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? 

2 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

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? 
 

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?

londons population is 8.9mil - scotland is 5.5 mil

 

1 minute ago, gonzo said:

 

it might be that bloke with sextuplets

5 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

londons population is 8.9mil - scotland is 5.5 mil

Wow. I didn’t think it was anything like that for some reason. That’s answered my question though mate 

This guy is the best guy to follow. 

Calm and rational. Not like the rest of the hysterical bum chuffers all over the show.

 

4 hours ago, peelyfeet said:

I agree.

Economic downturn is happening everywhere, regardless of each countries lockdown policy. 

Without restrictions, loads of folk would have been ill at the same time, they reckon hundreds of thousands  in the peak weeks. Hospitals wouldn't have coped so families would have had to tend to the sick. Millions would have been off work in key industries, gas water, electricity, food production, emergency services. Folk would have stayed off work and off school out of fear. That would have been disatrous for the economy too.

Some people aren't factoring this in

Of course.

If folk aren't factoring in the economic effect of the virus running more freely, then they're not making a remotely legitimate comparison. Is this actually going on?

If so, then the whole thing is becoming unsafe. Lockdown social media except for charitable functions. Too many cranks, which in this situation could well be injurious to the efforts.

All that said, I've a lot of time for these sage bods, and I don't believe they'd go for a release at all if they weren't confident we can now manage the situation and achieve a balance.

Can’t believe this junior ‘team’ thought it was ok to pitch up on Eagley today to train! It was not an Eagley team, and if anyone has any information we’d appreciate it..

You've spelled irresponsible wrong.

Anyway, as Rudy's slacking today, here's Blondi's avatar blown up, and another of the same girl.

3 minutes ago, gonzo said:

This guy is the best guy to follow. 

Calm and rational. Not like the rest of the hysterical bum chuffers all over the show.

 

Wasn't he unmasked as a charlatan and quack about a hundred pages back?

7 minutes ago, gonzo said:

This guy is the best guy to follow. 

Calm and rational. Not like the rest of the hysterical bum chuffers all over the show.

 

Some interesting messages in response to that. Seems like a number of people who have died are being labelled as covid victims when they're not.

1 minute ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Of course.

If folk aren't factoring in the economic effect of the virus running more freely, then they're not making a remotely legitimate comparison. Is this actually going on?

If so, then the whole thing is becoming unsafe. Lockdown social media except for charitable functions. Too many cranks, which in this situation could well be injurious to the efforts.

All that said, I've a lot of time for these sage bods, and I don't believe they'd go for a release at all if they weren't confident we can now manage the situation and achieve a balance.

Have a look at conservative woman, matt le tissier, hector drummond, toby young (the critic.org), Karol Sikora, Peter Hitchens, https://lockdownsceptics.org/   Toby Youngs podcast is in the top 25 https://ricochet.com/series/london-calling/

Theres a dsproportionate number of sceptics on social media, dangerous.

7 minutes ago, Youri McAnespie said:

Wasn't he unmasked as a charlatan and quack about a hundred pages back?

make your own mind up - have  a look at his wikipedia page, criticsm section - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Sikora

He's the Director of 5 private Cancer treatment centres, wants to privatise the NHS

Cancer refferals have fallen through the roof.

He's been on twitter multiple times every day for months warning people that the lockdown will create a ticking timebomb of undiagnosed cancer patients, more will die from lockdown etc.

24 minutes ago, peelyfeet said:

Have a look at conservative woman, matt le tissier, hector drummond, toby young (the critic.org), Karol Sikora, Peter Hitchens, https://lockdownsceptics.org/   Toby Youngs podcast is in the top 25 https://ricochet.com/series/london-calling/

Theres a dsproportionate number of sceptics on social media, dangerous.

Toby Young, the twat’s twat. 

1 minute ago, mickbrown said:

Toby Young, the twat’s twat. 

In your top 5, would hancock get in?

2 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Toby Young, the twat’s twat. 

he's the lovechild of jimmy sommerville and ian hislop

What’s happening with testing now? The centre that was set up near me in the lead up to the 100k a day deadline seems to have fucked right off. Is it not needed anymore?

