Wish America would come into the modern age and ban guns

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56483445

Interesting study, maybe we just spray the streets / air with rhinovirus

comment by Oscar. #TeamFury (U12980)
posted 2 minutes ago
Wish America would come into the modern age and ban guns
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s a mentality I just don’t get tbh, the fascination with guns. Can’t see any current politician over there (Dems, Reps, or anyone else) having the integrity or the humility to kill their political career to ban guns.

I think the issue / reality of the lockdown was if it was so effective and worked how the f were 80,000 people officially probably 120k unofficially catching the virus every single day for a few weeks and then lowered to 60k (probably 100k unofficially) if it actually did anything, there wasn’t that many rule breakers or morons doing dumb things

I knew so many people that got it over winter too and they literally had barely been out other than for walks. That’s the crux of it, if they were effective I don’t think that many people would of caught it

It’s like the masks, pretty much all nurses and doctors still caught the virus despite being in full PPE and high grade masks (2nd / 3rd wave I know the 1st wave they didn’t have proper equipment or to the standard this winter) so how much effect do they really have

Basically I just don’t think in the grand scheme of things there’s any real evidence they did anything in way of suppression just because we shut restaurants and non essential shops, If anything it probably accelerated it because everyone ends up going to the same places so they become vectors.

Especially the first 2 lockdowns when we still allowed air travel / people in with no requirements.

And countries that did stricter lockdowns like Spain or Peru or even Germany with their high grade mandatory masks they all still got savaged, everyone got savaged no matter what they did

Aus/NZ did well purely because right from the off they shut down air travel and had an effective border control system. If countries had that from the beginning it could of been different but still would of been difficult as those two are totally isolated

Few points Oscar;

- lockdowns in and of themselves don’t completely remove the virus unless implemented very quickly (which they were not at any point) and really hard (which again they were not at any point, visit any airport and watch the arrivals to confirm)
- the evidence that they reduced the prevalence of the virus is there if you look at the trends in the no of cases, hospitalisations and deaths data. With a lag due to the incubation period of the virus, the trends of increased lockdown leading to decreased cases is there.

- I understand your point re concentration, which was why in still open shops and supermarkets there were restricted numbers to combat just what you describe. There was also restrictions on groups meeting in general which again was implemented to stop the concentration you refer to.

- no PPE is 100% consistently effective all of the time. I think this has been covered several times on this thread in the last year or so, but the correct wearing of PPE reduces the risk of catching the virus, it doesn’t eliminate it,

- I am sceptical of your claim that hardly anyone was breaking the rules. From limited anecdotal evidence based on where I live (which has had cases broadly the median of the Scottish trends) there was a significant minority and potentially a majority breaking at least some of the rules. And I am sure many others have noted in this thread and the previous one that they’ve observed frequent rule breaking.

- agree completely on air travel, there’s folk coming in who’s travel originated in the so called “red” countries who are not having to Q-tine, it is genuinely baffling and in my mind undermining the other measures in place.

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 35 minutes ago
Neil Ferguson.

Put his model from last year which predicted us to get 500k deaths without lockdown into Sweden which didn’t lockdown and it predicted 96,000 deaths - how many deaths are they on again?

How about those latest prediction of another 100,000-130,000 deaths?
———————————
Just out of interest, the use of this model to Sweden, was it supported by SAGE? Working with these kinds of models (well specifically mortality projection models but using similar sorts of maths) you can’t just take one model built to attempt to replicate behaviour in one country and apply it to another, there are a large number of in built assumptions and EJs which mean the model is effectively bespoke, built for its specific use. I would be surprised if the developers of the model were supporting the use of it in modelling cases or mortality estimates in other countries.

And as has been mentioned above the 500k deaths was on the basis of no actions being taken, I believe this was discussed and concluded upon around 10 months ago on this thread. Similarly I believe (happy to be corrected of course) that the 100-130k was both without the introduction of the vaccine and without allowing for the current lockdown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I highly doubt it was supported by SAGE but it wasn’t applied to Sweden by a 5 year old and source code for models are normally published for all to see, so it’s doesn’t really matter if they support it or not.

Breaking from the norm in peer review conventions, they (the ICL team) delayed releasing the source code for their model for over a month. When they finally released it they provided an unusual caveat of “parameter files are provided as a sample only and do not necessarily reflect runs used in published papers“.

If you’d like to read the Sweden application (the 96000 deaths is the median number)

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.11.20062133v1.full.pdf

This paper was carried out with the intention of getting the Swedish government to put more severe measures in place as the 96,000 was supposed to take place by June 2020.


Yes the 500k was no action as I stated myself and yes the 130k was also no action and not taking the vaccines into account. Again why were we all given this figure? Why did we base our decisions on this? Why are we having a longer lockdown now than we ever have when we have extremely effective vaccines?

