Coronavirus

[southsidebud]

7 deaths registered today in Scotland - the downward trend continues.

No number of deaths is good news, but less deaths is better than more. It looks like we continue in the right direction - just have to hope that there is no spike from the Phase 1 easing of restrictions.

All going well, Phase 2 will start in just over a week 

[Sue Denim]

@TPAFKATS

Latest weekly mortality reports out from the ONS and NRS

I’ve popped on my tin foil hat and summed up deaths for England and Scotland from weeks 12 to 22 and compared with the average over the last 5 years over the same period (those averages supplied by the ONS and NRS.... that’s how they calculate “excess deaths” doh!)

England

deaths = 159,081

previous 5 yrs average = 102,876

excess deaths = 56,205

excess deaths per 1m pop = 1,004

 

Scotland

deaths = 16,635

previous 5 yrs average = 11,830

excess deaths = 4,805

excess deaths per 1m pop = 961

 

1,004  /  961 - 1  = 0.045

So England’s excess deaths are less than 5% higher than Scotland’s during the crisis

Not “almost 3 times” higher than Scotland’s

what is the explanation of this?

is it simply that @TPAFKATS can’t count? or is he a liar? or does he blindly believe everything he reads on nationalist websites? Or does he need a new tin foil hat?

I suspect it’s all 4 😂

Edited June 9, 2020 by Sue Denim

[bazil85]

8 minutes ago, Sue Denim said:

@TPAFKATS

Latest weekly mortality reports out from the ONS and NRS

I’ve popped on my tin foil hat and summed up deaths for England and Scotland from weeks 12 to 22 and compared with the average over the last 5 years over the same period (those averages supplied by the ONS and NRS.... that’s how they calculate “excess deaths” doh!)

England

deaths = 159,081

previous 5 yrs average = 102,876

excess deaths = 56,205

excess deaths per 1m pop = 1,004

 

Scotland

deaths = 16,635

previous 5 yrs average = 11,830

excess deaths = 4,805

excess deaths per 1m pop = 961

 

1,004  /  961 - 1  = 0.045

So England’s excess deaths are less than 5% higher than Scotland’s during the crisis

Not “almost 3 times” higher than Scotland’s

what is the explanation of this?

is it simply that @TPAFKATS can’t count? or is he a liar? or does he blindly believe everything he reads on nationalist websites? Or does he need a new tin foil hat?

I suspect it’s all 4 😂

Your siloed argument aside. 

do you now accept you were wrong about how deadly this virus is and as such the very obvious need to lock-down? (please remember when answering, stories that say this "could" happen, doesn't reflect the actual "has" happened picture) 

[Sue Denim]

Just quickly looking at the rest of the data, the latest number of weekly deaths in England & Wales is 9,823.

This is the lowest number this year and the lowest since the start of October last year.

You won’t see these facts reported in the media. You need to wear a tin foil hat, like me, and find out for yourself. 

It compares with 14,058 deaths in week 2 this year, long before this pandemic began.

So 4,234 more people died in the week to 10th Jan this year than died in the week to 29th May.

[Sue Denim]

1 minute ago, bazil85 said:

Your siloed argument aside. 

do you now accept you were wrong about how deadly this virus is and as such the very obvious need to lock-down? (please remember when answering, stories that say this "could" happen, doesn't reflect the actual "has" happened picture) 

Why would I accept something that obviously isn’t true?

[Sue Denim]

2 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

(please remember when answering, stories that say this "could" happen, doesn't reflect the actual "has" happened picture) 

You should take heed of your own advice 😉 

[Sue Denim]

Covid deaths in England & Wales compared with excess deaths in selected previous years (adjusted for population)

covid      45,516

2015.        44,000

2000.       66,000

1990.        52,000

1976.        68,000

1968.        84,000

1959.         102,000

1951.          140,000

I’d say it’s turned out like a relatively bad flu season. What do you think @bazil85? 

mild compared with what my parents have been through mind you

Interestingly, my parents don’t remember the Hong Kong flu of 1968 and they don’t remember anyone calling for a lockdown 

remembering when answering to heed your own advice and just concentrate on what has actually happened rather than what could have happened)

Edited June 9, 2020 by Sue Denim

[faraway saint]

1 hour ago, Bud the Baker said:

Coming from the guy who was poo-poohing estimates that the correct total of deaths due to the virus was 50-70% higher if care home deaths were included back in April and who was unable to add up 4 numbers correctly at the time and comparing this against figures provided by the ONS I'll be sticking to undoubtedly.

https://www.rte.ie/news/coronavirus/2020/0428/1135310-uk-covid-19-death-toll/

 

You , as usual, loving the big numbers, and we all know where that's leading.

