Coronavirus - potential Black Swan?

[NobodyInParticular]

10 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

 

That's not going to happen, the guy genuinely seems to be of too limited intelligence to even begin to understand the articles he is quoting from.

His last post is a case in point. It would take an uninformed but averagely intelligent person a few seconds to think of several reasons why there are less NHS beds occupied than normal but it's obviously beyond him. 

You just need to ask some NHS front line staff to find out why. 

[Chunketh]

On 06/01/2021 at 12:42, Dr Doom said:

Rate Of Adverse Reactions To COVID Vaccines Already 50x Higher Than Flu Shot

It would be withdrawn if it were true. Happily its not

[zugzwang]

5 hours ago, anonguest said:

So.......IF and when the hospitals start to become inundated with covid sick much younger (and possibly nominally healthy people) all the currently hospitalised elderly will be booted out to make way for them?

London hospitals are already overwhelmed with Covid sick.

There are currently 9 million over 70s in the UK. How big would you like the pile of bones to be?

[Confusion of VIs]

4 minutes ago, nightowl said:

But ultimately what purpose does this "prediction" serve if it not a forecast of a sort?  Did ICL do any other "scenarios" for the UK taking some sort of measures?

If I have a "scenario" warning you of a risk of sunburn tommorow with the caveat "if its not cloudy" while a bank of cloud can be seen blowing in....Does this help you decide on Factor15 or an umbrella? What purpose does my "scenario" with caveat really have?

In October we were presented with a "scenario" specifically not called a "prediction" of 4K/day etc but again no others. I dont know who made that one (dare I guess?) which suffers from the same problem.

All forecasts are scenario based and no doubt there were also best/mid case forecasts based on other scenarios but you know about the worst case one because it generated the best headlines. 

Same in October the "worst reasonable case" scenario got the headlines but the mid case actually turned out to be a bit low.

[Arpeggio]

45 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

 

 

So UK population goes up, NHS spending has gone up and Nurses are leaving. What's your point?

 

34 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Remind us again.

Just who's pushing the Global Britain/China First agenda?

 

Why do you keep posting this Tory sh*te as though it's a counterargument to a point (which nobody has made)?

Must be 4 times now? all of which I already I replied that I don't like the 2-parties-really-the-same (as I have said many times) and have never voted Tory in my life. What makes you think you'll get a different response this time?

Edited January 9, 2021 by Arpeggio

[NobodyInParticular]

24 minutes ago, nightowl said:

But ultimately what purpose does this "prediction" serve if it not a forecast of a sort? 

Decision support. You want to see what the worst case scenario looks like, for example. You might have worst case, 250k, public takes voluntary action, 150k, lockdown 100k. Based on that you could begin to make a judgement. If the worst case was 250 rather than 250k then you'd make different decisions. It also gives a crude measurement criterion. 

Quote

Did ICL do any other "scenarios" for the UK taking some sort of measures?

Numerous and ongoing. Ditto LSHTM and others. 

Quote

If I have a "scenario" warning you of a risk of sunburn tommorow with the caveat "if its not cloudy" while a bank of cloud can be seen blowing in....Does this help you decide on Factor15 or an umbrella?

Not a comparable analogy. 

Comparable would be 'chance of sunburn if sunny. Weather tomorrow unknown'. That's slightly closer. 

Quote

What purpose does my "scenario" with caveat really have?

As explained above. 

Quote

In October we were presented with a "scenario" specifically not called a "prediction" of 4K/day etc but again no others. 

In an attempt to keep things simple, Fergusson didn't do a good job of science communication in my opinion. 

[anonguest]

Just now, NobodyInParticular said:

Ah, sorry, I thought you were getting it, but obviously not. 

All of the above did not match the assumptions. This is because it was about a worst case scenario in which no one had the sense to change anything. Several and continued projections are made based on multiple scenarios in decision support to understand the decision surface. As reactions to an event occur then parameters are adjusted. This is just normal practice. I'd suggest going and reading about the subject. I had to do so when I was supporting modelling for epidemiologists several years ago (but I am not an epidemiologist). 

OK.  So the 250K deaths was his worst case projection.  Got it.  (Although, like someone else said, I too vaguely recall his worst casse forecast being 500K-ish deaths?)

