NPR

C69 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:02 pm So locally on the ground we are told it's business as usual with locally treating more Covid patients than the first wave.
there is only so much resilience in the system.
Nosocomial infections are the main issue in house

I’m staying home next time I have a heart attack.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:33 pm

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:11 pm

Link to the paper, then show where he is not using a hypothetical random section of the population.

It’s a simple link as you’ve read it all.


“ I’m qualified to peer review Carl Heneghans sampling”



Come on, give us where the professor is wrong.


Tell you what, let’s leave this here. I’ve made no claims you have claimed to have read his work and further questioned his sampling.

I’ll carry on laughing at people who dismiss one professor so easily while accepting others from the same institution.

No I won’t leave this here, I said his work on false positives are based on a hypothetical random sample, which is not relevant to the tests being carried out.

I’ve explained several times why this is not relevant, but you seem to still use him as a source to support your point of view.

I’m very much open to be being persuaded, as I’ve already said I loath this government so would very much welcome the evidence that they are getting this so wrong.

So, once again, I’ll invite you to go through Heneghan’s work on false positives and show how he is using real world numbers, and not hypotheticals.

If you won’t do this then don’t use him as a source.

Have you had a chance to listen to that link? Just see you are still batting back forth with bimbo 3 hours later?

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:11 pm

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:33 pm

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:11 pm


It’s a simple link as you’ve read it all.


“ I’m qualified to peer review Carl Heneghans sampling”



Come on, give us where the professor is wrong.


Tell you what, let’s leave this here. I’ve made no claims you have claimed to have read his work and further questioned his sampling.

I’ll carry on laughing at people who dismiss one professor so easily while accepting others from the same institution.

No I won’t leave this here, I said his work on false positives are based on a hypothetical random sample, which is not relevant to the tests being carried out.

I’ve explained several times why this is not relevant, but you seem to still use him as a source to support your point of view.

I’m very much open to be being persuaded, as I’ve already said I loath this government so would very much welcome the evidence that they are getting this so wrong.

So, once again, I’ll invite you to go through Heneghan’s work on false positives and show how he is using real world numbers, and not hypotheticals.

If you won’t do this then don’t use him as a source.

Have you had a chance to listen to that link? Just see you are still batting back forth with bimbo 3 hours later?

If you give me some idea as to what it’s about I might well do

I have tried to find the sampling (briefly) but failed. I did find a tweet from Heneghan talking about base rate fallacy (he cited Wikipedia no less) where a question was put back to him:

True, but this only applies if the testing is on random samples of the population. But if tests are for a reason (symptoms, or recent contact with symptoms) then the a priori probability of true positive is going to be much higher. Or have I missed something?

Similar to what you we are seeing here, there was no reply.

Jb1981 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:26 pm I have tried to find the sampling (briefly) but failed. I did find a tweet from Heneghan talking about base rate fallacy (he cited Wikipedia no less) where a question was put back to him:

True, but this only applies if the testing is on random samples of the population. But if tests are for a reason (symptoms, or recent contact with symptoms) then the a priori probability of true positive is going to be much higher. Or have I missed something?

Similar to what you we are seeing here, there was no reply.

That is exactly what has been explained multiple times, that yes, in terms of mathematics you’d expect a lot of false positives, but in terms of who is being tested that possibility reduces to near zero, there were multiple links from sources such as the BMJ showing how this works.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:32 pm

Jb1981 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:26 pm I have tried to find the sampling (briefly) but failed. I did find a tweet from Heneghan talking about base rate fallacy (he cited Wikipedia no less) where a question was put back to him:

True, but this only applies if the testing is on random samples of the population. But if tests are for a reason (symptoms, or recent contact with symptoms) then the a priori probability of true positive is going to be much higher. Or have I missed something?

Similar to what you we are seeing here, there was no reply.

That is exactly what has been explained multiple times, that yes, in terms of mathematics you’d expect a lot of false positives, but in terms of who is being tested that possibility reduces to near zero, there were multiple links from sources such as the BMJ showing how this works.

Agreed - I meant there was no reply re. specific sampling. The point above makes sense and is clear.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:19 pm

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 8:11 pm

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:33 pm


No I won’t leave this here, I said his work on false positives are based on a hypothetical random sample, which is not relevant to the tests being carried out.

