For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
  • 1
  • 350
  • 351
  • 352
  • 353
  • 354
  • 582
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1876340
The endpoint data is likely to be the most reliable, i.e. hospital admissions/death.

The UK will have more tests for a number of reasons, more infected people hence more tests, and all the travel tests. Until recently anyone traveling from teh UK to elsewhere needed a departure test, a day 2 test and a day 8 test.

No other country needs those (useless) tests.
#1876343
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Yes and no.

Do you think the UK has per capita more vulnerable people?

I personally think that it is more useful to compare data from countries with similar population densities and economic, medical and social parameters.

Of course.

What I'm trying to say (obviously quite badly :) ) is that a death is a statistic of one, ie dead/alive. What causes that one to be dead/alive is about that individual, which I certainly don't need to tell you as a GP and am not trying.

So while Covid death comparisons between similar nations are useful/helpful/interesting/instructive/whatever, they are Schrodinger's Statistics, being both dead and alive, healthy and unhealthy until we look in the box. We know that the actual patient in the box will most likely be previously unhealthy and dead. We have to open a lot of boxes to find a previously healthy and dead patient. Happily, virtually every box has a live patient, whether healthy or not.




Apologies for absolutely mangling the metaphor, I just wanted to shoehorn in my new favourite term, Schrodinger's Statistic. :oops:
#1876350
eltonioni wrote:As a nation, it's not something to be worried about any more...


@eltonioni - you said that we shouldn't be worried and I refuted that with some numbers which looked, to me, like they were still a matter of concern.

I had hoped that you might be able to come back with reasons why my numbers were twaddle and I should be entirely carefree about this 'ere COVID but you haven't. Should I be worried?
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1876356
johnm wrote:The number of cases across the population is useful as it provides trend data, the bigger the tested population the better the data within reason. so as things stand the UK has a reasonable of view of the scale of the pandemic and its stability from the case rate.


Yes, I broadly agree with the principle... but should we concentrate on this if those infected are not ill? Its expensive and like tracking who has caught a cold. Interesting but why?

johnm wrote:The good news is that all the supply chain nonsense doesn't affect us, we don't buy crappy Chinese toys for the grandchildren and all our food is locally sourced.


You keep on thinking that... :thumleft:

There are so many things that have been disrupted by the events of the last year or so that you wouldnt even think of as having an effect on the things you take for granted. And constantly changing travel restrictions are still effecting so many things. I recall when the lockdowns/economic shutdowns first happenned trying to explain to people on here and elsewhere what it actually meant in the global world and very few actually grasped the ramifications.

Regards, SD..
Flyingfemme, flybymike, Charles Hunt and 1 others liked this
#1876378
"Mr Khan added the New Year will instead be welcomed by 'something that people can enjoy in the comfort of their living rooms,' but he was unable to give details."

We already have that - it's a TV, or boardgame, and supermarket bubbly. That won't help the struggling hospitality industry.
flybymike, Spooky liked this
#1876464
JAFO wrote:
eltonioni wrote:As a nation, it's not something to be worried about any more...


@eltonioni - you said that we shouldn't be worried and I refuted that with some numbers which looked, to me, like they were still a matter of concern.

I had hoped that you might be able to come back with reasons why my numbers were twaddle and I should be entirely carefree about this 'ere COVID but you haven't. Should I be worried?

Thanks for noticing J :) I did pen a reply and then deleted it, thinking it better sometimes to shut up and listen than to barge in with yet another cheeky comment.

If it's not too personal, could I ask, are you personally worried for yourself? And, if not, when did you stop worrying? And if you are, why specifically? If it's none of my damned business just ignore and we'll move on.
#1876467
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Is there only the personal wellbeing that one is allowed to worry about?

FD, I hope I've been crystal clear about properly protecting the vulnerable right the way through.
#1876472
@eltonioni - it's a fair question. My level of personal worry did drop when I was vaccinated however I still take what I see to be reasonable precautions. I wear a mask when indoors in proximity to others; I keep my distance from others whenever possible; I wash or sanitise my hands regularly; I take a LFT when I think it's appropriate, for instance when I know that I will be in close contact with others, particularly if I know they are or have close contact with vulnerable people.

Of course I agree with you that we should protect the vulnerable, it's just that I don't necessarily accept that the vulnerable are those with co-morbidities. Young, previously healthy people are suffering from both severe, acute symptoms and also more long-term effects from COVID.

You originally said that "as a nation, it's not something to be worried about any more" and it's that which I particularly disagreed with. As a nation it still is a cause for concern. There are still significantly more people in hospital than there were at the same time last year. That is a cause for concern for everyone, surely?
Last edited by JAFO on Fri Oct 15, 2021 7:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Flyin'Dutch', eltonioni, johnm and 1 others liked this
#1876475
JAFO wrote:@eltonioni - it's a fair question. My level of personal worry did drop when I was vaccinated however I still take what I see to be reasonable precautions. I wear a mask when indoors in proximity to others; I keep my distance from others whenever possible; I wash or sanitise my hands regularly; I take a LFT when I think it's appropriate, for instance when I know that I will be in close contact with others, particularly if I know they are or have close contact with vulnerable people.

Of course I agree with you that we should protect the vulnerable, it's just that I don't necessarily accept that the vulnerable are those with co-morbidities. Young, previously healthy people are suffering from both severe, acute symptoms and also more long-term effects from COVID.

You originally said that "as a nation, it's not something to be worried about any more" and it's that which I particularly disagreed with. As a nation it still is a cause for concern. There are still significantly more people in hospital than there were at the same time last year. That is a cause for concern for everyone, surely?

I don't disagree specifically and perhaps we've just lost something in the tone of chatting online without nuance. Yes, you are right, and of course I think that there are concerns for very many individuals which we shouldn't ignore, hence the bee in my bonnet about the shocking failure to properly protect vulnerable people. Where I was coming from was the very high "nation" level where individuals don't really exist - the macro of the macro if you like. It's my fault for assuming that it was obvious when it obviously wasn't.

@Flyin'Dutch' yes, I agree.
Flyin'Dutch', JAFO liked this
#1876481
Flyingfemme wrote:"Mr Khan added the New Year will instead be welcomed by 'something that people can enjoy in the comfort of their living rooms,' but he was unable to give details."


Covert photo from the rehearsals.

Image
flybymike liked this
  • 1
  • 350
  • 351
  • 352
  • 353
  • 354
  • 582