Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

South Lorne

Members
  • Posts

    12,672
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by South Lorne

  1. 3 hours ago, Warlord said:

    Just passing it on....

    ...also, just passing it on ....Labour and other remainers wish to remain with this lot in the EU ...where do Lewis Hamilton and "Faulty Towers" fit in here...

    https://www.daimler.com/company/tradition/company-history/1933-1945.html

     

    Initially, the company recruited women in order to cope with the required unit volumes. However, as staff numbers were still too low, Daimler-Benz also used forced labourers. These prisoners of war, abducted civilians and detainees from concentration camps were housed close to the plants. Forced labourers from western Europe lived in guest houses, private accommodation or schools.

    Workers from eastern Europe and prisoners of war were interned in barrack camps with poor, prison-like conditions. Concentration camp detainees were monitored by the SS under inhumane conditions. They were “loaned out” to companies in exchange for money. In 1944, almost half of Daimler Benz’s 63,610 Daimler Benz employees were civilian forced labourers, prisoners of war or concentration camp detainees.

    After the war, Daimler-Benz admitted its links with the Nazi regime, and also became involved in the German Industry Foundation’s initiative “Remembrance, Responsibility and Future”, whose work included the provision of humanitarian aid for former forced labourers.

     

     

    Wiki Daimler

    Although Daimler-Benz is best known for its Mercedes-Benz automobile brand, during World War II, it also created a notable series of engines for German aircraft, tanks, and submarines. Its cars became the first choice of many Nazi, Fascist Italian and Japanese officials including Hermann Goring, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini and Hirohito, who most notably used the Mercedes-Benz 770 luxury car. Daimler also produced parts for German arms, most notably barrels for Mauser Kar98k rifles. During World War II, Daimler-Benz employed the use of over 60,000 concentration camp prisoners and other forced laborers to build machinery. After the war, Daimler admitted to its links and coordination with the Nazi government."

     

    Mercedes Benz

    We’re investigating a group action on behalf of Mercedes BlueTEC owners who’ve been affected by the cheating software which was installed into their vehicles engine and was designed to defeat pollution tests.  If you purchased one of the affected vehicles you may be eligible to join.

     

     

  2. 2 minutes ago, South Lorne said:

    you are correct the cases should read :

    Italy

    Coronavirus Cases to date - 21,157

    UK

    Coronavirus Cases to date - 1,372

     

    and that still is out of synch with our 80% which you quote...

     

     

    you are correct the cases should read :

    Italy

    Coronavirus Cases to date - 21,157

    UK

    Coronavirus Cases to date - 1,372

    and that still is out of synch with our 80% which you quote...

    ...deaths to date are:
    Italy : 1441
    UK: 35

  3. 11 minutes ago, slawek said:

    They use word "expected" in the PHE document.

    "Coronavirus Deaths to date - 21,157" that is wrong it should be 1,809 as of today.

    you are correct the cases should read :

    Italy

    Coronavirus Cases to date - 21,157

    UK

    Coronavirus Cases to date - 1,372

     

    and that still is out of synch with our 80% which you quote...

     

     

  4. 7 minutes ago, slawek said:

    Which sentence in the post is a theory according to you?

    "they should buy time with more aggressive social distancing to properly prepare for the controlled outbreak." ...and I refer you to the current  UK / Italy figures to help you. You skim your theory without any data to back it up as usual. You are a propagandist with sound bites.

    Current data:

    Italy: Population - 60m
    Coronavirus Deaths to date - 21,157
    Deaths - 1,441

    UK: Population - 66m
    Coronavirus Deaths to date - 1,372
    Deaths - 35

    Italy had their first confirmed death 24 hours before the UK

     

     

    and of course along with current planning the Government are due to introduce more social distancing in the near future .

     

     

  5. 5 minutes ago, slawek said:

    I was comparing total infected cases, 20k in Italy is below 1%. 80% is expected value from the PHE document.

    ...that is a disaster recovery worst case scenario plan not actual figures ....kindly comment on the current UK and Italy figures as our histories of the virus are only one day apart and you quoted 20K in Italy v 80% of our 66 million ...do your maths..is that logical :

    Current data:

    Italy: Population - 60m
    Coronavirus Deaths to date - 21,157
    Deaths - 1,441

    UK: Population - 66m
    Coronavirus Deaths to date - 1,372
    Deaths - 35

    Italy had their first confirmed death 24 hours before the UK

     

  6. 2 minutes ago, slawek said:

    What theory?

     

    Your words of wisdom quoted which need data to back them up.

    "They are just idiots.

    Even if they aim for the herd immunity they should buy time with more aggressive social distancing to properly prepare for the controlled outbreak. At the moment they don't have enough ICU beds or even normal hospital beds and it looks like the peak is weeks away if they don't get serious. It is going to be a carnage. "

  7. 51 minutes ago, slawek said:

    They are just idiots.

