Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

The home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4350
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 1590 times
Been thanked: 1579 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322428

Postby GoSeigen » June 29th, 2020, 1:11 am

Clitheroekid wrote:Apologies if it's too O/T but I've noticed that all these rave type events seem to leave behind hundreds of nitrous oxide canisters (apparently known as `whippits').

In my older generation naivete I wasn't even aware of these things until about a year ago, and when I did see the odd one lying around I wondered what on earth they were.


They've been popular with the youf for a long time now: I remember finding them interspersed with used condoms and alcopop empties when doing the big clean up after a family birthday party some ten years ago. We'd come across them discarded in our country lanes in leafy Surrey too.

GS

johnhemming
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3858
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 609 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322434

Postby johnhemming » June 29th, 2020, 5:52 am

servodude wrote:Did you ever have a listen to the BBC podcast that debunked the lockdown timing?

As a general principle I will read things, but I rarely listen to things simply because of the amount of time it takes.

Similarly I am not going to spend a lot of time repeating what I have said previously.

One thing I listened to part of (although I was put off by them using dates of reports of deaths as opposed to dates of deaths) was the independent SAGE committee as they call themselves. They suggested that people who get hospitalised generally do so 2 weeks after infection and deaths then follow 3-4 weeks after infection.

I accept that the profile of deaths following infections is relevant. However, I do not accept the argument that a sufficient number of people died within 2 weeks of infection as to make the lockdown a limiting factor on the peak number of deaths per day.

If the government has any scientific sense they will be driven primarily by numbers of admissions to hospital which is pretty well as timely a measure as counted infections in practice.

I looked at the leicester figures and there appeared to be a spike rather than a jump in admissions. Obviously if there was a continuning increase in admissions this would warrant further study and could potentially be a cause for some action. It is politically sensible for the government to publicly talk about this process as it would indicate they are "on the case".

Whether there is a good case for Leicester to be locked down and whether it will be locked down does not affect any of the above. There probably isn't a good case. However, one should keep an open mind.

Given the pattern of hospital admissions more recently across England (I have not seen the figures for the rest of the UK) I think the position is now settled even if people don't all agree.

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8271
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4435 times
Been thanked: 3564 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322456

Postby servodude » June 29th, 2020, 8:56 am

johnhemming wrote:
servodude wrote:Did you ever have a listen to the BBC podcast that debunked the lockdown timing?

As a general principle I will read things, but I rarely listen to things simply because of the amount of time it takes.

Similarly I am not going to spend a lot of time repeating what I have said previously.

One thing I listened to part of (although I was put off by them using dates of reports of deaths as opposed to dates of deaths) was the independent SAGE committee as they call themselves. They suggested that people who get hospitalised generally do so 2 weeks after infection and deaths then follow 3-4 weeks after infection.

I accept that the profile of deaths following infections is relevant. However, I do not accept the argument that a sufficient number of people died within 2 weeks of infection as to make the lockdown a limiting factor on the peak number of deaths per day.

If the government has any scientific sense they will be driven primarily by numbers of admissions to hospital which is pretty well as timely a measure as counted infections in practice.

I looked at the leicester figures and there appeared to be a spike rather than a jump in admissions. Obviously if there was a continuning increase in admissions this would warrant further study and could potentially be a cause for some action. It is politically sensible for the government to publicly talk about this process as it would indicate they are "on the case".

Whether there is a good case for Leicester to be locked down and whether it will be locked down does not affect any of the above. There probably isn't a good case. However, one should keep an open mind.

Given the pattern of hospital admissions more recently across England (I have not seen the figures for the rest of the UK) I think the position is now settled even if people don't all agree.


Sorry, was that "no"? ;)

Fair enough, it was succinct and you probably would have found it interesting; even if it didn't quite fit with the cherries you've picked, one should keep an open mind, after all.

Sláinte
-sd

johnhemming
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3858
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 609 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322458

Postby johnhemming » June 29th, 2020, 9:00 am

servodude wrote:Sorry, was that "no"? ;)

Yes ... it was no. I have not listened to the BBC podcast.

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2540
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322460

Postby jfgw » June 29th, 2020, 9:05 am

Bubblesofearth wrote:It would have been totally clear how to behave If everyone had simply been given an equation such as;

RI (risk of infection) = c.p(I).1/D^2.t

Where c = proportionality constant*, p(I) = probability person is infected, D^2 = distance squared and t = time of contact.

*This would vary with environmental factors such as whether indoors, wind speed, temperature and humidity. For clarity a different equation could be provided here to allow people to calculate c.


You also need to factor in the effect of distance on amount of the virus exhaled due to the loudness of people's voices. In an enclosed environment, it may be that a plot of RI against D would, for a range of D (which may include the 1m to 2m range), have a positive slope.


Julian F. G. W.

