Jump to content

beardy

Gold Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    52

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by beardy

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

     
    Some people's idea of risk is just nuts. Chest pains, numbness in the left arm and trouble breathing? Best go to bed then. Don't want to catch Covid. 
    Neutropenia with leukemia, fvck yeah stick a Covid patients next to me.

    Day 2 post Kidney transplant, cough at me fella.

    We can all indulge in hyperbole.

    If your wife or child had neutropenia would you be happy with a covid positive patient next to them.

    People need to learn to be a little less dogmatic, black/white about this.

    I suspect the reality in Sweden will not be as is portrayed.

    It really isn't a bad cold and stats have clearly shown that.
    0

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    So do I. But it's going to be quite the bit of spin to make out that that decision, when it comes, is based on anything other than everyone else doing it.
    That said, talk of a strategic plan being published near the end of February is worrying. Plan for what, exactly?
    There will have to be some planning to reestablish the NHS.

    I've not seen any countries plans for integrating COVID into existing health systems.

    There will remain a lot of hurdles to do this.

    Who knows though?
    0

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    I don't think it's either/or with the vaccine or Ivermectin. People with risk factors who develop symptoms should have access to early treatments. People in Asia, Latin America and Africa have access to early treatments, governments in the American Empire have ensured that people here don't. 
    It shouldn't be political but it clearly is. 
    It's also worth remembering that rich people in the west do get early treatment with new drugs that aren't available to the rest of us. 
    Correct, name an early treatment that has been proven to work.
    0

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    McCullough explained on Rogan that there had been one trial done on Ivermectin in the UK but it was given to hospital patients 14 days + after infection so it obviously wasn't effective. The 'failure' of that study was used a reason to close the debate. He believes this was intentional. 
    One of the more interesting things on the podcast was explaining Trump's drink bleach comment. In Bangladesh they have been successful in reducing transmission using the pink disinfectant you get at the dentist to disinfect their mouths and noses. Much like the horse paste meme there was obviously a coordinated smear campaign to discredit that practice in the West. 
    Fvcking hell, it's nearly 2 years since people at a Melbourne Uni (maybe Monash) found a pleotropic effect of ivermectin.

    However this was in-vitro.

    It has become one of the most fraudulently studied medicines of the pandemic (maybe even all time).

    If this drug was really as good as it's purported to be, then why such shithouse research.

    Oh and Laurence Fox has been vaccinated, he's a grifting cvnt.
    1

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    No it doesn't. 
    From Nosgrove's response.
    "It would also be correct to say that the prevalence of COVID-19 was around one percentage point higher in England than in Scotland."  So he's agreeing with what Rennie claimed.
    He's said they're both correct in their figures basically.  He also states that the rate of infection is lower in Scotland than England but that was never in dispute.
    Whether you think it should have been presented as 1 percentage point higher than Scotland or 20% higher than Scotland is open to interpretation but it's no surprise to see politicians present the stat that most favourably supports their position as someone previously said.

    Of course politicians will select according to their bias however Rennie's point of contention in his correspondence was

    At yesterday’s First Minister’s Questions, the First Minister stated: “The Office for National Statistics figures this week show that infection levels in England are over 20 per cent higher than those in Scotland”.

    However, ONS figures state that 1 in 20 people were infected in both Scotland and England in the week ending 15 January. They also state that the estimated average percentage of the population that had COVID-19 in Scotland was 4.49% compared to 5.47% – a difference of less than 1%.

    Infections were over 20% more, as I mentioned above the difference would represent 500000 fewer infections in England if they had the same rate as Scotland. This is not an insignificant amount however probably has less meaning in the Omicron wave.


    Rennie is just wasting other people's time.
    0

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    It's one of those situations where both are correct and in the wrong.
    The figures used by the SNP were disingenuous because they made it look like we in a far better position than England but it was marginal in reality.
    There was a 21.8% difference between the 2 figures but they were both around 1 in 20.
    5.47% is 21.8% bigger than 4.49%. Both of them were 'at it'. using the figures to suit their own agenda.
    Nope, Rennie is wrong. It's that clear.

    The response from Nosgrove who's representing the UK statistics authority states that clearly.

    If England had the positivity rate if Scotland then that 1% point difference represents 500,000 infections.

    It doesn't really make a difference in the Omicron wave however it is what it is.
    0

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    I see Nicola Sturgeon has been cleared by the UK Statistics Authority after being reported last week by Willie Rennie over her use of COVID data.
    https://news.stv.tv/politics/sturgeon-criticises-rennie-after-being-cleared-by-uk-stats-watchdog
     
    I saw the response from David Nosgrove on their website yesterday and my first though was these guys must really really hate politicians.

    Wasting time to score a point when in fact the data was presented clearly and Rennie could easily have interpreted it himself.

    These organisations should get a joker card where several times a year they can officially tell people to 'get fvcked' with impunity.
    0

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    Genuinely bewildering how many people still appear to not understand this btw.
    Is it any wonder we are in the shit we are with the likes of Brexit when we allow people with zero grasp of fairly basic statistics to vote on whether or not we should leave the EU?
    The gross misrepresentation of stats on this thread is ridiculous.

    Stuff that was explained in 2020 still getting blurted out.

    Deaths vs Death lag /dry tinder/'of covid' vs with/cases vs hospitalization vs ICU / optimistic vs pessimistic models.

    Fvck me there was a period where people were discussing that a third of scottish NHS staff were off sick at one time. Which was just an absurd reading of stats.

    This thread is not the place for stats, there are much much better resources for that.
    0

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    As i pointed out earlier in the thread this guy is talking utter shite.
    As pointed put by you that you think he is talking shite. Hardly a ringing endorsement.

    You should actually try and read around this subject because you consistently display a lack of understanding.

    ICNARC reports do establish ICU admissions by vaccination status.

    images.jpeg
    0

    Coronavirus (COVID-19)

    in The General Nonsense Forum

    Posted

    So you’ve still not provided the alleged public health benefit pre-covid.  Glad we cleared that up.  
     
    What are these other advantages?   Is the air really so bad in public buildings that it needs to be cleaner and fresher?  What is causing this?  Is it people having a sneaky cigarette?
     
    It's crazy to think that there haven't been any reviews into the quality of indoor air in public buildings or recommendations made before, absolutely staggering.


    0
×
×
  • Create New...