OV9

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 12:59 pm**

Love this forum, the negatively is immense.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:11 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 12:15 pm I'm not challenging the data, just the solidity of the analysis - your link doesn't take me to anything and the other one to the ITV site is the original press story. I don't doubt the conclusion which looks eminently logical, but on its own this is just one piece of news, not justification for relaxing the lockdown.

Unless the data is revised it certainly is some justification for relaxing the lockdown as it suggests it's efficacy in reducing the R0 to >1, over and above social distancing, is questionable.

I was also wrong when I said the peak of deaths on 8 April suggested that infection peak (assuming 14 day average incubation) occurred 2 days after lockdown as it doesn't take into account that median time to death from becoming symtomatic to death was 13 days (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0320_article). That means peak infection using those averages would have fallen c.13 days plus two weeks before 8 April which would clearly be well before lockdown.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:12 pm**

Broccers wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 12:59 pm Love this forum, the negatively is immense.

You're always such a ray of sunshine

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:14 pm**

GG. wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:11 pm
Jobbo wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 12:15 pm I'm not challenging the data, just the solidity of the analysis - your link doesn't take me to anything and the other one to the ITV site is the original press story. I don't doubt the conclusion which looks eminently logical, but on its own this is just one piece of news, not justification for relaxing the lockdown.
Unless the data is revised it certainly is some justification for relaxing the lockdown as it suggests it's efficacy in reducing the R0 to >1, over and above social distancing, is questionable.

I was also wrong when I said the peak of deaths on 8 April suggested that infection peak (assuming 14 day average incubation) occurred 2 days after lockdown as it doesn't take into account that median time to death from becoming symtomatic to death was 13 days (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0320_article). That means peak infection using those averages would have fallen c.13 days plus two weeks before 8 April which would clearly be well before lockdown.

I'm sure there's more detailed background analysis, though even Heneghan's own twitter feed with links doesn't give much other than the data and the conclusion. I'm interested in confidence intervals.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:17 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:12 pm
Broccers wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 12:59 pm Love this forum, the negatively is immense.
You're always such a ray of sunshine

Thanks for the acknowledgement!

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:32 pm**

Jobbo wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:14 pm
GG. wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:11 pm
Jobbo wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 12:15 pm I'm not challenging the data, just the solidity of the analysis - your link doesn't take me to anything and the other one to the ITV site is the original press story. I don't doubt the conclusion which looks eminently logical, but on its own this is just one piece of news, not justification for relaxing the lockdown.
Unless the data is revised it certainly is some justification for relaxing the lockdown as it suggests it's efficacy in reducing the R0 to >1, over and above social distancing, is questionable.

I was also wrong when I said the peak of deaths on 8 April suggested that infection peak (assuming 14 day average incubation) occurred 2 days after lockdown as it doesn't take into account that median time to death from becoming symtomatic to death was 13 days (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0320_article). That means peak infection using those averages would have fallen c.13 days plus two weeks before 8 April which would clearly be well before lockdown.
I'm sure there's more detailed background analysis, though even Heneghan's own twitter feed with links doesn't give much other than the data and the conclusion. I'm interested in confidence intervals.

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/tracking- ... over-time/

This is also interesting. Seems they're cross checking against past trends to establish whether excess deaths were likely Covid related and say that "The peak of deaths is consistent with NHS England’s peak -deaths (8th April). This could be revised upwards but the data is consistent with NHS England’s data on deaths"

This article from earlier in the month acknoweldges difficulties in accurate daily tracking https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/reconcili ... in-the-uk/ though it seems they're now pretty confident in their analysis but they aren't statisticians.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 1:43 pm**

Interesting Twitter thread here which cites (and agrees with) Heneghan - it's just a statistical analysis and it's for the FT so again not a peer-reviewed scientific paper:

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 2:20 pm**

Yes I expect the main unknown is size of peak, not timing, otherwise you're assuming hospital deaths are out of sync with deaths in the community/unreported Covid deaths which i'm not sure makes sense/is likely.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 4:14 pm**

Fat old black Asian etc people passing away.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 4:21 pm**

Broccers wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 4:14 pm Fat old black Asian etc people passing away.

Ah, there’s that famous positivity we’ve been missing.

Posted: **Wed Apr 22, 2020 4:34 pm**

NotoriousREV wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 4:21 pm
Broccers wrote: Wed Apr 22, 2020 4:14 pm Fat old black Asian etc people passing away.
Ah, there’s that famous positivity we’ve been missing.

Boom. Just repeating the news.

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:26 am**

Aston Martin, B&Q and Taylor Wimpey opening or planning to open thier doors.

Wonder what the govt view on this is..

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:34 am**

Probably be happy to see it as long as sensible social distancing measures are put in place.

Posted: **Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:55 am**

Yeah, if they can they should. The gov doesn’t want the economy to stop unnecessarily.

Posted: **Fri Apr 24, 2020 7:43 am**

It continues....

Posted: **Fri Apr 24, 2020 8:18 am**

Beggars belief.

Posted: **Fri Apr 24, 2020 8:41 am**

I for one volunteer for Trumps Covid subbed technique.

Luckily he mentions medical doctors Being used and not a vet, that shows due diligence.

I’m a bit of a fan of trump and his attitude in meetings but sometimes it looks like he saw a picture on the wall before walking in and just fixated on it. Like he would be distracted in a state of address by someone in a fluffy hat.

Dave!

Posted: **Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:31 am**

The answer is a uv fluorescent dildo followed by a bleach enema.

Posted: **Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:32 am**

He’s a fucking idiot.

Posted: **Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:34 am**

ZedLeg wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:32 am He’s a fucking idiot.

This never quite seems enough to sum up just how much of an idiot he is. But then there probably aren't enough words in all the languages in the world to really nail it.

OV9

Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus

Re: Coronavirus