    Even if they aim for the herd immunity they should buy time with more aggressive social distancing to properly prepare for the controlled outbreak. At the moment they don't have enough ICU beds or even normal hospital beds and it looks like the peak is weeks away if they don't get serious. It is going to be a carnage.  

    ...where is your data to back such a theory ...?

  8. 8 minutes ago, slawek said:

    There is not enough beds for less than 1% infected,  try to imagine what will happen when try to get 80% infected. 

    They = the government. 

    80% will not be affected at the same time and many of the 80% will not require hospital treatment ..and 80% is worst case scenario in the contingency planning ...you are a propagandist and without  a counter solution to offer you and people like you are part of the problem facing the country.

  9. 9 minutes ago, South Lorne said:

    ...who are most experts...?..you are very good at making vague statements with absolutley no foundation :

    On 'Guido' some people were commenting on today's data between Italy and the UK..I don't have an explanation either ...maybe you do?...

    image.png

     

     

    The image shows this current data:

    Italy: Population - 60m
    Coronavirus Deaths to date - 21,157
    Deaths - 1,441

    UK: Population - 66m
    Coronavirus Deaths to date - 1,372
    Deaths - 35

    Italy had their first confirmed death 24 hours before the UK

     

    The people you mention are not "most".....you are just another progagandist challenging without facts. Your views on the UK / Italy data  would be useful. I can't begin to explain it.

     

  10. 23 minutes ago, slawek said:

    They are just idiots.

    Even if they aim for the herd immunity they should buy time with more aggressive social distancing to properly prepare for the controlled outbreak. At the moment they don't have enough ICU beds or even normal hospital beds and it looks like the peak is weeks away if they don't get serious. It is going to be a carnage.  

    ....you are just uttering banal mutters ...which country has enough beds to go around for their spikes...?    ...who are "they" ..you didn't quote the post to which you  were replying ....very strange behaviour ....

  11. 4 hours ago, slawek said:

    Most experts think the UK strategy is mad. He is not really an expert, he is a psychologist.  Why has he omitted key facts?  

    https://uk.linkedin.com/in/ian-donald-6850082b

    ...who are most experts...?..you are very good at making vague statements with absolutley no foundation :

    On 'Guido' some people were commenting on today's data between Italy and the UK..I don't have an explanation either ...maybe you do?...

    image.png

     

     

  12. 1 minute ago, slawek said:

    Unfortunately I can't help you if you have, or pretending you have, problems with following  my argument. 

    I don't know, I am not the owner of data on wikipedia. My guess is China didn't publish official data before that date. 

    Actions need to be consistent with the strategy. I've presented two possible explanations why that is not case. If you claim there is consistency between actions and the strategy then you lack ability to understand a simple fact that  a claim "will save life" and a decision "not save lives" are in a clear contradiction. I can't help you with that. A claim by someone "I am competent " is not a proof he is. I think that is obvious.  

    ....there are no arguments...just honest debates, which should be backed up with facts and owned opinion......you should own the fact that anything on  Wiki that does not add up should be challenged but you use it in data to comapre with other countries ...that is fake news....nobody claimed they were competent but in my opinion I stated they were ...that is permitted and you can agree or disagree....good luck... I'm off to eat.

  13. 1 hour ago, slawek said:

    "Delaying aggressive measures by a day increases deaths by around 30%."

    30% is roughly the increase rate of the confirmed cases. Deaths = cases * mortality rate. 30% increase in cases causes 30% increase in deaths. 

    Raw UK official data of confirmed cases:

     https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb1

    "Inconsistency between the new strategy and their actions is a fact too."

    It is derived from the previous fact and the government strategy " Our goal is to protect life from this virus", you provided. Delaying more aggressive measures doesn't protect life from the virus but it increases deaths. It is clearly an inconsistency. 

    Question is where this inconsistency between the government strategy and its action comes from. Possible explanations are

    a) the government lies about their strategy

    b) the government is incompetent and unable to execute its strategy properly  

     

    ....deaths are actual data and assuming the lead-in is one month from infection and the infection data is unreliable and underestimated as groups of people, who have it, have not been tested, I don't understand from where your 30% daily increases in deaths comes.

    You are still to comment on the Wiki data which does not include deaths in China before 10th January 2020. Maybe you can offer a better explanation than the one I hinted at and explain why you are using this data to compare with other countries.