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 3 minutes ago
Few points Oscar;

- lockdowns in and of themselves don’t completely remove the virus unless implemented very quickly (which they were not at any point) and really hard (which again they were not at any point, visit any airport and watch the arrivals to confirm)
- the evidence that they reduced the prevalence of the virus is there if you look at the trends in the no of cases, hospitalisations and deaths data. With a lag due to the incubation period of the virus, the trends of increased lockdown leading to decreased cases is there.

- I understand your point re concentration, which was why in still open shops and supermarkets there were restricted numbers to combat just what you describe. There was also restrictions on groups meeting in general which again was implemented to stop the concentration you refer to.

- no PPE is 100% consistently effective all of the time. I think this has been covered several times on this thread in the last year or so, but the correct wearing of PPE reduces the risk of catching the virus, it doesn’t eliminate it,

- I am sceptical of your claim that hardly anyone was breaking the rules. From limited anecdotal evidence based on where I live (which has had cases broadly the median of the Scottish trends) there was a significant minority and potentially a majority breaking at least some of the rules. And I am sure many others have noted in this thread and the previous one that they’ve observed frequent rule breaking.

- agree completely on air travel, there’s folk coming in who’s travel originated in the so called “red” countries who are not having to Q-tine, it is genuinely baffling and in my mind undermining the other measures in place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have you seen the differences between the following mate?

Peru vs Chile
Colombia vs Mexico
California vs Florida
North Jutland vs North Jutland

Extremely different lockdown procedures but strangely similar infection rates etc. Have look down the rabbit hole, you’ll love it given what you do for work (or hate it).

Just on the final one, am I missing something? North Jutland v North Jutland?

comment by Oscar. #TeamFury (U12980)
posted 57 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 4 seconds ago
Gutted I missed the 10k though
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’ve reserved 20k for you mate

And welcome back
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Glad to hear things are looking up.

76.7% of Irish Muslims would vote for a united Ireland if a referendum was held tomorrow.

83.3% of Irish Muslims "believe in the idea of a united Ireland," with the remaining 16.7% "not sure". A regularly discussed barrier is an unclearer path to Irish citizenship than British citizenship, making campaigns like @labouryouth's #BornHereBelongHere even more important.

https://twitter.com/IMPIC_ie/status/1374093480666877955?s=20

Interesting

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 1 minute ago
Just on the final one, am I missing something? North Jutland v North Jutland?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m glad you asked 😂

It’s not a mistake, no. There are 11 municipalities in North Jutland and 7 of them locked down hard and 4 didn’t at all. Yet the numbers are extremely similar.

It’s included in the list to avoid criticism of different countries / different cultures et cetera.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 1 minute ago
Just on the final one, am I missing something? North Jutland v North Jutland?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m glad you asked 😂

It’s not a mistake, no. There are 11 municipalities in North Jutland and 7 of them locked down hard and 4 didn’t at all. Yet the numbers are extremely similar.

It’s included in the list to avoid criticism of different countries / different cultures et cetera.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
👍 Just skimmed a paper on it there so with you now. It’s similar to what we’ve seen in places like Finland, which due to its constitution can’t force lockdown measures in the way that we have in the UK. What the conclusion (from Finland and I believe the Northern Jutland study) was the impact of what one could term “voluntary lockdown”, where people act as if there was a lockdown (limited travel to restaurants, not mixing with each other and especially with the olds or the at risk, wearing masks, social distancing etc) but with the position being more in the case of “guidelines” in respect of some measures as opposed to rules. Which to me comes back to one of our old topics; trust in leaders. Where there isn’t trust, guidance simply isn’t enough.

comment by Constantinople (U11781)
posted 20 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 6 minutes ago
are there any offshore workers who post on this site btw ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, Shooty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
#me too

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 1 minute ago
Just on the final one, am I missing something? North Jutland v North Jutland?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m glad you asked 😂

It’s not a mistake, no. There are 11 municipalities in North Jutland and 7 of them locked down hard and 4 didn’t at all. Yet the numbers are extremely similar.

It’s included in the list to avoid criticism of different countries / different cultures et cetera.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
👍 Just skimmed a paper on it there so with you now. It’s similar to what we’ve seen in places like Finland, which due to its constitution can’t force lockdown measures in the way that we have in the UK. What the conclusion (from Finland and I believe the Northern Jutland study) was the impact of what one could term “voluntary lockdown”, where people act as if there was a lockdown (limited travel to restaurants, not mixing with each other and especially with the olds or the at risk, wearing masks, social distancing etc) but with the position being more in the case of “guidelines” in respect of some measures as opposed to rules. Which to me comes back to one of our old topics; trust in leaders. Where there isn’t trust, guidance simply isn’t enough.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We’re definitely not as obedient as the scandos are for sure but how does that then fit into the other examples? Are we saying that Floridians are much more trusting and obedient than Californians? Peru vs Chile? And so on.