I'm quite comfortable in my predictions on numbers as care home deaths were not  50-7-% higher over since the first cases were recorded.

You looked at a very short period, about 2 weeks as I recall. , so well done you could work for the Sun

I'll stick to the official figures, you scrape around for more ammo in your never ending desire to blame. 

PS It shoes how desperate you are if your using one miscalculation as anything other than an error. 

#undoubtedly 

Edited June 9, 2020 by faraway saint

[FTOF]

12 minutes ago, Sue Denim said:

Covid deaths in England & Wales compared with excess deaths in selected previous years (adjusted for population)

covid      45,516

2015.        44,000

2000.       66,000

1990.        52,000

1976.        68,000

1968.        84,000

1959.         102,000

1951.          140,000

I’d say it’s turned out like a relatively bad flu season. What do you think @bazil85? 

mild compared with what my parents have been through mind you

Interestingly, my parents don’t remember the Hong Kong flu of 1968 and they don’t remember anyone calling for a lockdown 

remembering when answering to heed your own advice and just concentrate on what has actually happened rather than what could have happened)

To be fair, in 1968 global travel was on a much. much smaller scale and  world population was less than half of what it is today. Both huge factors in containing the spread, without any need for a lockdown.

An article here about the possible effects of lockdown. Looks hastily compiled and lots of estimates and incomplete data. However, that goes for any data churned out at this early stage in the game.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2405-7

Plus you're a plum of the highest order.

Edited June 9, 2020 by FTOF

[Bud the Baker]

24 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

You , as usual, loving the big numbers, and we all know where that's leading.

I'm quite comfortable in my predictions on numbers as care home deaths were not  50-7-% higher over since the first cases were recorded.

You looked at a very short period, about 2 weeks as I recall. , so well done you could work for the Sun

I'll stick to the official figures, you scrape around for more ammo in your never ending desire to blame. 

PS It shoes how desperate you are if your using one miscalculation as anything other than an error. 

#undoubtedly 

 

Like I said all the figures I quote are from official government sources like the ONS , the difference is I understand what they mean - the correct figure will undoubtedly be between 31 & 63% higher than the figure the figure the government likes to use! 

 

[faraway saint]

5 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

 

Like I said all the figures I quote are from official government sources like the ONS , the difference is I understand what they mean - the correct figure will undoubtedly be between 31 & 63% higher than the figure the figure the government likes to use! 

 

Aye, of course you do, now away and make some bread and mind don't feck up the measurements. 

[FTOF]

Interesting little footnote from the article that I posted a link to earlier.

Quote

But they warned that only a small proportion of people have been infected with Covid-19, and we are still only "at the beginning of the pandemic".

🤧😷🤒😲

[faraway saint]

2 minutes ago, FTOF said:

Interesting little footnote from the article that I posted a link to earlier.

🤧😷🤒😲

Could be seen a something to worry about but as no other country has seen anything resembling numbers close to their peak I'll not worry too much.

My slight concern is the lack of a robust track and trace system as I believe this is a major tool in helping to precisely spot any rise in infections. 

Something you highlighted the other week when there was a small rise in somewhere in the far east.(Can't remember where but that's not critical )

[Bud the Baker]

20 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Aye, of course you do, now away and make some bread and mind don't feck up the measurements. 

ONS figure - 51,089 (31/5/20) - contemporaneous NHS figure (39,045) - ONS figure 31% higher.

Excess deaths in the UK since the corona outbreak began - 63,596 (29/5/20) also an ONS figure - contemporaneous NHS figure (38,819) - excess death figure 64% higher - rounded up this time.

Simple calculations based on figures published by the ONS & NHS - show me how they're wrong, rather than inconvenient to your forelock tugging agenda. 

Edited June 9, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[faraway saint]

2 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

ONS figure - 51,089 (31/5/20) - contemporaneous NHS figure (39,045) ONS figure - ONS figure 31% higher.

Excess deaths in the UK since the corona outbreak began - 63,596 (29/5/20) also an ONS figure - contemporaneous NHS figure (38,819) excess death figure 64% higher (rounded up this time). 

Simple calculations based on figures published by the ONS & NHS - show me how they're wrong, rather than inconvenient to your forelock tugging agenda. 

From worldometer.......................

I'll leave it at that, now run along, I've got stuff to do. 

#forelock tugging. 

