends have said they feel almost like they are bunking off because they'll start at 8 and switch the computer off at 4 and it feels like a half day.

Mrs Don has been quite concerned about quarantine and international travel. Her parents are currently in very good health but they are in their late-70s and are living in New Jersey, a US Coronavirus hotspot, so she is concerned about whether and how she could visit them if the need arose.

Will flights be available ?
Will quarantine be required in the US and/or on her return to the UK ?
Will our travel insurance cover her if she needs to visit them and she has medical expenses ?
How long will the current situation be in place ?

P.J. Denyer 29th April 2020 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13072222)
Boris is missing PM questions as he has a new baby.
I wonder what his excuse will be next week.

The heart warming story of a man born in another country who's fathered children on a number of different women and now lives out of wedlock in a large taxpayer funded house. I believe that the Sun and Daily Mail have run similar stories in the past, I wonder if they'll follow the same template as usual?

AnonyMoose 29th April 2020 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13072192)
Can anybody tell me why we have thousands of people dying of coronavirus in care homes at the same time as we have a series of very expensive new empty nightingale hospitals?
Why are they dying in the care homes and not being taken to hospital?

It's the Tory Way, pick the science that makes you the most money and follow it. Then you build hospitals when you have no staff to work them.
Incompetence and greed make a murderous combination.

People are being written off, left in care homes to keep the hospital death figures looking lower than they really are.
We weren't supposed to notice until this had all blown over, and we could be distracted by a royal wedding, VE Day and the new Boris baby.


The same thing has been happening here in Canada, and many people are pissed about it. There's no bloody reasonable excuse why seniors are not being cared for properly and/or sent to half empty hospitals to be cared for.

Some family members are having to take matters into their own hands and getting their parents/grandparents out of these places and taking them home, even if that parent needs to be in an environment where special nursing skills are a necessity. This sort of thing shouldn't be happening in any 1st world country. There's no bloody excuse for it. :mad:

Planigale 29th April 2020 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop (Post 13072192)
Can anybody tell me why we have thousands of people dying of coronavirus in care homes at the same time as we have a series of very expensive new empty nightingale hospitals?
Why are they dying in the care homes and not being taken to hospital?
It's the Tory Way, pick the science that makes you the most money and follow it. Then you build hospitals when you have no staff to work them.
Incompetence and greed make a murderous combination.

People are being written off, left in care homes to keep the hospital death figures looking lower than they really are.
We weren't supposed to notice until this had all blown over, and we could be distracted by a royal wedding, VE Day and the new Boris baby.

Yes, because it would be cruel.

The residents in care homes are by definition the frail elderly, many with dementia. At best a quarter will die within the year and half in two years. You are taking them out of their 'home' environment with people who know them and they know to a strange clinical environment with strangers. For what? There is no treatment for covid-19 and that can be administered in their home as well as in a temporary hospital. It is well described that moving elderly confused patients results in a deterioration in their health. So you are potentially harming them for no benefit. They will be in an area that is not designed for care of the frail elderly. There will not be the specialist nurses, doctors, therapists for rehabilitating the frail elderly. There are no shortage of beds in hospitals to treat frail elderly patients who need hospital treatment e.g. fall with hip fracture. But moving them because...

Trying to treat frail elderly confused patents is distressing for the person themselves and for the staff. They do not understand why you are hurting them by sticking needles in to them, they pull at their tubes and don't keep their oxygen on. Just admitting them into a strange place where everyone has masks on, where they are allowed no visitors, with strange food and strange carers causes confusion.

The kindest thing unless there is some specialist treatment that can only be given in hospital is to allow them to stay at home and keep them comfortable. Much treatment can be administered in care homes by family doctors and community care teams.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:45 PM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-22, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.