Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Welcome to Easter Monday PB Nighthawks

SystemSystem Posts: 11,019
edited April 2020 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Welcome to Easter Monday PB Nighthawks

The first holiday weekend of the coronavirus emergency and I find that I am watching a lot more television and not doing all the things that I hoped I would do.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,403
    edited April 2020
    Primus inter pares.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,208
    Good to hear that PB will continue despite the crisis :smiley:
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,274
    Third at the bar
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,271

    Primus inter pares.

    Ecce homo, qui est faba.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,577
    Population Differences in Proinflammatory Biology: Japanese have Healthier Profiles than Americans
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3039107/

    The pleiotropic cytokine, interleukin-6 (IL-6), has emerged as a key factor in the biology of aging and the physiology of inflammation. Yet much of what we know about the normal functioning of IL-6 has been generated primarily from research on European populations and Americans of European descent. Our analyses compared IL-6 levels in 382 middle-aged and older Japanese to the values found in 1209 Caucasian- and African-Americans from the Midlife in the United States survey (MIDUS). Across the life span from 30–80 years of age, mean IL-6 levels were strikingly lower in Japanese individuals. Significantly lower levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and fibrinogen (FBG) provided confirmatory evidence for a population difference in proinflammatory activity. Because IL-6 release has been associated with obesity, differences in body mass index (BMI) were taken into consideration. Japanese had the lowest, and African-Americans had the highest overall BMIs, but significant group differences in IL-6 persisted even after BMI was included as a covariate in the analyses. Additional support for distinct variation in IL-6 biology was generated when systemic levels of the soluble receptor for IL-6 (sIL-6r) were evaluated. Serum sIL-6r was higher in Japanese than Americans, but was most notably low in African-Americans. Our cytokine data concur with national differences in the prevalence of age-related illnesses linked to inflammatory physiology, including cardiovascular disease. The findings also highlight the importance of broadening the diversity of people included in population studies of health and aging, especially given the relative paucity of information for some Asian countries and on individuals of Asian heritage living in the US.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,989
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,577
    Level of IL-6 predicts respiratory failure in hospitalized symptomatic COVID-19 patients
    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20047381v2
    The pandemic Coronavirus-disease 19 (COVID-19) is characterized by a heterogeneous clinical course. While most patients experience only mild symptoms, a relevant proportion develop severe disease progression with increasing hypoxia up to acute respiratory distress syndrome. The substantial number of patients with severe disease have strained intensive care capacities to an unprecedented level. Owing to the highly variable course and lack of reliable predictors for deterioration, we aimed to identify variables that allow the prediction of patients with a high risk of respiratory failure and need of mechanical ventilation Patients with PCR proven symptomatic COVID-19 infection hospitalized at our institution from 29th February to 27th March 2020 (n=40) were analyzed for baseline clinical and laboratory findings. Patients requiring mechanical ventilation 13/40 (32.5%) did not differ in age, comorbidities, radiological findings, respiratory rate or qSofa score. However, elevated interleukin-6 (IL-6) was strongly associated with the need for mechanical ventilation (p=1.2.10-5). In addition, the maximal IL-6 level (cutoff 80 pg/ml) for each patient during disease predicted respiratory failure with high accuracy (p=1.7.10-8, AUC=0.98). The risk of respiratory failure for patients with IL-6 levels of ≥ 80 pg/ml was 22 times higher compared to patients with lower IL-6 levels. In the current situation with overwhelmed intensive care units and overcrowded emergency rooms, correct triage of patients in need of intensive care is crucial. Our study shows that IL-6 is an effective marker that might be able to predict upcoming respiratory failure with high accuracy and help physicians correctly allocate patients at an early stage.
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341
    HYUFD said:
    Ah, so a mere 1 in 8 chance of significant organ damage. Comforting.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,989
    edited April 2020

    HYUFD said:
    Ah, so a mere 1 in 8 chance of significant organ damage. Comforting.
    Compared to the likes of pancreatic cancer yes and that is only of those who get it in the first place and most likely for older people who get it whose bodies are less strong anyway
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,066

    HYUFD said:
    Ah, so a mere 1 in 8 chance of significant organ damage. Comforting.
    Any indication if hot broth can keep you in the 88%?
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,808
    And the average age of those surviving with significant organ damage will be lower than for those dying. Herd immunity, in it's almost literal sense, would have decimated the older workforce.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079
    Fun fact: Princess Eugenie was at Newcastle University at the same time as me. For all I know, I could have been drinking treble vodkas in the same bar as her.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,208
    https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1249730009922711552

    Not half. This gets better by the hour. Pass me some popcorn.