All that said then what were his projections for deaths assuming various actions were taken?  Specifically, among the (presumably) several different projections he made were there any wherein the assumptions could be said to arguably correlate with the actions that have been taken thus far (e.g. lockdowns, social distancing, etc) - and so how far out, or close, have those projections come to the reported deaths to date?

Edited January 9, 2021 by anonguest

[NobodyInParticular]

12 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

All forecasts are scenario based and no doubt there were also best/mid case forecasts based on other scenarios but you know about the worst case one because it generated the best headlines. 

Same in October the "worst reasonable case" scenario got the headlines but the mid case actually turned out to be a bit low.

Thank you again. 

[zugzwang]

1 minute ago, Confusion of VIs said:

All forecasts are scenario based and no doubt there were also best/mid case forecasts based on other scenarios but you know about the worst case one because it generated the best headlines. 

Same in October the "worst reasonable case" scenario got the headlines but the mid case actually turned out to be a bit low.

We're in the Hot Zone.

Vaccinations won't hold this thing back. We could see 250,000 dead by July unless we adopt a Zero Covid strategy.

 

[NobodyInParticular]

2 minutes ago, anonguest said:

OK.  So the 250K deaths was his worst case projection.  Got it.  (Although, like someone else said, I too vaguely recall his worst casse forecast being 500K-ish deaths?)

I can't remember which. Since I read the assumptions I didn't pay a lot of attention to the exact figure as it was worst case and I assumed there would be action. 

2 minutes ago, anonguest said:

All that said then what were his projections for deaths assuming various actions were taken? 

See www.imperial.ac.uk. I expect they are all there. 

Quote

 

 

Edited January 9, 2021 by NobodyInParticular

[zugzwang]

3 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

So UK population goes up, NHS spending has gone up and Nurses are leaving. What's your point?

 

Why do you keep posting this Tory sh*te as though it's a counterargument to a point (which nobody has made)?

Must be 4 times now? all of which I already I replied that I don't like the 2-parties-really-the-same (as I have said many times) and have never voted Tory in my life. What makes you think you'll get a different response this time?

It's a double whammy for NHS budgets. The UK population goes up 10 million in twenty years. The number of over 65s within that population goes up from 15% to nearly 25%.

I'm just waiting for you to acknowledge that it's 'Britain Trump' and his City pals who are driving the China First/Lagos-on-Thames agenda; as they have done for the past three and half decades.

[Arpeggio]

59 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

We would be very happy if you ******ed off while the grown ups are talking.

or stopped having your tantrum.

Said someone who can't even debate, but instead just goes ad hominem over half the time and now you call yourself a grown up. It's painfully obvious you aren't capable of anything else.

If you were a child you'd get a clip round the ear for being such an obnoxious little sh*t by now. Instead of trolling, it might be a good idea to come up with something more compelling to anyone reading this forum that you are interested in a little more than just wasting space.

Edited January 9, 2021 by Arpeggio

[Peter Hun]

2 hours ago, nightowl said:

So what difference does that make when forming policy?

Quite a lot.

First, a vaccination can be produced much quicker for Flu. Four months and side effect etc are well know. Anti-virals existed in the past to treat flu. Nobody has made a vaccine for a corona virus before.

Second its effects are well known -  Long Covid is not an issue, neither is the oxygen issue a problem. 

Third immunity is acquired after the first infection and its sustained.

The the result is Flu would have burned out in a few months and a vaccine available for known vulnerable groups which would be perfectly safe for all age groups.

The fact that the speaker says that you cannot stop people getting it and a certain amount need to get it is a reference to Flu. Its completely wrong with COVID, because four months later its still here isn't it?

[zugzwang]

Vietnam is fighting Covid without pitting economic growth against public healthcare.

Why can't we?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/20/vietnam-covid-economic-growth-public-health-coronavirus

To date, Vietnam (population: 95 million) has recorded 35 deaths from the novel coronavirus. My office building’s response was typical of the aggressive contact-tracing strategy the country adopted from the beginning of the pandemic. During the first phase, the government managed to cut off all the virus transmission routes promptly and comprehensively. Every infected person was hospitalised. People in contact with them were traced to the fourth layer and isolated. Their homes and neighbourhoods were put under local lockdown and sanitised by the army. The country has effectively been acting as if this were biological warfare.

Vietnam had all the ingredients for a Covid-19 disaster. It has a 1,300km (800-mile) border with China, with lots of informal trade via secret mountain trails, and an under-developed healthcare system (albeit a well functioning one). So, beyond contact-tracing, why has Vietnam been so good at dealing with the pandemic?