To clarify before someone infers that I don’t think lockdown are at all effective, I’m not saying that. I am merely questioning the efficacy of them and why we have based our decisions on these models, why we have only been given the worst case scenario etc.

We had a plan for pandemics such as this in place that we had put together over years but it was ripped up at the drop of a hat and replaced with the Chinese approach immediately. I’m sure it wasn’t an easy decision but with the huge cost of locking down there for all to see and continue to see over the coming years, I don’t feel that this was a net benefit.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 3 minutes ago
Few points Oscar;

- lockdowns in and of themselves don’t completely remove the virus unless implemented very quickly (which they were not at any point) and really hard (which again they were not at any point, visit any airport and watch the arrivals to confirm)
- the evidence that they reduced the prevalence of the virus is there if you look at the trends in the no of cases, hospitalisations and deaths data. With a lag due to the incubation period of the virus, the trends of increased lockdown leading to decreased cases is there.

- I understand your point re concentration, which was why in still open shops and supermarkets there were restricted numbers to combat just what you describe. There was also restrictions on groups meeting in general which again was implemented to stop the concentration you refer to.

- no PPE is 100% consistently effective all of the time. I think this has been covered several times on this thread in the last year or so, but the correct wearing of PPE reduces the risk of catching the virus, it doesn’t eliminate it,

- I am sceptical of your claim that hardly anyone was breaking the rules. From limited anecdotal evidence based on where I live (which has had cases broadly the median of the Scottish trends) there was a significant minority and potentially a majority breaking at least some of the rules. And I am sure many others have noted in this thread and the previous one that they’ve observed frequent rule breaking.

- agree completely on air travel, there’s folk coming in who’s travel originated in the so called “red” countries who are not having to Q-tine, it is genuinely baffling and in my mind undermining the other measures in place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Have you seen the differences between the following mate?

Peru vs Chile
Colombia vs Mexico
California vs Florida
North Jutland vs North Jutland

Extremely different lockdown procedures but strangely similar infection rates etc. Have look down the rabbit hole, you’ll love it given what you do for work (or hate it).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
IMO, the problem with this is that lockdowns were not uniformly applied. There's no point to disjointed lockdowns IMO. The moment you lift the lockdown then transmissions from places that didn't lock down start occurring immediately. Like adding dirty water to clean water, pretty soon all you'll have is dirty water. Lockdowns would have worked much better if centrally co-ordinated and planned instead of everyone pretty much doing their own thing but that's not really possible in this time and age.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - Son of the Soil (U1282)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by Constantinople (U11781)
posted 20 hours, 51 minutes ago
comment by peks - 1974 (U6618)
posted 6 minutes ago
are there any offshore workers who post on this site btw ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye, Shooty
----------------------------------------------------------------------
#me too
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what sort of offshore work do you do ?

Exactly, the constant lock unlock lock unlock approach from us likely did more harm than benefit.

And Bmcl I don’t really agree with the numbers side is down to the lockdown as we still despite lockdown saw rates go up up up up and then naturally they are now coming down as they did last year, it seems like when the virus has burned itself out is when they start to go down, then obviously new variant + less antibodies due to the 4/5 month break from May to September = new rejuvenated spread

And I agree their were people breaking the rules never said there wasn’t but I don’t believe there was people breaking the rules to the level to purely be the sole reason we had 80,000+ new cases a day despite lockdowns distancing and masks

If the lockdown distancing and masks really did work or massively help to reduce spread we wouldn’t of seen that level of “official cases” and likely 1.5 x / 2 x times that with unofficial cases

This winters going to be interesting, and what they do with boosters

As everyone that’s had both jabs by May especially over 60’s are unlikely to have protection from November

comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 11 minutes ago
Effective track and trace would have been huge in the efficacy of lockdowns and keeping them shorter

I'm hearing that some NHS authorities have started their own track and trace because ours isn't reliable
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That second part is quite embarrassing, Jesus.

The first part still requires societal obedience, keeping Bluetooth on etc. Yeah yeah yeah get me into the pub, drink drink drink - bluetooth? Yeah erm no. Drink drink drink

comment by Oscar. #TeamFury (U12980)
posted 3 minutes ago
This winters going to be interesting, and what they do with boosters

As everyone that’s had both jabs by May especially over 60’s are unlikely to have protection from November
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What do you base this on? There is no evidence whatsoever as far as I'm aware that this will be the case at all.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Ah ok that makes sense and is good, originally thought they only estimated immunity / antibodies to last 6 months for older people and up to a year for younger people