Earlier lockdown could have prevented three-quarters of UK coronavirus deaths

[papasmurf]

Better be careful what you wish for in places like Cornwall. When all this is over, you might find people don't come back at all. Might not affect you building your garden shed and your wonky barbeque, but it will affect those with trade or jobs in tourism.

Frankly the morons NOT abiding by the no staying overnight rule and leaving a mess are tourists Cornwall could do without.

[DeppityDawg]

Local "farce book" page, (I am not a member,) and complaints to local media.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/279752848787914/">https://www.facebook.com/groups/279752848787914/



Also report here:-



https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-police-raids-campers-cornwall-095242221.html">https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/coron ... 42221.html">https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-police-raids-campers-cornwall-095242221.html

Better be careful what you wish for in places like Cornwall. When all this is over, you might find people don't come back at all. Might not affect you building your garden shed and your wonky barbeque, but it will affect those with trade or jobs in tourism.

[B0ycey]

I guess we'll find out.  When we find out that 50% of the population have already had Covid 19 I will look like such an idiot.  :oops:

I don't actually think it is 50% FYI. And even if it was you won't look like an idiot because as it stands, nobody knows the true infection rate in the UK and any educated prediction is usually a conservative guess.

[Javert]

Porton Downs have tested the effectiveness of the Roche test. They haven't done mass public testing which will start next week but will take months for any useful data to come out anyways. Hancocks data has come from swab tests and the model that based on that is likely wrong.

I guess we'll find out.  When we find out that 50% of the population have already had Covid 19 I will look like such an idiot.  :oops:

[B0ycey]

Porton Downs have tested the effectiveness of the Roche test. They haven't done mass public testing which will start next week but will take months for any useful data to come out anyways. Hancocks data has come from swab tests and the model that based on that is likely wrong.

[Javert]

Don't worry Papa, I have got this.



It was a study by Oxford using data that was avaliable at the time. It was slammed even by the author because using assumptions via data can be misleading and as such you should take any results as cautionary rather than factual. The same logic applies with all models but it seems depending on your opinion will depend on validation of model and what should be accepted analysis it seems.



The point is we have only now have the antibody tests which we won't roll out until next week. Current projections are by the swab test data and that is misleading as it doesn't take into account those who had it. So much so Bonn said Germany, who tested like crazy, still under reported Covid19 cases by tenfold. If the same is true for the UK that is 30 million people. Or 45% of the population.

Not really.  Porton Down and many others have already been conducting antibody tests for weeks and have put together a study based on a population sample.  



The rollout next week is a much wider rollout for health service workers - they have been using antibody tests as part of trials for the government already for a while.



Watch the first part of yesterday's Matt Hancock 5pm press conference on Iplayer.

[Javert]

I don't have to. It wasn't my study.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/weird/1260301/coronavirus-uk-oxford-university-science-study-covid-19-infection-half-of-uk/amp">//https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.express.co.uk/news/weird/1260301/coronavirus-uk-oxford-university-science-study-covid-19-infection-half-of-uk/amp



The point is that as there hasn't been sufficient testing, at the moment all models are guesstimates. But in reality if the percentage of those infected is high, then the usefulness of lockdown loses reason and it will also determine whether we are actually at risk of a second wave.

This study is from mid March, and even in the article it admits the study was "slammed by experts".



The data in the other thread is from very recently the last few weeks and from a significant amount of random population sampling.

[Borg Refinery]

Anyway, moving on from the thread-wrecking garden gnome and his being a shit.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/isabeltogoh/2020/05/21/at-least-54000-us-deaths-could-have-been-avoided-if-lockdown-came-two-weeks-earlier/amp/">https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes ... rlier/amp/">https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/isabeltogoh/2020/05/21/at-least-54000-us-deaths-could-have-been-avoided-if-lockdown-came-two-weeks-earlier/amp/



They est. that 54,000 US deaths could've been prevented had the lockdown been earlier.



I know it's only an estimate, but hey c19 was detected in France in December they reckon so, really, everything should've been picked up on and sorted out much earlier.



If we knew about this in December - and it's China and the WHO's fault we don't, then the whole world economy and billions might be in a better place now.



But hey, let's look at the small scale temporal stuff and bitch over little details.

[papasmurf]

Link please.



I've never smoked papa, once again it is as foreign to me as sarc and humour clearly is to you.  

There is no humour in people shitting outside and leaving it. (It is getting far worse to-day as many of us who live here expected.)

The police should have blockaded the Tamar Bridge yesterday.

[Borg Refinery]

What are you smoking?

Link please.



I've never smoked papa, once again it is as foreign to me as sarc and humour clearly is to you.  

[papasmurf]

It means you were lying about the campers, it was refuted in a study from the grauniad 5 years ago.

What are you smoking? The problem with campers who should not be here at all is now not five years ago.

I suggest you sober up before posting again.

[B0ycey]

This study is from mid March, and even in the article it admits the study was "slammed by experts".



The data in the other thread is from very recently the last few weeks and from a significant amount of random population sampling.

Don't worry Papa, I have got this.



It was a study by Oxford using data that was avaliable at the time. It was slammed even by the author because using assumptions via data can be misleading and as such you should take any results as cautionary rather than factual. The same logic applies with all models but it seems depending on your opinion will depend on validation of model and what should be accepted analysis it seems.



The point is we have only now have the antibody tests which we won't roll out until next week. Current projections are by the swab test data and that is misleading as it doesn't take into account those who had it. So much so Bonn said Germany, who tested like crazy, still under reported Covid19 cases by tenfold. If the same is true for the UK that is 30 million people. Or 45% of the population.

[Borg Refinery]

What are you on about? You are replying to someone else.

It means you were lying about the campers, it was refuted in a study from the grauniad 5 years ago.

[Borg Refinery]

No you haven't, it has just been restated by the government NO overnight stays.

I might get my eyes pecked out by crows, kneecapped or even burnt in an effigy. :|



No I meant go there to call her a liar to her face.  :roll:



I'll leave the wild campy stuff to you, it's not my thing.

[papasmurf]

But...but... I had made special arrangements.....

... to travel from e sussex the whole south coast just to do  that.  :cry:

No you haven't, it has just been restated by the government NO overnight stays.