    Actions and measures are subject to change depending on timeline and events but the broad strategy stays the same. The strategy is the same and therefore cannot be lies and as far as competence is concerned the following was announced by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care:

    From the horses mouth:

    "We have acted to contain the spread of the virus so far. We have carried out some of the highest number of tests in Europe, our surveillance testing is among the most sophisticated in the world and the UK’s plans for the rapid response to and mitigation of the spread of an epidemic are ranked number one above any other country by the Global Health Security Index. Most importantly of all, thanks to our record levels of tracing the number of people who came into contact with the first people who caught the virus, the initial growth was slowed significantly, and the growth of the virus in the UK has been slower than many major European countries. This action has already prevented the NHS being put under greater pressure in its hardest season of the year. We have bought valuable time to prepare.

    Last week we stepped into the next phase of our response. We took action to advise anyone with symptoms, however mild, to stay at home. This advice from the Chief Medical Officer will be reinforced with a national communications campaign so everyone knows what they can do: how you can play your part. The new campaign will set out the latest clinical advice, for people to stay at home for seven days if they develop a high temperature or new continuous cough."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/03/14/must-do-everything-power-protect-lives/amp/

     

    IMHO we are not looking at any loss of competence but an increase.

    As quoted earlier:

    "If it's not classified as editorial or opinion, then look for bias/judgemental language." Penny Reid, Author

     

     

  14. 1 minute ago, slawek said:

    Delaying aggressive measures by a day increases deaths by around 30% is a fact not an opinion.  

    Inconsistency between the new strategy and their actions is a fact too.

    Whether they are lying or not about the change of their strategy is an opinion.  

    ...as I said you are also entitled to your opinion ...but when you quote data as fact you should link it to a source which helps everyone to understand your stance ....e.g. your first sentence.

    I assume "they" in your terminology is the Government and their current stance IMHO of "Our goal is to protect life from this virus, our strategy is to protect the most vulnerable and protect the NHS through contain, delay, research and mitigate." has been their broad aim from early on.

  15. 2 minutes ago, slawek said:

    It is good to hear they have changed their strategy. I hope that they don't lie. 

    I am not sure their strategy is to protect the lives at the moment.  Every day day of delaying more aggressive measures costs us around 30% more deaths. If they are serious they need now to follow other countries and close schools, ban events, limit public transport and introduce other social distancing measure so that the virus stop spreading.  

    ....everyone is entitled to their opinion..that's healthy ....

  16. 13 minutes ago, scottbeard said:

    But hang on though...most of the deaths of under 55s with be those who are vulnerable due to underlying health conditions.

    They are being advised to isolate along with the over 70s.

    The mortality rate if 45m healthy under 55s are infected would be much lower, and perhaps close to zero?

    ...we have to be aware of mutation which took place with the Spanish flu 1918-19:

    "The horrific scale of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic is hard to fathom. The virus infected 500 million people worldwide and killed an estimated 20 million to 50 million victims— that’s more than all of the soldiers and civilians killed during World War I combined.

    When the Spanish flu first appeared in early March 1918, it had all the hallmarks of a seasonal flu, albeit a highly contagious and virulent strain. One of the first registered cases was Albert Gitchell, a U.S. Army cook at Camp Funston in Kansas, who was hospitalized with a 104-degree fever. The virus spread quickly through the Army installation, home to 54,000 troops. By the end of the month, 1,100 troops had been hospitalized and 38 had died after developing pneumonia.

    From September through November of 1918, the death rate from the Spanish flu skyrocketed. In the United States alone, 195,000 Americans died from the Spanish flu in just the month of October. And unlike a normal seasonal flu, which mostly claims victims among the very young and very old, the second wave of the Spanish flu exhibited what’s called a “W curve”—high numbers of deaths among the young and old, but also a huge spike in the middle composed of otherwise healthy 25- to 35-year-olds in the prime of their life.

    “That really freaked out the medical establishment, that there was this atypical spike in the middle of the W,” says Harris.

    While the global pandemic lasted for two years, the vast majority of deaths were packed into three especially cruel months in the fall of 1918. Historians now believe that the fatal severity of the Spanish flu’s “second wave” was caused by a mutated virus spread by wartime troop movements."

    https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-second-wave-resurgence

  17. 6 minutes ago, slawek said:

    I didn't claim it is a news reporting. It is an epidemiologist opinion of the UK herd immunity strategy.

    The problem is the government has not published any official plans regarding their strategy. That is what Parick Vallance, the govt adviser, said

    “Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease and we reduce the transmission, at the same time we protect those who are most vulnerable to it. Those are the key things we need to do.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/coronavirus-science-chief-defends-uk-measures-criticism-herd-immunity 

    ...the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care stated this morning from the horses mouth:

    "We have a plan, based on the expertise of world-leading scientists. Herd immunity is not a part of it. That is a scientific concept, not a goal or a strategy. Our goal is to protect life from this virus, our strategy is to protect the most vulnerable and protect the NHS through contain, delay, research and mitigate."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/03/14/must-do-everything-power-protect-lives/amp/

    I read your link but I will take this morning's current statement as the strategy in hand...thank you.