[FTOF]

15 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

Could be seen a something to worry about but as no other country has seen anything resembling numbers close to their peak I'll not worry too much.

My slight concern is the lack of a robust track and trace system as I believe this is a major tool in helping to precisely spot any rise in infections. 

Something you highlighted the other week when there was a small rise in somewhere in the far east.(Can't remember where but that's not critical )

It was South Korea, and it was a relatively small localised spike in an area where there were a lot of nightclubs. Although there has been another in the past two days  related to a door to door sales company.

Quote

South Korea's daily number of COVID-19 cases has returned to the 50s after eight days. The nation confirmed 51 new cases on Saturday, bringing the total amount to 11-thousand 719. Most cases are related to Richway, a door-to-door sales company. A total of 34 people have been infected from there. Over 70 percent of them are elderly. South Korea's health authorities urged citizens once again to follow quarantine measures over the weekend, highlighting that's the way to protect the country. There were no new deaths, so the death toll remains at 273.

TBH it is possible that any spikes in the UK will be largely localised and related to large gatherings. This is when a robust track and trace system, which we don't seem to have, could be invaluable.

It will be interesting to see if the gatherings at the weekend protests in England generate any spikes or not.

Edited June 9, 2020 by FTOF

[Bud the Baker]

3 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

From worldometer.......................

I'll leave it at that, now run along, I've got stuff to do. 

#forelock tugging. 

So you can't show me how they're wrong, now who do I trust the ONS or a forelock tugger who's pretending he's got something better to do - you'll be back. 

[bazil85]

2 hours ago, Sue Denim said:

Why would I accept something that obviously isn’t true?

Your in the extreme minority with this view, even Sweden have came out admitting they were wrong on their approach. Excessive deaths point to a lock-down needed

1 hour ago, Sue Denim said:

You should take heed of your own advice 😉 

My view is based on facts regarding excessive deaths.

1 hour ago, Sue Denim said:

Covid deaths in England & Wales compared with excess deaths in selected previous years (adjusted for population)

covid      45,516

2015.        44,000

2000.       66,000

1990.        52,000

1976.        68,000

1968.        84,000

1959.         102,000

1951.          140,000

I’d say it’s turned out like a relatively bad flu season. What do you think @bazil85? 

mild compared with what my parents have been through mind you

Interestingly, my parents don’t remember the Hong Kong flu of 1968 and they don’t remember anyone calling for a lockdown 

remembering when answering to heed your own advice and just concentrate on what has actually happened rather than what could have happened)

Where have these stats came from? You've  been caught many times spinning numbers on here, this will be no different. I know you hate being proven wrong but lock-down was 100% the right call, it has saved lives and you spinning excessive deaths doesn't change that. 

 

[Bud the Baker]

Far more important than a childish spat about statistics is the governments incoherent & inconsistent relaxation of lockdown restrictions - apparently the June 22 opening of pub gardens in England has been pushed back to the original date of July 4 but with a potential reduction in social distancing from 2m to 1m to be discussed at tomorrow's Cabinet meeting. A trivial question is can social distancing be maintained with the need to pee presumably becoming more urgent as we go into the evening? Presumably by the time NS let's us back into pubs the nights will be "drawin' in" and in our climate outdoor drinking in autumn may be less attractive than a carry-out.

As another aside when matches with fans restart will we all be able to have a socially distanced pee within 15 minutes at half-time. Oh and didn't half-time use to be 10 minutes, I seem to remember it becoming 15 mins sometime in the 80s (after Spain 82?). 

  

Edited June 9, 2020 by Bud the Baker

[faraway saint]

31 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

Far more important than a childish spat about statistics is the governments incoherent & inconsistent relaxation of lockdown restrictions - apparently the June 22 opening of pub gardens in England has been pushed back to the original date of July 4 but with a potential reduction in social distancing from 2m to 1m to be discussed at tomorrow's Cabinet meeting. A trivial question is can social distancing be maintained with the need to pee presumably becoming more urgent as we go into the evening? Presumably by the time NS let's us back into pubs the nights will be "drawin' in" and in our climate outdoor drinking in autumn may be less attractive than a carry-out.

As another aside when matches with fans restart will we all be able to have a socially distanced pee within 15 minutes at half-time. Oh and didn't half-time use to be 10 minutes, I seem to remember it becoming 15 mins sometime in the 80s (after Spain 82?). 

  

Scotland follows it's own guidelines, no need to worry, we're all safe. 

I've said many times recently the goalposts are shifting every day, either officially or by the general public.