I’ve explained several times why this is not relevant, but you seem to still use him as a source to support your point of view.

I’m very much open to be being persuaded, as I’ve already said I loath this government so would very much welcome the evidence that they are getting this so wrong.

So, once again, I’ll invite you to go through Heneghan’s work on false positives and show how he is using real world numbers, and not hypotheticals.

If you won’t do this then don’t use him as a source.

Have you had a chance to listen to that link? Just see you are still batting back forth with bimbo 3 hours later?

If you give me some idea as to what it’s about I might well do

So you aren’t actually interested in finding out, yep very open minded, keep arguing with bimbo you have an eager band of cheerleaders here to back you up

Northern Lights wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:06 pm

So you aren’t actually interested in finding out, yep very open minded, keep arguing with bimbo you have an eager band of cheerleaders here to back you up

I was distracted by my national team playing a rugby match. I caught up with a few of Bimbo's posts during breaks in play.

In answer, on the contrary, you seem to be keeping from us the subject matter of the podcast.

What is it about?

Is that a difficult question?

The straw man arguments this guy supports...


He puts up a podcast.

I ask what it's about, saying my time is limited tonight, but I did go and look up some articles by the interviewee in the podcast, which I stated.

He says "just listen to it"

I ask again what it's about

He says I'm not interested in it and attacks my lack of open mind.

Fucking nutters you have in here.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:20 pm The straw man arguments this guy supports...


He puts up a podcast.

I ask what it's about, saying my time is limited tonight, but I did go and look up some articles by the interviewee in the podcast, which I stated.

He says "just listen to it"

I ask again what it's about

He says I'm not interested in it and attacks my lack of open mind.

Fucking nutters you have in here.

Pretty tame these days. You should have been posting 2002-2005

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:45 pm

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:20 pm The straw man arguments this guy supports...


He puts up a podcast.

I ask what it's about, saying my time is limited tonight, but I did go and look up some articles by the interviewee in the podcast, which I stated.

He says "just listen to it"

I ask again what it's about

He says I'm not interested in it and attacks my lack of open mind.

Fucking nutters you have in here.

Pretty tame these days. You should have been posting 2002-2005

Halcyon days.

Donald Trump today campaigning in Florida, boasting about how well the USA was dealing with covid-19, and how they were "turning the corner" on the virus. Meanwhile there were 75 000 new cases of covid-19 in the USA over the past 24 hours.

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:07 am Donald Trump today campaigning in Florida, boasting about how well the USA was dealing with covid-19, and how they were "turning the corner" on the virus. Meanwhile there were 75 000 new cases of covid-19 in the USA over the past 24 hours.

The most recent Florida poll I can find is from two days ago - Biden 49%, Dogshit 45.7%

Fingers crossed.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:17 am

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:07 am Donald Trump today campaigning in Florida, boasting about how well the USA was dealing with covid-19, and how they were "turning the corner" on the virus. Meanwhile there were 75 000 new cases of covid-19 in the USA over the past 24 hours.

The most recent Florida poll I can find is from two days ago - Biden 49%, Dogshit 45.7%

Fingers crossed.

I think Biden will lose Florida. Latinos have turned to Trump.

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:21 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:17 am

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:07 am Donald Trump today campaigning in Florida, boasting about how well the USA was dealing with covid-19, and how they were "turning the corner" on the virus. Meanwhile there were 75 000 new cases of covid-19 in the USA over the past 24 hours.

The most recent Florida poll I can find is from two days ago - Biden 49%, Dogshit 45.7%

Fingers crossed.

I think Biden will lose Florida. Latinos have turned to Trump.

The irony would be hilarious, if it didn't have repercussions beyond the USA.

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:21 am

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:17 am

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 12:07 am Donald Trump today campaigning in Florida, boasting about how well the USA was dealing with covid-19, and how they were "turning the corner" on the virus. Meanwhile there were 75 000 new cases of covid-19 in the USA over the past 24 hours.

The most recent Florida poll I can find is from two days ago - Biden 49%, Dogshit 45.7%

Fingers crossed.

I think Biden will lose Florida. Latinos have turned to Trump.

You need to be careful what you read AC. There's a lot of miss-information put out about the 'Latinos'. You can read entire articles about the Hispanics and they'll focus on one thing or another and not get it right, either deliberately or slanted. It's one of the things the liberal media got completely wrong in 2016. The Hispanics are split into fundamentally 3 kinds in Florida: the Puerto Ricans, the Cubans, and 'Others' pretty much in equal thirds. The Cubans (and Venezualans) have always tended Republican - Trump got 56% of their vote last time. Anybody who thinks the Puerto Ricans are going to vote Trump needs their mind read. Hillary got 79% of their vote and Biden should get more. And it's not just trends but trends where. Winning by a lot in a place you were always going to win means nothing obviously - which happened to Hillary with an uptick in 2016 that the liberal media predicted but didn't do her any good when key swing areas of Tampa and Orlanda went Trump's way. It's highly complex and I'd suspect what you've seen is a GOP tending article that is pushing the Republican line.

Biffer wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:43 pm

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 7:28 pm Just put him on Ignore. Then abuse him at YOUR leisure if you fancy.

He is. That’s what I’m doing.

All that does is leave him free to continue spouting misinformation without the fear of contradiction.

Win-win for Bimbo.

Sandstorm wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:45 pm

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:20 pm The straw man arguments this guy supports...


He puts up a podcast.

I ask what it's about, saying my time is limited tonight, but I did go and look up some articles by the interviewee in the podcast, which I stated.

He says "just listen to it"

I ask again what it's about

He says I'm not interested in it and attacks my lack of open mind.

Fucking nutters you have in here.

Pretty tame these days. You should have been posting 2002-2005

Christ, have you seen the Trump fred on PR?

Mental.

This place is an oasis of calm in comparison.

Flockwitt wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:41 am You need to be careful what you read AC. There's a lot of miss-information put out about the 'Latinos'. You can read entire articles about the Hispanics and they'll focus on one thing or another and not get it right, either deliberately or slanted. It's one of the things the liberal media got completely wrong in 2016. The Hispanics are split into fundamentally 3 kinds in Florida: the Puerto Ricans, the Cubans, and 'Others' pretty much in equal thirds. The Cubans (and Venezualans) have always tended Republican - Trump got 56% of their vote last time. Anybody who thinks the Puerto Ricans are going to vote Trump needs their mind read. Hillary got 79% of their vote and Biden should get more. And it's not just trends but trends where. Winning by a lot in a place you were always going to win means nothing obviously - which happened to Hillary with an uptick in 2016 that the liberal media predicted but didn't do her any good when key swing areas of Tampa and Orlanda went Trump's way. It's highly complex and I'd suspect what you've seen is a GOP tending article that is pushing the Republican line.

I got my info from CNN, but hopefully its wrong. If I was Biden I would be spending the next 11 days in Florida.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Fri Oct 23, 2020 9:20 pm The straw man arguments this guy supports...


He puts up a podcast.

I ask what it's about, saying my time is limited tonight, but I did go and look up some articles by the interviewee in the podcast, which I stated.

He says "just listen to it"

I ask again what it's about

He says I'm not interested in it and attacks my lack of open mind.

Fucking nutters you have in here.

Aye you have really added to the quality of poster

It's an hour and half podcast that disects in detail where we are going wrong, I wont do it justice but just for you:

Sage should be disbanded, they are made up in his opinion of insufficient expertise on this epidemic and there seems to be vested interests that are doubling down on their bad advice. The action being taken also aids other aims so that is why so many people are quite happy with the push for behavioural change just as an example less people flying, good for the environment so pressure groups in this area see this as a way to make meaningful change, he stress this isnt conspiracy theory stuff with the illuminati etc pushing their nefarious ways on the world, that's nonsense but this does give an avenue for various pressure groups/people to further their agenda on societal change or for governments to cover up failings in other areas (for example it suits Boris and co to have the corona taking the front page when the have the Brexit fuckup carrying on). There has also been a lot of pressure put on people not to speak up.

Hospitals and ICU's etc are pretty much at this level of capacity/fullness at this time of year as this is when respiratory virsus are on the go and this is no different, too early for the flu to really kick in but plenty of other viruses kicking about. This is because the NHS and hospitals are run thin and dont have bucketloads of excess capacity and we shouldnt be shitting the bed over this like we are, we should properly address funding better if we want more capacity and not have it creaking.

There isnt a second wave, these viruses dont do waves and Vallance etc know this and this is basically epidemiology 101 and he is extremely frustrated that they keep pushing this nonsense, what we are seeing is more a ripple in the areas that werent badly hit in March/April, it was delayed in getting to these areas (Manchester etc) by the summer months and possibly some of the mitigation measures.

This has been blown out of all proportion because of social media and armchair experts spouting forth, this would have just past through like viruses do every year.

Coronaviruses dont mutate at the same rate as influenza so there is immunity after exposure, what we are being asked to believe is that this Covid-19 is unique to such an extent that what they are pushing is nonsense. It isnt that deadly and we have lost the plot on how we are responding to it and the herd theory is all the political leaders following each other and not wanting to be seen doing nothing. We dont really know what much about flu.

Washing hands etc is good because you should do that anyway etc etc

He knows far more than me, has the background in this and was very compelling. So if you have a healthy scepticism of our political leaders like you say do in terms of their ability, it is worth taking the time to listen to it rather than just blowing it off and calling me a nutter because you didnt get a brief summary wont do it justice as the subject matter cant really be condensed into a snappy headline.

After that I'm out and i am certainly not getting into defending any of his claims and if i have misrepesented him that is my fault and I'm not getting into a back and forth on that either.

So he thinks the government have got this seriously wrong and suggests that their policies could well be agenda-driven?

That would have enough to pique my interest.

Why was that so difficult?

I’ll give it a listen, but I’m still not sure why a government of any stripe would shut down the economy and borrow billions to distract attention from the cliff edge of no deal Brexit.

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:50 am I’ll give it a listen, but I’m still not sure why a government of any stripe would shut down the economy and borrow billions to distract attention from the cliff edge of no deal Brexit.

See this is where cherry picking one bit of an already highly abbreviated summary doesn’t work and even then one tiny example from me that doesn’t do it justice.

Gone.

Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

The reduction in positive tests is excellent news.

That’s an increase in new cases from the day before. I haven’t see the seven day average but hopefully you start to see results from your actions there soon.

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

The end game of Protestantism.

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

Oh well - we won't bother with working on the vaccine and all other medical research might as well be cancelled.

Ovals wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 1:03 am

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

Oh well - we won't bother with working on the vaccine and all other medical research might as well be cancelled.

With the right product it could work for marketing.

So what? People die if not from this, something else...

Smoke Marlboro.

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

A fairly revealing post. is Openside's attitude typical amongst UK residents at the moment?

And, surely, the people who'd have died from "something else" are still dying of those things. It's not like other illnesses and diseases have stopped because Covid is dominating, or have they?

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 2:26 am

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

A fairly revealing post. is Openside's attitude typical amongst UK residents at the moment?

I think it's typical of the political right. Individualism is something they treasure and if something bad is happening to someone else, so be it. Basic human empathy died somewhere along the way.

Ovals wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 1:03 am

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

Oh well - we won't bother with working on the vaccine and all other medical research might as well be cancelled.

True.

Keeping people alive is a pointless exercise as they all die eventually.

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

I think you'll find the preference for most people is to not die prematurely from something preventable, but if you're volunteering, I won't stop you.

Bimbowomxn wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:42 pm

Hal Jordan wrote: ↑Wed Oct 21, 2020 3:19 pm I see some cunt Tory MP's response to the suggestion that we give food to hungry kids via an extension to the free school meals into the holiday is, "Children have been going hungry under a Labour Government for years" and then some bullshit about Universal Credit.

It’s a parents job to feed their children.

I see you still provide no solution to the fact some parents for various reasons do not properly feed their children.

151 more deaths reported today (28 day cut off count)

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 2:26 am

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

Insane_Homer wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 4:32 pm Cases: +23,012
Deaths: +174

That makes 1099 deaths for the past 6 days.

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

A fairly revealing post. is Openside's attitude typical amongst UK residents at the moment?

He's having a great lockdown

frodder wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 4:50 pm

Carter's Choice wrote: ↑Sun Oct 25, 2020 2:26 am

Openside wrote: ↑Sat Oct 24, 2020 11:29 pm

so what? people die if not from this, something else...

A fairly revealing post. is Openside's attitude typical amongst UK residents at the moment?

He's having a great lockdown

Make you wonder why he was out on his doorstep, clapping for the NHS; when apparently he was secretly hoping there was a Harold Shipman out there putting the ill out of his misery

Big restrictions announced in Spain and Italy today