Left Back
-
Posts
6,719 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Store
Blogs
Posts posted by Left Back
-
-
When you have someone on ignore is there a way to stop seeing when people quote them as well?
4 -
4 minutes ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:
Yeah I understand it from that point, which makes me take slight issue with the reporting of deaths. the way they have done so with the running totals make it sound like a war or natural disaster, obviously there have been many people who have gone before their time and I'm certainly not belittling any death from this. but it's not like they would all still be here had it not been for covid. the same goes for future waves too, if a vaccinated 87 year old tests pos
Reading that thread in more detail it's simply talking about predicted deaths from an exit wave, i.e. what happens as we start to open everything up.
The main criticism he seems to have about the models is they don't actually account for reduced transmission or seasonality. Warwick have modelled that separately and the results are in line with James Wards own base model and in summary means no real exit wave if the modelling assumptions are correct.
That doesn't mean he's saying crank everything up after April as one of the assumptions all the models are using is that the expected controls (i.e. restrictions) on the UKG roadmap are followed as the roadmap states.
0 -
2 minutes ago, renton said:
Both teams seem relatively pessimistic on the transmission reduction in their models too. 0-30% across both teams. Haven't initial studies shown transmission reduction in health care workers to be far higher? Hasn't the Israeli data shown the same?
One of the models had a scenario with an estimated improved transmission reduction bring deaths down to 9k. Whether that was in line with our studies ort the Israeli data who knows.
0 -
1 minute ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:
so about the same as we managed in the first fortnight in January? Death literally the most unavoidable fact of life. get restriction right in the bin
Depends if the government think that's an acceptable number that the electorate will swallow.
You'd have to assume most of these deaths would be expected over the winter months so an average of around 150ish per day. There would also be more people in hospital with coronavirus than those dying so what does that do to the NHS? You'd hope someone is working all this out.
0 -
21 minutes ago, ICTChris said:
If I'm reading that right Imperial are predicting another 15k deaths and Warwick another 19k?
0 -
28 minutes ago, Day of the Lords said:
I'd be astounded if that happens. No way do the SNP support the Tories in a vote, especially during an election campaign. It would be electoral suicide. To give this context, not even Labour are supporting it. Or even abstaining for once.
Will the vote even happen before the election?
0 -
Isobel Oakshott basically saying OK for international, nah for domestic, on Sky News at the moment.
the world is screwed if I’m agreeing with Isobel Oakshott.
3 -
21 minutes ago, Elixir said:
Will the SNP vote with the Tories?..
This is an interesting (and strange) viewpoint.
”. The Government believes that introducing a ban on this [asking for Covid passports/status] would in most cases be an unjustified intrusion on how businesses choose to make their premises safe”
is it not up to the paid public health experts in conjunction with government to determine what is an acceptable risk rather than individual businesses. This seems like an abdication of responsibility to me.
0 -
9 minutes ago, Detournement said:
The screenshot I posted says a report from 17 December discusses restrictions based on vaccination status.
Take your big book of conspiracy theories and away and hide under your bed mate.
1 -
35 minutes ago, Detournement said:
It's all in the media but the vast majority of the population seems to have an unshakeable conviction that it's impossible that the nature of our society can fundamentally change so they ignore anything that contradicts that. It's a strange phenomenon.
Zuhlke were contracted in November 2020.
Research into whether something is feasible/possible is a lot different to actually rolling it out. Back in November they awarded contracts to build prototype apps to prove your testing status (i.e. that you'd had a recent negative test). It was nothing to do with vaccination status.
0 -
15 minutes ago, Detournement said:
Government ministers were saying that there were no plans to bring in Vaccine Passports as late as February despite tendering contracts being signed in November. Why did they lie?
There is clearly huge momentum behind vaccine passports despite no politician being willing to speak up for them publicly. The impetus is clearly coming from the WEF and the interests they represent.
You should take your evidence to the media. They'd have a field day with a provable conspiracy like this.
0 -
8 minutes ago, peasy23 said:
Were they just expecting the government to shut down all public services? Shite that they didn't have the ability to WFH but that's life.
0 -
4 minutes ago, craigkillie said:
92% complete on 55-59 and 72% complete on 50-54. Based on the figures in the 2011 census, that would mean around 132,000 over 50s still to do. Obviously they're not the only people getting the vaccines, but I can't imagine that taking another 24 days to complete.That's about 16,500 per day to meet the original target (14th April) I think it was. Should be doable. If they miss it by a couple of days or a week who actually cares?
0 -
-
1 hour ago, Thereisalight.. said:
BJ seems hellbent on bringing domestic vaccines in. With a shower of shite MPS who'll either back him or abstain. As for Devi she should have been punted back into obscurity at least 10 months ago.
Hope so. Vaccines are the way out of this...
...sorry, vaccines used to be the way out of this.
0 -
1 hour ago, Thereisalight.. said:
Has anyone else on here never had the covid test or downloaded the app?
Downloaded the app. Never had a test. I’ve only known one person that’s actually had to go for a covid test. Came back negative.
0 -
9 minutes ago, Honest Saints Fan said:
^^^ doesn’t have a mate with a factory that manufactures LFT’s.
1 -
4 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:
Utterly grim.....
Another point from the government's 'early thinking' document... Some coronavirus measures might still be needed after all adults have had a jab
The vaccine programme does not provide universal protection and it is still not known how much impact vaccines have on transmission, the government says.
Some people will not take up the offer of a vaccine and even after two doses it will not be 100% effective.
As a result, some measures may still be needed for some time after all adults have been offered a vaccine.