It's a free for all, already the major supermarkets up here are slacker than a whores fanny, hardly anyone at the door controlling in/out, random cleaning of trolleys, members of staff congregating in aisles..............................on the other hand B&Q have been outstanding since the start, and are still very much in control. 

Todays number, 286, slightly better than last weeks highs, all in the 300's. 

[Ayrshire Saints]

Far more important than a childish spat about statistics is the governments incoherent & inconsistent relaxation of lockdown restrictions - apparently the June 22 opening of pub gardens in England has been pushed back to the original date of July 4 but with a potential reduction in social distancing from 2m to 1m to be discussed at tomorrow's Cabinet meeting. A trivial question is can social distancing be maintained with the need to pee presumably becoming more urgent as we go into the evening? Presumably by the time NS let's us back into pubs the nights will be "drawin' in" and in our climate outdoor drinking in autumn may be less attractive than a carry-out.

As another aside when matches with fans restart will we all be able to have a socially distanced pee within 15 minutes at half-time. Oh and didn't half-time use to be 10 minutes, I seem to remember it becoming 15 mins sometime in the 80s (after Spain 82?). 

  

Beer gardens and outdoor cafe, restaurants are in phase 2 so likelihood is their reopening up here will be announced next week. It was this prospect I suspect (based on the bullish nature of NS yesterday) that hastened the rumour of the same happening in England being brought forward, it was fuelled unsurprisingly by the press but seems to have been rebuffed by WM for now. I have absolutely no doubt that if we announce P2 including pubs, restaurants and cafes outdoors, next week WM will be forced to do likewise, the population down there simply won't stand for us having that and them not.

 

ETA of course another possible is that the SG has assured WM that beer gardens etc definitely will not be reopening come the 18th thus dulling the enthusiasm down South.

 

[Guest TPAFKATS]

 

 

 

Covid deaths in England & Wales compared with excess deaths in selected previous years (adjusted for population)

covid      45,516

2015.        44,000

2000.       66,000

1990.        52,000

1976.        68,000

1968.        84,000

1959.         102,000

1951.          140,000

I’d say it’s turned out like a relatively bad flu season. What do you think [mention=8643]bazil85[/mention]? 

mild compared with what my parents have been through mind you

Interestingly, my parents don’t remember the Hong Kong flu of 1968 and they don’t remember anyone calling for a lockdown 

remembering when answering to heed your own advice and just concentrate on what has actually happened rather than what could have happened)

 

How utterly deranged do you need to be to compare this to a bad flu season without acknowledging that the deaths we have so far are after weeks of lockdown and social distancing.

 

What a tin foil trumpet. It's telling that only creepy from arbroath likes your posts.

 

 

 

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Far more important than a childish spat about statistics is the governments incoherent & inconsistent relaxation of lockdown restrictions - apparently the June 22 opening of pub gardens in England has been pushed back to the original date of July 4 but with a potential reduction in social distancing from 2m to 1m to be discussed at tomorrow's Cabinet meeting. A trivial question is can social distancing be maintained with the need to pee presumably becoming more urgent as we go into the evening? Presumably by the time NS let's us back into pubs the nights will be "drawin' in" and in our climate outdoor drinking in autumn may be less attractive than a carry-out.
As another aside when matches with fans restart will we all be able to have a socially distanced pee within 15 minutes at half-time. Oh and didn't half-time use to be 10 minutes, I seem to remember it becoming 15 mins sometime in the 80s (after Spain 82?). 
  

Head of the Health & Safety Executive is at todays dealing briefing.
I'm sure she just explained how much more likely it is that the virus is spread through 1m or even 1.5m social distancing as opposed to the current 2m distance.

Wouldnt be surprised if UK Gov lower it tomorrow.

[faraway saint]

20 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:

 

 

 

 

 

How utterly deranged do you need to be to compare this to a bad flu season without acknowledging that the deaths we have so far are after weeks of lockdown and social distancing.

 

What a tin foil trumpet. It's telling that only creepy from arbroath likes your posts.

 

 

 

And Thicky & Baz like yours. 

[bazil85]

7 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

And Thicky & Baz like yours. 

This guy is doubling down on views we know aren't correct (that there shouldn't have been a lock-down, that this is no worse than a bad flu season, that lock-down has ended more lives than it's saved). It's nothing other than common sense to be on the side of the people combating him. 

Time will tell what happens next on second waves and the likes but it has been proven beyond doubt that the UK had to lock-down to avoid a near biblical level catastrophe.