The central reason is perhaps the way the government has depoliticised the pandemic, treating it purely as a health crisis, allowing for effective governance. There was no political motive for government officials to hide information, as they don’t face being face being reprimanded if there are positive cases in their authority area that are not due to their mistakes. I haven’t heard about any religious opposition to the government’s strategy either. With the head of Hanoi centre for disease control being arrested for suspected corruption in relation to the purchase of testing kits, and small traders getting fines for price-gouging face-masks, the government has also been clear that public health cannot be entangled with commercial interests.

The second reason is Vietnam knows China well – it learned from the Sars outbreak in 2003 that the Chinese authorities might downplay it. In January, when Wuhan announced the first death, Vietnam tightened its border and airport control of Chinese visitors. This wasn’t an easy decision, given that cross-border trade with China accounts for a significant part of the Vietnamese economy. When the first Covid cases were announced in Vietnam – a father and son from China – it took precautionary measures above and beyond World Health Organization recommendations, including health declaration and temperature screening at every border entry point and stopping flights to and from Wuhan. Preparations for a pandemic were implemented a week before the outbreak was officially a public health emergency of international concern, and more than a month before WHO declared Covid-19 a pandemic.

 

[nightowl]

58 minutes ago, Confusion of VIs said:

All forecasts are scenario based and no doubt there were also best/mid case forecasts based on other scenarios but you know about the worst case one because it generated the best headlines. 

Same in October the "worst reasonable case" scenario got the headlines but the mid case actually turned out to be a bit low.

 

 

46 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

Decision support. You want to see what the worst case scenario looks like, for example. You might have worst case, 250k, public takes voluntary action, 150k, lockdown 100k. Based on that you could begin to make a judgement. If the worst case was 250 rather than 250k then you'd make different decisions. It also gives a crude measurement criterion. 

Numerous and ongoing. Ditto LSHTM and others. 

Not a comparable analogy. 

Comparable would be 'chance of sunburn if sunny. Weather tomorrow unknown'. That's slightly closer. 

As explained above. 

In an attempt to keep things simple, Fergusson didn't do a good job of science communication in my opinion. 

I understand the Decision Support aspect having a best, midway and worst case scenarios but what if none of them are remotely accurate anyway? 

Back to the weather forecast analogy, saying the weather tommorow is unknown is a useless "prediction" because it helps no one make a decision still.

Edited January 9, 2021 by nightowl

[Arpeggio]

21 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

It's a double whammy for NHS budgets. The UK population goes up 10 million in twenty years. The number of over 65s within that population goes up from 15% to nearly 25%.

.....so they should have done the opposite of what made nurses leave, beds being cut and staff have to pay for parking despite increased spending.

21 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

I'm just waiting for you to acknowledge that it's 'Britain Trump' and his City pals who are driving the China First/Lagos-on-Thames agenda; as they have done for the past three and half decades.

This must be at least 5 times now that you've bought up Trump on here?!

Again you are putting words into other people's mouths to make it look like you are "catching them out" for an angle they have never even had. It's pathetic. I know Boris angle on China and haven't approved it for far longer than you're trying to gaslight anyone to think.

With the amount of times I have critized China on here, for you to suggest I have some kind of less unforgiving view just because of some kind imaginary political angle in your imagination, isn't too dissimilar to the whole idea of trying to split politics into 2 camps as part of the fake 2 party system.

Apparently this is a COVID thread, but not so much for you it seems.

Child incest scandal shakes French intelligentsia

Edited January 9, 2021 by Arpeggio

[moonriver]

2 hours ago, Roman Roady said:

The only reason any kids will have such problems in the future will be down to reactions of their hysterical parents.

Children are stronger than we think.

Both my parents were evacuated in the war aged 11. My father had a horrible time. My mother eventually enjoyed herself but would recant stories of clutching her brother in some village hall screaming "I'm not leaving my brother" as some strangers tried to separate them. One uncle who was apprenticed to my Grandfather on the River Thames remembered running in terror during a bombing raid whilst returning home walking through Greenwich Park. His father and mate were laughing at him saying "where do you think you are running to? You might run to your death!" He would have been 14 or 15 at that time. The family lost everything to a V1 at the end of the war; my parents didnt live in their OWN house until they were 37.