I’ve no issue with coronavirus measures remaining post vaccination as long as they are commensurate with and normal to a pre-covid world.
Proof of vaccination to enter a country being the obvious example. It’s normal to have this for certain diseases in certain countries.
I had no idea until today that surgeons are required to have certain vaccines but if this is deemed a risk by the medical profession then it seems sensible to me that these requirements be extended to include coronavirus. This is a normal event that may need to include an additional measure for coronavirus.
the idea that we’re going to alter normal life in case of coronavirus is deplorable though as the reasons to do this don’t seem to stack up.
1 -
4 minutes ago, Wee Bully said:
Not in Scotland - there has never been a doctor (or anyone else) charged with manslaughter in Scotland, much less jailed.
I think the equivalent offence in Scotland is culpable homicide (which requires intent). I don’t think there have been any convictions under this.
I wasn’t taking a Scotland centric viewpoint on this or even particularly wanting to discuss doctors. More a general point that being negligent and costing lives should lead to the jail, regardless of where you are.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:
not if you are just shit and not acting with malice. You should just be struck of the register.
Even if you’ve killed people by being shit? Even with no malice that’s manslaughter. Doctors do get jailed for it.
ETA doctors aren’t the only profession that have been jailed for manslaughter due to being shit at their jobs and I’m not picking on doctors. They were just the obvious example where being shit can cost lives.
0 -
18 minutes ago, craigkillie said:
This is essentially advocating a step towards fascism. Being bad at your job should not be punishable by imprisonment, no matter what your job is. The predictions are not what affect the liberty of people - the liberty of people is being affected by the people who make the decisions - the fact that they might act on bad information (or at least a failure to understand the nuances of the information) is their fault for picking the wrong people to listen to. It sort of reminds me (in the opposite direction) of the Italian government trying to prosecute seismologists who failed to predict the fatal earthquake in L'Aquila in 2009.The only possible effect of this is that scientists (and all sorts of other experts) refuse to work with the government again, and you get a bunch of yes men telling people in power exactly what they want to hear with no checks or balances.
Even a negligent doctor?
0 -
40 minutes ago, super_carson said:
I do wonder if all this talk about vaccine passports and mass testing in England is part of an over-correction on the part of WM. Last year they were criticised for being too slow to react (e.g. lockdowns could/should have happened earlier than they did, not closing borders etc.) and uncaring with the desire to get people back into offices/work. Conversely, in Scotland, NS and the SG were praised for being decisive and clear in their policies (that, of course, is up for debate) by Joe Public, "experts" and the WHO. Clearly there has been a change in tone from WM and BJ - it's far more cautious, emotional and "caring".
Forgive my cynicism, but I can't help but feel this all a massive PR exercise designed to regain public trust (despite being ahead in the polls) and pre-empt any push back from those in society who refuse to accept there is a need to return to normal. For Bojo, as a strategy, it probably represents the best of both options; reopening the country while make it look he is taking significant steps to mitigate any increase in cases (despite the vaccine rollout largely nullifying the case/hospitalisation/death ratio). The impact of this can go either way - we maintain focused on cases as the primary metric and they remain with restrictions indefinitely or it provides clear data that case numbers are no longer significant with regards to hospitalisations, ICU and deaths.
In my own personal opinion, I don't mind vaccine passports for international travel - after all there is already a precedent for that in terms of needing certain injections before travelling to specific countries - as a temporary measure. I also don't mind short term regular testing as a way to get the economy opening faster and without restrictions while the vaccine roll out is completed. It would allow the younger folk who have undoubtedly being given the shitty end of a short stick the opportunity to go out and live a bit more freely while they wait for vaccination. That all said, it would have to be absolutely set down in law that these measures would be binned at a specified point not long after the last injection is complete. Unfortunately, I doubt this would be the case and I think we should all be wary of this level of data gathering (the irony of sending this from an android phone that requires a google account isn't lost on me, by the way).
I say 'we', because undoubtedly this will take hold in Scotland too. Again, as temporary measures they are preferable to social distancing and setting fire to our economy but in absolutely no way should these become a permanent feature. They are, after all, still restrictions and kill off any spontaneity in life. People should be asking why and to what end this idea of mass testing has reared its head, especially in the context of vaccines. If it is to gather evidence that vaccines work and break transmission, or to ascertain the number of cases being asymptomatic (and therefore irrelevant) then fair enough, provided there is a clear end point. If this becomes a permanent feature of life, then that is something that should be set fire to, but in the bin and then launched into the sea.
Of course, another thing to consider is liability and insurance. You can bet those unscrupulous b*****ds in the finance sector will view this as an opportunity to push premiums up and passports/regularly testing may help to mitigate risk to businesses should someone catch covid on a premises. Not that I expect the Tory government to be looking out for the little guy.
How long did it take you to type this essay on a phone?
0 -
1 hour ago, Empty It said:
I think you're all being selfish, we should all just accept a lockdown until 2025 to protect pensioners and the obese.
Protect pensions of the obesely rich.
0 -
28 minutes ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:
To be quite honest, if the torries are in charge of giving out tenders for implementing this vaccine passport, then I’m not worried about it in the slightest, why worry about something that will be so late and so half arsed that itl have no effect on us at all
Possibly because the law requiring one to enter premises will be in place well beforehand which effectively is another form of lockdown.
0
Coronavirus (COVID-19)
in The General Nonsense Forum
Posted
Have there been any recent estimates on the percentage of the population that would need to be vaccinated to make this irrelevant?
Vaccine efficacy seems to be reported as different numbers depending on what agenda is being followed.