     

     

     

  18. 14 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

    I just mentioned successful treatment for Corona Virus but nobody was interested.

    Sorry for the large text. I notice someone else earlier thought large text was merited for national quarantine lock-down announcements. I would have thought that successful treatment for it might also be of as much interest? If not sorry.

    I got the link to work to the Chinese website but it's all written in Chinese (surprise surprise)

    Here's a link about it though...   https://www.europereloaded.com/news-media-attacks-vitamin-c-treatment-of-covid-19-coronavirus-video/

    Also a paper on the standard Flu jab.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22032844

     "Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking."

    ...thanks for that info and links ...I'll do some further searching later but it appears positive and good news...

  19. 10 minutes ago, slawek said:

    This is worth reading

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/epidemiologist-britain-herd-immunity-coronavirus-covid-19

    When I heard about Britain’s ‘herd immunity’ coronavirus plan, I thought it was satire, writes Dr William Hanage, a professor of the evolution and epidemiology of infectious disease at Harvard.

    The most fundamental function of a government is to keep its people safe. It is from this that it derives its authority, the confidence of the people and its legitimacy.

    Nobody should be under the illusion that this is something that can be dodged through somehow manipulating a virus that we are only beginning to understand. This will not pass you by; this is not a tornado, it is a hurricane.

    ...that article is an opinion ...could you kindly give me source details of "Britain’s ‘herd immunity’ coronavirus plans"....thank you...

    .

    ...see also the quote earlier by Penny Reid, author ...

    "Know the difference between "news reporting" (aka actual news, fact) and "editorial" (aka opinion, not fact).

    Before you accept an article or TV report as factual, check to see first if it's an opinion piece/editorial. Editorials always include bias. Take them with a huge grain of salt.

    If it's not classified as editorial or opinion, then look for bias/judgemental language.
    1) Is the news reporter reporting what happened? (just the facts)
    2) Or, are they adding what they think/feel about what happened? (their opinion)

    It's okay for a news reporter to quote someone else's opinion within the news article, but if the reporter is offering their own feelings, the article ceases to be news."

     

    ..

     

     

  20. 6 minutes ago, slawek said:

    The graph is based on the official Chinese data. You can find them on wikipedia 

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic_data/China_medical_cases

    ...thank you for your source ...I can now compare it with other souces....interestingly Wiki reports deaths due to the virus prior to 10th January 2020 as "Zero" ...it could be before then they categorised the deaths as Pneumonia. If you look at this report by Live Science dated 9th January 2020, it may explain why.

     

    New Virus Related to SARS May Be Behind Mysterious Pneumonia Outbreak in China

    By Rachael Rettner - Senior Writer January 09, 2020

    https://www.livescience.com/new-coronavirus-pneumonia-outbreak-china.html

    ..their more recent article dated 23 hours ago is headed

    1st known case of coronavirus traced back to November in China

    By Jeanna Bryner

    https://www.livescience.com/amp/first-case-coronavirus-found.html

  21. 5 minutes ago, debtlessmanc said:

    My Grandfather had this in 1918 (he told me when he was alive) they were collecting bodies from up and down the street apparently.

    "The influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 killed more people than the Great War, known today as World War I (WWI), at somewhere between 20 and 40 million people. It has been cited as the most devastating epidemic in recorded world history. More people died of influenza in a single year than in four-years of the Black Death Bubonic Plague from 1347 to 1351. Known as "Spanish Flu" or "La Grippe" the influenza of 1918-1919 was a global disaster."

    https://virus.stanford.edu/uda/

  22. 1 minute ago, slawek said:

    To get herd immunity you need to infect 60%-70% of the population around 45m

    if you got infected only under 55y (that is roughly the age, which will give 45m of younger) with the mortality rate under 55s around 0.4% you get

    0.4% * 45m =  180k

    if you, more realistically, have 75% < 55y and 25% > 75y and the mortality rate above 55y being 5% you get

    0.4%* 75% *45m + 5% * 25% * 45m =   700k

    Mortality rates

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

    ...thank you for the link which I saw 2 weeks ago ...the graph you put up gives data up to March 13th  ...this is really useful and  interesting but it is not valid without a named source...grateful if you could provide....

  23. 4 minutes ago, slawek said:

    They have two options

    1)  maintain more aggressive social distancing measures, but less aggressive than now,  to keep R0 < 1 and have only some residual cases 

    2) relax even more and have another outbreak in a few months, which will be dealt with like the first one with only a few thousand deaths  

    ...again where is your source data  for this opinion and your source for the graph showing the deaths in China?...it would be useful to everyone if you could inform us...thank you...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.