    No one knows who actually wrote this "report"?
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079
    Also no real person gives two hoots about this Labour thing right now. It’s completely inconsequential.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,208

    Fun fact: Princess Eugenie was at Newcastle University at the same time as me. For all I know, I could have been drinking treble vodkas in the same bar as her.

    Nah, she's more a Newcastle Brown lass.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,271
    The Guardian Report on the #LabourLeaks

    Please read this report to understand the importance why Sir Jeremy Corbyn needs to be reinstated as Labour Leader.
    Benjamin Netanyahu
    1 hour ago
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,592
    The Wuhan lockdown lasted for 11 weeks.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Hubei_lockdowns
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1249730009922711552

    Not half. This gets better by the hour. Pass me some popcorn.

    No one knows who actually wrote this "report"?

    Seumas?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,577

    Fun fact: Princess Eugenie was at Newcastle University at the same time as me. For all I know, I could have been drinking treble vodkas in the same bar as her.

    Memory loss ?
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,922
    ‘Quiz’ on ITV was good fun

    Remember this?

    https://youtu.be/Lb1Gc8jiubc
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376
    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1249730009922711552

    Not half. This gets better by the hour. Pass me some popcorn.

    No one knows who actually wrote this "report"?

    Seumas?
    There needs to be

    1) The report on the report
    2) report on the leak of the report

    Probably need to get ahead of events. So

    3) A report on the leaking of the report on the report
    4) A report on the leaking of the report on the leaking of the report

    Then again, to be sure....
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,208
    https://twitter.com/EricHolthaus/status/1249783979651280899

    If Biden bends over backwards to meet Bernie, surely a decent chunk of the latter's fans will hold their noses and turn out to vote for the Dems?
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Ah, so a mere 1 in 8 chance of significant organ damage. Comforting.
    Compared to the likes of pancreatic cancer yes and that is only of those who get it in the first place and most likely for older people who get it whose bodies are less strong anyway
    "Less bad than pancreatic cancer" sounds like one of those spoof film reviews that comedies occasionally put on their posters.

    That isn't the most comforting use of "most likely" I've ever come across, either.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,208

    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1249730009922711552

    Not half. This gets better by the hour. Pass me some popcorn.

    No one knows who actually wrote this "report"?

    Seumas?
    There needs to be

    1) The report on the report
    2) report on the leak of the report

    Probably need to get ahead of events. So

    3) A report on the leaking of the report on the report
    4) A report on the leaking of the report on the leaking of the report

    Then again, to be sure....
    What if the report is the report ?
  • Options
    DensparkDenspark Posts: 68
    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates
  • Options
    What the fuck is Labour doing.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    What the fuck is Labour doing.

    You may wish to be a little more specific.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376

    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1249730009922711552

    Not half. This gets better by the hour. Pass me some popcorn.

    No one knows who actually wrote this "report"?

    Seumas?
    There needs to be

    1) The report on the report
    2) report on the leak of the report

    Probably need to get ahead of events. So

    3) A report on the leaking of the report on the report
    4) A report on the leaking of the report on the leaking of the report

    Then again, to be sure....
    What if the report is the report ?
    Then we need a report on that. As well. Obviously.

    Go long on lefty think tanks that write reports for money.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962
    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    It could jump to 4,000 deaths tomorrow according to their model.
  • Options
    blairfblairf Posts: 98
    i read that paper linked to on last post about the response to this. one shower thought was the response from 'the west' has been very peculiar compared to previous epidemics. in the past you quarantined the sick often brutally and cruelly, think leprosy or bubonic plague. this time round we've quarantined the well. odd.