42 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

Wow. I didn’t think it was anything like that for some reason. That’s answered my question though mate 

You learn something new everyday. I thought it was about 3 or 4 million 

16 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

What’s happening with testing now? The centre that was set up near me in the lead up to the 100k a day deadline seems to have fucked right off. Is it not needed anymore?

133,000 yesterday

54 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

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? 
 

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?

 

As I say, I think it's importance as the sole defining gatekeeper to releasing lockdown has been overstated - both by the media and by the government at times. For one thing, it's based on data that's a fortnight old.

There was a good Q & A about it on today's briefing.

1 minute ago, Mr Grey said:

This was discussed a couple of weeks back, covid being put on the death certificate when they hadn't died of it.

And yet some say the figure for deaths could be 20k higher, no fucker has a clue. Its like play you cards right, higher or lower but without the Brucie bonus.

I want to see numbers when its all finished (or vastly reduced), i.e. what is the general death rate for that period in previous years, and how they compare to this period with CV-19 deaths. Then we should get a real sense of how we have been affected.

I think the death certificate is a red herring - there will have been thousands missed off at the beginning when we were only testing in hospital. There's no incentive for docs to put covid on the certificate as the main cause, it's supposed to be used if the symptoms point to it.

ONS is showing 60K excess deaths this year against 5 year average so far - most in mid March until now. They havent done it by age yet though.

Some of those would have died later on this year or next from something else, so until we see that breakdown we won't know. 

15 minutes ago, Mr Grey said:

This was discussed a couple of weeks back, covid being put on the death certificate when they hadn't died of it.

And yet some say the figure for deaths could be 20k higher, no fucker has a clue. Its like play you cards right, higher or lower but without the Brucie bonus.

I want to see numbers when its all finished (or vastly reduced), i.e. what is the general death rate for that period in previous years, and how they compare to this period with CV-19 deaths. Then we should get a real sense of how we have been affected.

Aye.

Wonder if any of the reasons on death certificates can or will be changed?

Would seem important to get a proper idea of numbers so as to create future strategies.

26 minutes ago, boltondiver said:

133,000 yesterday

Good stuff

14 minutes ago, Tombwfc said:

 

As I say, I think it's importance as the sole defining gatekeeper to releasing lockdown has been overstated - both by the media and by the government at times. For one thing, it's based on data that's a fortnight old.

There was a good Q & A about it on today's briefing.

I will try and pick up the q and a over the weekend. Thanks 

13 minutes ago, Mr Grey said:

This was discussed a couple of weeks back, covid being put on the death certificate when they hadn't died of it.

And yet some say the figure for deaths could be 20k higher, no fucker has a clue. Its like play you cards right, higher or lower but without the Brucie bonus.

I want to see numbers when its all finished (or vastly reduced), i.e. what is the general death rate for that period in previous years, and how they compare to this period with CV-19 deaths. Then we should get a real sense of how we have been affected.

 

There were 50k excess deaths across March and April. Those people are definitely dead, so there's no conjecture about that.

Many of the regions in Italy that had few COVID cases, have so far reported significantly less excess deaths. If it was the lockdown killing people, or something else, you'd expect that to be more evenly distributed.

It's the virus.

 

 

48 minutes ago, deane koontz said:

You learn something new everyday. I thought it was about 3 or 4 million 

I thought high 2’s if I’m honest. 9 million cockney wideboy cunts. Fuck that for a game of soldiers. They can keep their overinflated wages 😁

Edited May 15, 20206 yr by Escobarp

Just now, Mr Grey said:

Some won't have that argument though, i remember Professor Neil Ferguson bringing up stats about the number of deaths and they seemed a bit scewed because they are sort of double counted, in other words some would have died around the same time anyway due to their underlying health issues. I lnow its been discussed before on here, but its probably only going to be the ideal barometer to measure the deaths.

 

ONS is as good as we'll get, but it's a week - 2 weeks behind so isn't good for monitoring on a daily basis, but has the best data.  Ultmatley what we will see is how many extra people have died by age group compared against the 5 year average, adjusted for population, by country.

The ones who would have died anyway,  won't appear in the stats for later this year and early next, because theyre already dead, so it will level utself out a bit - it happens with flu.