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7086
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3794 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322480

Postby Mike4 » June 29th, 2020, 9:59 am

johnhemming wrote:
servodude wrote:Sorry, was that "no"? ;)

Yes ... it was no. I have not listened to the BBC podcast.


I suggest you break your rule for once, or you will be missing out on hearing a mathematician statistician very convincingly explaining how what appears at first sight to be impossible, is in fact, the case.

bungeejumper
Lemon Half
Posts: 8064
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 2:30 pm
Has thanked: 2846 times
Been thanked: 3939 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322484

Postby bungeejumper » June 29th, 2020, 10:16 am

Clitheroekid wrote:From what little I know these canisters seem relatively harmless compared to other drugs, but they don't half make a mess!

As I understand it, they can stop your heart in a few seconds. :|

Today's gateway drug of choice for the teen group, especially in rural areas. What I can tell you is that people do irresponsible things when they're up on this stuff. A couple of years ago, a pair of local teens let off their high spirits by chucking the metal bottles at our greenhouse. Oh, what merry fun that must have been. And how we laughed. :evil:

BJ

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7086
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3794 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322487

Postby Mike4 » June 29th, 2020, 10:28 am

bungeejumper wrote:
Clitheroekid wrote:From what little I know these canisters seem relatively harmless compared to other drugs, but they don't half make a mess!

As I understand it, they can stop your heart in a few seconds. :|

Today's gateway drug of choice for the teen group, especially in rural areas. What I can tell you is that people do irresponsible things when they're up on this stuff. A couple of years ago, a pair of local teens let off their high spirits by chucking the metal bottles at our greenhouse. Oh, what merry fun that must have been. And how we laughed. :evil:

BJ


Did it crack you up?

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2540
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322488

Postby jfgw » June 29th, 2020, 10:41 am

Itsallaguess wrote:Can you wake me up when we're landing please?

https://i.imgur.com/HGk53oJ.png

Cheers,

Itsallaguess


https://www.ajmc.com/newsroom/covid19-m ... port-finds


Julian F. G. W.

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 8209
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 913 times
Been thanked: 4097 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322489

Postby tjh290633 » June 29th, 2020, 10:52 am

Clitheroekid wrote:Although it's illegal to supply NO2 canisters as a drug it's absurdly easy - and totally legal - to buy them, as they apparently have a legitimate use in making whipped cream, and of course every young person is a whipped cream enthusiast! It therefore seems to be yet another example of a law to stop people using drugs that is both unenforceable and unenforced and frankly makes a mockery of the law.

Just in case you feel the urge to try some, it is not Nitrogen Dioxide,(NO2) but Nitrous Oxide (N2O), otherwise known as Laughing Gas. You can get your fix of NO2 on the motorways, if you wish.

TJH

bungeejumper
Lemon Half
Posts: 8064
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 2:30 pm
Has thanked: 2846 times
Been thanked: 3939 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322492

Postby bungeejumper » June 29th, 2020, 10:54 am

Mike4 wrote:
bungeejumper wrote:A couple of years ago, a pair of local teens let off their high spirits by chucking the metal bottles at our greenhouse. Oh, what merry fun that must have been. And how we laughed. :evil:

Did it crack you up?

We were shattered.

BJ

redsturgeon
Lemon Half
Posts: 8912
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Has thanked: 1309 times
Been thanked: 3667 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322564

Postby redsturgeon » June 29th, 2020, 3:15 pm

Mike4 wrote:
johnhemming wrote:
servodude wrote:Sorry, was that "no"? ;)

Yes ... it was no. I have not listened to the BBC podcast.


I suggest you break your rule for once, or you will be missing out on hearing a mathematician statistician very convincingly explaining how what appears at first sight to be impossible, is in fact, the case.


I haven't heard this podcast, do you have a link.

John

csearle
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4764
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 2:24 pm
Has thanked: 4814 times
Been thanked: 2083 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322621

Postby csearle » June 29th, 2020, 6:35 pm

scotia wrote:
csearle wrote:If one is to believe the Oxford epidemiologists the thing has probably, largely passed through our society. It is on its way out. The international data confirm this according to them. So long as one protects the vulnerable until the vestigial virus left is really tiny then we might as well let the lockdown finish right now and spare ourselves the downside of it. No chance of a second peak.

Chris
(Referring to Professor Gupta of Oxford University)

I have not read any of Professor Gupta's pronouncements, so I apologise if I am mis-interpreting them from the above summary.
However this view seems to be entirely at odds with the random sampling of Covid-19 antibodies that has taken place, and which discovered antibodies in less than 10% of the populace. So if we are to believe that Covid-19 has swept through almost the whole UK population, then we apparently need to believe that most of the population is immune to Covid-19 without developing antibodies. Would this be unique for a viral infection?
If you look at the video interview to which I linked Professor Gupta points out that antibodies are pretty much the last thing the body produces to fight viruses. Many are often not genetically disposed to be attacked by a given virus. Many will ward off the infection with "inate" defence mechanisms, the T cells were mentioned too I think. So she points out that if, say, 5% have antibodies the chances are that a higher proportion of society are not susceptible to CV-19.