They never assaulted anyone (to the best of my knowledge).

The future will take care of itself, stop worrying and enjoy this time with your kids...they really do grow up too quickly.

Good post.

Agree, children adjust quicker than we imagine.

As a parent, that time is special whilst they are young, and when you look back it passes by so quickly.

[MonsieurCopperCrutch]

1 hour ago, Bob8 said:

We would be very happy if you ******ed off while the grown ups are talking.

or stopped having your tantrum.

Put him on ignore. Only person I have on ignore and it makes reading threads much, much more pleasant.

[anonguest]

37 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Vietnam is fighting Covid without pitting economic growth against public healthcare.

Why can't we?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/20/vietnam-covid-economic-growth-public-health-coronavirus

To date, Vietnam (population: 95 million) has recorded 35 deaths from the novel coronavirus. My office building’s response was typical of the aggressive contact-tracing strategy the country adopted from the beginning of the pandemic. During the first phase, the government managed to cut off all the virus transmission routes promptly and comprehensively. 

 

Which included, IIRC, shutting down/sealing off their national borders completely?  (even more so than the few other countries to do similar, such as Israel).  BUT I recall lots here citing all manner of experts who were supposedly saying how such steps were pointless/futile!

Edited January 9, 2021 by anonguest

[Arpeggio]

4 minutes ago, anonguest said:

Which included, IIRC, sutting down/saeling off the national borders completely?  (even more so than the few other countries to do similar, such as Israel).  BUT I recall lots here citing all manner of experts who were supposedly saying how such steps were futile!

Taiwan was warning the world about it months before hand also but was ignored by WHO. I have mentioned this before but what seems to register or not on here seems to be selective for the nutcases.

Edited January 9, 2021 by Arpeggio

[Arpeggio]

10 minutes ago, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

Put him on ignore. Only person I have on ignore and it makes reading threads much, much more pleasant.

You just acknowledged me by replying to someone you thought was talking about me.

They were not, you idiot and you would have known this if you hadn't blocked me lol.

Edited January 9, 2021 by Arpeggio

[nightowl]

20 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

This must be at least 5 times now that you've bought up Trump on here?!

Welcome to the "Brexit/Trump-debate-by-proxy" thread... dont be fooled by the Black Swan Title 🙂

 

9 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

Taiwan was warning the world about it months before hand also but was ignored by WHO.

Taiwan has no illusions about the political leadership in China and more wary than many others.

[Arpeggio]

6 minutes ago, nightowl said:

Welcome to the "Brexit/Trump-debate-by-proxy" thread... dont be fooled by the Black Swan Title 🙂

Cat's out the bag now! Zugzwang has "Trumped". I think Zug may even be a Greta Fartberg fan "concerned" about global warming too?

https://www.state.gov/chinas-environmental-abuses/

"The People’s Republic of China (PRC) is the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases"

 

6 minutes ago, nightowl said:

Taiwan has no illusions about the political leadership in China and more wary than many others.

There's some more images of China boy Hunter out recently too and they are worse than the last ones. Saw a couple, his d8ck was blocked out.

[NobodyInParticular]

37 minutes ago, nightowl said:

 

 

I understand the Decision Support aspect having a best, midway and worst case scenarios but what if none of them are remotely accurate anyway? 

The mid point ones have been fairly good when the scenarios have matched the chain of events. What you can't do is take a mid-point one from March and complain it isn't right now as we've had on-off lockdowns and a new strain. 

37 minutes ago, nightowl said:

Back to the weather forecast analogy, saying the weather tommorow is unknown is a useless "prediction" because it helps no one make a decision still.

I apologise if you failed to understand my explanation that your analogy was incorrect or the point I was trying to make. But at a certain point I stop banging by head against a brick wall. 

[NobodyInParticular]

47 minutes ago, Arpeggio said:

.....so they should have done the opposite of what made nurses leave, beds being cut and staff have to pay for parking despite increased spending.

In the last ten years although spending has gone up it has not gone up as fast as need, which is based on population size and demographics. This was covered extensively in the press in the run up to the last election.

What has made nurses leave has been years of pay freezes and insufficient spending given the need. 

Typical European nations have more complex systems (although the internal market has a cost) but spend about 2% more of GDP on healthcare. To be comparable, the NHS would need around 1% more of GDP as a minimum, or about another £20bn a year right now. This is about twice that promise on the bus. 

Quote