free hit
counters
Coronavirus - Page 183 - General Chat - The Lotus Forums - Lotus Community Partner #ForTheOwners Jump to content


IGNORED

Coronavirus


Barrykearley

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

Remember with statistics you can make the numbers say anything to back up an argument 

Works the other way as well

hindsight: the science that is never wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Upgrade today to remove Google ads and support TLF.
1 hour ago, sailorbob said:

I think there is doubt. There is an uptick in positive test results from the 13th onwards but nothing like a doubling every two days.

UK_tests_vs_positive_result.jpg

Remember there is a very established 'delta' wave ongoing - in the region of 50k cases per day. 'omicron' doubling doesn't double the total until it becomes totally dominant.

4 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

The government and other governments are going to try and introduce a division in society - between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.

its bullshit I’m afraid. A vaccine is no different from natural immunity following infection. We are on a very dangerous path indeed.

This is not correct actually. Plenty of well documented evidence that natural infection doesn't result in any significant immunity in up to 30% of cases. The best protection is natural infection plus vaccination or three doses of vaccine.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, eeyoreish said:

Surely a significant effect on the daily ‘cases’ number is that everyone and his dog now seems to be encouraged to do lateral flows almost daily?

So now we will be seeing many more asymptomatic ‘cases’ that could have been there already but would have gone undetected.

There are a couple of things here. Yes if you test more you find more (so by testing less all you do is under report positive cases). However if you look at the positivity rate this tells you whether the increased number of positives is just down to testing or whether it reflects a true change. You can see on the dataset above that this figure is not changing very much (I would suspect the 19/12 is incomplete because of the time scales) and may be slightly increasing. If you were just finding more positives by greater testing the % positive would fall as you would need to test more and more to find fewer and fewer cases. Always be concerned when looking at country data where there are relatively few cases but a high positivity rate (10% plus) because this just means that there is insufficient testing.

In this case it is safe to say that increased testing is not the reason for increased positives, it reflects just a greater number of positive cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m no statistical expert but I suppose my point was that the media seem to talk mostly about total cases found per day. i.e test more people, find more cases, even if the positive to tested ratio remains the same?

  • Like 2

Not worth starting anything now...🍺

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that if a person has any symptoms they are more likely to be testing to work out whether they have COVID / flu/ cough , so more cases drives more testing, and that drives more results of positive.

So, yes test more for no underlying reason other than desire to test more, and you will find more cases but you may find a lower proportion of +ve results. test more because more people think there's a specific reason for them to test and you'll find more cases but you may find the proportion of +ve cases doesn't fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eeyoreish said:

I’m no statistical expert but I suppose my point was that the media seem to talk mostly about total cases found per day. i.e test more people, find more cases, even if the positive to tested ratio remains the same?

The media talk about anything that they can report as negative sensationalism!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Guardian: New year ‘too late’ for extra Covid rules in England, scientists say | Coronavirus | The Guardian

Quote

Scientists have reacted with dismay to Boris Johnson’s decision not to impose fresh restrictions to curb the spread of Omicron, emphasising that waiting until the new year would “almost certainly be too late to have a material impact on the epidemic”.

Because the rate of growth in infection rates may already have plateaued or fallen by then, it may also be too late to know what impact those restrictions would have had if they had been introduced earlier. “We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t,” said Paul Hunter, a professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PaulCP said:

The media talk about anything that they can report as negative sensationalism!

The crux of my point. The danger is we are only hearing about new cases in the mainstream media, not the % of tests that are positive now vs pre Omicron.

3 hours ago, andydclements said:

Don't forget that if a person has any symptoms they are more likely to be testing to work out whether they have COVID / flu/ cough , so more cases drives more testing, and that drives more results of positive.

So, yes test more for no underlying reason other than desire to test more, and you will find more cases but you may find a lower proportion of +ve results. test more because more people think there's a specific reason for them to test and you'll find more cases but you may find the proportion of +ve cases doesn't fall.

I agree with your logic entirely but we are currently in a situation where people are being actively encouraged to test before meeting up, even if they have no symptoms. I know it’s a real phenomenon because my parents in law (who are watching the news all day every day) are now testing before meeting anyone and asking other people they meet to test as well. Hence we will inevitably find more asymptomatic cases that we otherwise (pre Omicron) would not have known we had. 

Im not suggesting this accounts for the whole rise in daily cases but it must be adding to it. I suspect over Christmas it’ll become even more of a contributing factor as whole families test before meeting up…

 

Edited by eeyoreish

Not worth starting anything now...🍺

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes - there was a twitter exchange where this was "revealed".

On 20/12/2021 at 11:47, ChrisJ said:

From the horses mouth here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Like 1

88 Esprit NA, 89 Esprit Turbo SE, Evora, Evora S, Evora IPS, Evora S IPS, Evora S IPS SR, Evora 400, Elise S1, Elise S1 111s, Evora GT410 Sport

Evora NA

For forum issues, please contact the Moderators. I will aim to respond to emails/PM's Mon-Fri 9-6 GMT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 50m dead people, that's quite a cost! This time around we do have a 100 year technical advantage thankfully!

  • Like 1

88 Esprit NA, 89 Esprit Turbo SE, Evora, Evora S, Evora IPS, Evora S IPS, Evora S IPS SR, Evora 400, Elise S1, Elise S1 111s, Evora GT410 Sport

Evora NA

For forum issues, please contact the Moderators. I will aim to respond to emails/PM's Mon-Fri 9-6 GMT. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

Spanish flu did indeed go away all on its own as well 🤔

As far as I know.

It did but then re-emerged and is the H1N1 that we face every year. Part of what made it such a big problem initially was the toxic combination of new virus variant we had little natural immunity to, poor general health (lots of food problems due to various wars) plus lots of troop movements meant it was spread by human movement not just normal day to day contagion.

It magically re-appeared and what re-appeared was almost an un-mutated version meaning it may well have been a lab breach rather than low level existence that then broke out again.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, andydclements said:

As far as I know.

It did but then re-emerged and is the H1N1 that we face every year. Part of what made it such a big problem initially was the toxic combination of new virus variant we had little natural immunity to, poor general health (lots of food problems due to various wars) plus lots of troop movements meant it was spread by human movement not just normal day to day contagion.

It magically re-appeared and what re-appeared was almost an un-mutated version meaning it may well have been a lab breach rather than low level existence that then broke out again.

 

I think you need to brush up on your understanding of H1N1 and it's origins

Influenza A virus subtype H1N1 - Wikipedia

15 hours ago, eeyoreish said:

The crux of my point. The danger is we are only hearing about new cases in the mainstream media, not the % of tests that are positive now vs pre Omicron.

I agree with your logic entirely but we are currently in a situation where people are being actively encouraged to test before meeting up, even if they have no symptoms. I know it’s a real phenomenon because my parents in law (who are watching the news all day every day) are now testing before meeting anyone and asking other people they meet to test as well. Hence we will inevitably find more asymptomatic cases that we otherwise (pre Omicron) would not have known we had. 

Im not suggesting this accounts for the whole rise in daily cases but it must be adding to it. I suspect over Christmas it’ll become even more of a contributing factor as whole families test before meeting up…

 

I did explain this above - nothing is being hidden or twisted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...