Chris

stewamax
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2417
Joined: November 7th, 2016, 2:40 pm
Has thanked: 83 times
Been thanked: 782 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322659

Postby stewamax » June 29th, 2020, 9:42 pm

It may be my overactive imagination, but the virus in the link below looks remarkably like a death's head. ..

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&url=h ... AdAAAAABAE

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8271
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4435 times
Been thanked: 3564 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322683

Postby servodude » June 30th, 2020, 3:32 am

redsturgeon wrote:
Mike4 wrote:
johnhemming wrote:Yes ... it was no. I have not listened to the BBC podcast.


I suggest you break your rule for once, or you will be missing out on hearing a mathematician statistician very convincingly explaining how what appears at first sight to be impossible, is in fact, the case.


I haven't heard this podcast, do you have a link.

John


Don't know if bbc links survive this type of pasting but hopefully it's here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08bqjmt
- starting at ~8:19

crux is if you're using the wrong average for the time from infection to death you will overestimate the time it takes because the distribution is skewed towards the earlier times
- makes the whole thing balanced by bawhairs
enough so that if I see a statement of certainty around this I tend to suspect politics/hope/begging the question

- sd

sg31
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1543
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:35 am
Has thanked: 925 times
Been thanked: 708 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322717

Postby sg31 » June 30th, 2020, 10:22 am

Current state of play in respect of vaccines....

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/a ... te-june-29

ElectronicFur
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 170
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:18 pm
Has thanked: 133 times
Been thanked: 61 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322722

Postby ElectronicFur » June 30th, 2020, 10:34 am

scotia wrote:
csearle wrote:If one is to believe the Oxford epidemiologists the thing has probably, largely passed through our society. It is on its way out. The international data confirm this according to them. So long as one protects the vulnerable until the vestigial virus left is really tiny then we might as well let the lockdown finish right now and spare ourselves the downside of it. No chance of a second peak.

Chris
(Referring to Professor Gupta of Oxford University)

I have not read any of Professor Gupta's pronouncements, so I apologise if I am mis-interpreting them from the above summary.
However this view seems to be entirely at odds with the random sampling of Covid-19 antibodies that has taken place, and which discovered antibodies in less than 10% of the populace. So if we are to believe that Covid-19 has swept through almost the whole UK population, then we apparently need to believe that most of the population is immune to Covid-19 without developing antibodies. Would this be unique for a viral infection?


This thread by Professor Francois Balloux is informative:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1277 ... 35553.html

ElectronicFur
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 170
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:18 pm
Has thanked: 133 times
Been thanked: 61 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322727

Postby ElectronicFur » June 30th, 2020, 10:53 am

Here in Wales on the 13th of June, the number of deaths was already below the 5 year average for the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, as taken from their confidential briefing paper.

The latest ONS data, released today, shows this is now true for England & Wales. The mortality rate in England & Wales is now less than 5-year average.

Yet our children are denied education.

scotia
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3561
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:43 pm
Has thanked: 2371 times
Been thanked: 1943 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322732

Postby scotia » June 30th, 2020, 11:08 am

ElectronicFur wrote:
This thread by Professor Francois Balloux is informative:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1277 ... 35553.html

Many thanks for that link. It was informative, without apparently taking any sides.
However it does reinforce my thoughts (and I stress thoughts) that T-cells are not a source which has led to large scale immunity to Covd-19. Since the author stresses that T cell immunity is extremely long lasting, then such immunity, possibly picked up from other Corona Viruses (Common Cold) should be stronger in the older populace who have experienced more such infections. The opposite seems to be the case. And the recent paper (link posted previously) which (on a small sample) identified T Cells specifically active in Covid-19 infections, also reported that these were found in only 2 out of 10 healthy persons - further backs up my thoughts.
I think that optimism is overcoming realism among those who propose that Covid-19 has already swept through the entire UK population.

scotia
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3561
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 8:43 pm
Has thanked: 2371 times
Been thanked: 1943 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#322738

Postby scotia » June 30th, 2020, 11:20 am

ElectronicFur wrote:Here in Wales on the 13th of June, the number of deaths was already below the 5 year average for the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board, as taken from their confidential briefing paper.

The latest ONS data, released today, shows this is now true for England & Wales. The mortality rate in England & Wales is now less than 5-year average.

Excellent news. And we should expect to see a dip under the 5 year average, due to a significant fraction of the Covid-19 deaths over the past few months being among the elderly and unwell.
ElectronicFur wrote:Yet our children are denied education.

Why not adopt the Scottish school system - Summer holidays have commenced, and its back-to-school in Mid August. By that time, if we have been sensible, the infection rate will have dropped further, and we may be able to return to more normal teaching practices.


Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests