Slow news day? The real deal? End of the world? 
 

They’re saying it probably came from an animal, has Somebody been shagging monkeys again? 

Symons

Where did you get that? Personal scan? 😀

Spent a good five minutes looking for images from that kiss and tell only to conclude they'd probably all become chip barm wrappers.

9 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

Who off home and away?

See previous page.

Bit of a salad dodger these days. 😕

Edited May 15, 20206 yr by Youri McAnespie

28 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

Who off home and away?

Marilyn

1 minute ago, ZicoKelly said:

Marilyn

He's scrubbed up well!

57 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

Probably nonsense;

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30610-3

this is a bit easier to digest - same thing

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/t-cells-found-covid-19-patients-bode-well-long-term-immunity#

I wonder if they do the same test on young kds they'd find they have loads of the same T cells?

Edited May 15, 20206 yr by peelyfeet

 

Test numbers are good news.

Nearly 34k dead less so. That's a full Reebok, plus another East Stand.

 

4 minutes ago, ProfessorWoland said:

 

Test numbers are good news.

Nearly 34k dead less so. That's a full Reebok, plus another East Stand.

 

That doesn’t make sense

Says 2.3 million tests

Then says 1.6 million people tested.

so which is it?

1 minute ago, Spider said:

That doesn’t make sense

Says 2.3 million tests

Then says 1.6 million people tested.

so which is it?

Maybe some folk have been tested more than once?

3 minutes ago, Spider said:

That doesn’t make sense

Says 2.3 million tests

Then says 1.6 million people tested.

so which is it?

Double tests, false negatives etc. 

If someone has it and recovers, they are tested again to make sure it's gone..

2 minutes ago, only1swanny said:

Double tests, false negatives etc. 

If someone has it and recovers, they are tested again to make sure it's gone..

Ah ok, cheers. 👍

5 minutes ago, Spider said:

That doesn’t make sense

Says 2.3 million tests

Then says 1.6 million people tested.

so which is it?

They tested 1.599,999 individual people and then administered 700,000 tests on Matt Hancock to boost the numbers. 

7 minutes ago, Spider said:

That doesn’t make sense

Says 2.3 million tests

Then says 1.6 million people tested.

so which is it?

Both

Emily Symons porn

133k tests on 69k people is a lot of people being tested more than once in the same day.

Possibly very good news

 

https://www.foxnews.com/science/covid-cure-california-biopharmaceutical-coronavirus-antibody-breakthrough

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52677194

 

and that will only go up with the easing of lockdown. 

14 minutes ago, only1swanny said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52677194

 

and that will only go up with the easing of lockdown. 

Wonder how accurate these numbers really are, sure time will tell -  go above 1 and you get kicked in the arse for a month.

Edited May 15, 20206 yr by peelyfeet

14 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

Wonder how accurate these numbers really are, sure time will tell -  go above 1 and you get kicked in the arse for a month.

How can scotland have the highest r rate in the UK when we have Only 1400 in hospital and 71 in icu. In fact less now as some of them have died 

Out of a population of 5.5m or something   I bet London has more folk in hospital than that alone! But they’re ok and out the other side 

 

or am I missing something??

Edited May 15, 20206 yr by Escobarp

Just now, Escobarp said:

How can scotland have the highest r rate in the UK when we have Only 1400 in hospital and 71 in icu. In fact less now as some of them have died 

 

or am I missing something??

The lovely Nicola is pulling your plonker

Just now, boltondiver said:

The lovely Nicola is pulling your plonker

Well I’m slowly thinking there is something far wrong in all of this. I’ve gone from the world is going to end cos we are all going to die to we are killing thousands via the poverty this is going to cause and I cannot see where Scotland’s huge issue is that I am told exists 

28 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

How can scotland have the highest r rate in the UK when we have Only 1400 in hospital and 71 in icu. In fact less now as some of them have died 

Out of a population of 5.5m or something   I bet London has more folk in hospital than that alone! But they’re ok and out the other side 

 

or am I missing something??

God knows - they're using multile models that measure differently and taking average numbers from all of them  - I havent seen how they are measuring, but from the graphs that show patient in hospital, Scotland, NI and Wales look like they've had the least % decline over the last few weeks  - London's gone from 4.5k to 1.8k - scotland looks like its gone from 1.8k down to 1.4k in the same period - looks like it not declining as fast as most

Edited May 15, 20206 yr by peelyfeet

12 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

How can scotland have the highest r rate in the UK when we have Only 1400 in hospital and 71 in icu. In fact less now as some of them have died 

Out of a population of 5.5m or something   I bet London has more folk in hospital than that alone! But they’re ok and out the other side 

 

or am I missing something??

 

The R rate is a lot more complex than is being made out in headlines I think. If cases are falling in the community (where R is lower) but not in hospitals and care homes (where R is higher), then the greater prevalence of the latter will start bumping the average up.

None of those exist in a vacuum though, which is why they say if R stays above 1 for a sustained period of time we've got a problem.

5 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

God knows - they're using multile models that measure differently and taking average numbers from all of them  - I havent seen how they are measuring, but from the graphs that show patient in hospital, Scotland, NI and Wales look like they've had the least % decline over the last few weeks  - London's gone from 4.5k to 1.8k - scotland looks like its gone from 1.8k down to 1.4k in the same period - looks like it not declining as fast as most

Thanks. But using those numbers how can London with a population far far less than scotland have a lower R number? Or is it because of the cases that aren’t in hospital? 
 

5 minutes ago, Tombwfc said:

 

The R rate is a lot more complex than is being made out in headlines I think. If cases are falling in the community (where R is lower) but not in hospitals and care homes (where R is higher), then the greater prevalence of the latter will start bumping the average up.

None of those exist in a vacuum though, which is why they say if R stays above 1 for a sustained period of time we've got a problem.

yeah I get the care home scenario but that is in effect outside the community and if that is skewing the R and keeping us all locked down it would seem harsh?

8 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

God knows - they're using multile models that measure differently and taking average numbers from all of them  - I havent seen how they are measuring, but from the graphs that show patient in hospital, Scotland, NI and Wales look like they've had the least % decline over the last few weeks  - London's gone from 4.5k to 1.8k - scotland looks like its gone from 1.8k down to 1.4k in the same period - looks like it not declining as fast as most

I would guess that the figure is calculated from folk known to have it all over; in hospitals and in the community. Aren't their care homes suffering more too?