  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,989
    Endillion said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Ah, so a mere 1 in 8 chance of significant organ damage. Comforting.
    Compared to the likes of pancreatic cancer yes and that is only of those who get it in the first place and most likely for older people who get it whose bodies are less strong anyway
    "Less bad than pancreatic cancer" sounds like one of those spoof film reviews that comedies occasionally put on their posters.

    That isn't the most comforting use of "most likely" I've ever come across, either.
    Compared to most serious diseases 88% is good odds and that is not even an 88% survival rate, merely 88% chance of avoiding heart complications
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376

    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1249730009922711552

    Not half. This gets better by the hour. Pass me some popcorn.

    No one knows who actually wrote this "report"?

    Seumas?
    There needs to be

    1) The report on the report
    2) report on the leak of the report

    Probably need to get ahead of events. So

    3) A report on the leaking of the report on the report
    4) A report on the leaking of the report on the leaking of the report

    Then again, to be sure....
    What if the report is the report ?
    Then we need a report on that. As well. Obviously.

    Go long on lefty think tanks that write reports for money.
    I have just repurposed a COVID19 spread model and discovered that in 19 weeks, 924% of the GDP of the planet will be consumed on writing reports about reports on the leaks of Labour party reports.

    Plus or minus.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725

    Primus inter pares.

    I had no idea we were pares.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,662
    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    You have to laugh really. This latest report suggests that the UK has 6,781 ICU beds, which sounds plausible.

    The earlier widely reported IHME report (the one that predicted 66k UK deaths) assumed the UK had 799 ICU beds. Don't they sense check these things before issuing?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376

    https://twitter.com/EricHolthaus/status/1249783979651280899

    If Biden bends over backwards to meet Bernie, surely a decent chunk of the latter's fans will hold their noses and turn out to vote for the Dems?


    That seems to be Bidens plan.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376

    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    You have to laugh really. This latest report suggests that the UK has 6,781 ICU beds, which sounds plausible.

    The earlier widely reported IHME report (the one that predicted 66k UK deaths) assumed the UK had 799 ICU beds. Don't they sense check these things before issuing?
    No - and they didn't update it for weeks.

    In fact the number of ICU beds is still wrong, I believe.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    edited April 2020
    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    The last word of your post (excluding the link) is probably the most important. A two-thirds reduction in under a week is quite a comedown.

    Note that the 717 you quote is deaths reported today, which breaks down to about 15-20% that happened yesterday, 50% the day before (Apr 11) and the rest earlier than that. Today could be around a thousand in terms of hospital deaths, but probably quite a lot more when including all deaths.

    Edit: Lol. The lower bound on the Italy, Spain and Frances ranges are already below the reported figures according to Worldometer.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,662

    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    You have to laugh really. This latest report suggests that the UK has 6,781 ICU beds, which sounds plausible.

    The earlier widely reported IHME report (the one that predicted 66k UK deaths) assumed the UK had 799 ICU beds. Don't they sense check these things before issuing?
    No - and they didn't update it for weeks.

    In fact the number of ICU beds is still wrong, I believe.
    I'll take your word for that but 799 was cleary an order of magnitude error.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    @ydoethur FPT

    Philip of Spain proposed to Elizabeth. As she noted he didn’t “love her very much” so perhaps the prospect of being King of England had some appeal?

    Re: the Bank of England

    The “wise man” was my 9x-great grandfather who wrote an excoriating pamphlet saying that the foundation of the Bank would lead to inflation, debasement of the currency and ever mounting government indebtedness.

    (His opposition may have been influenced by the fact he was a close friend and ally of Abigail Masham)

    We gave the Governor a copy of the pamphlet for their 300th birthday 😊
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,989
    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    Italy now forecast to be just 2000 behind the UK.

    Sweden forecast to be ahead of France which would be quite astonishing as France has over six times the Swedish population
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    HYUFD said:

    Endillion said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Ah, so a mere 1 in 8 chance of significant organ damage. Comforting.
    Compared to the likes of pancreatic cancer yes and that is only of those who get it in the first place and most likely for older people who get it whose bodies are less strong anyway
    "Less bad than pancreatic cancer" sounds like one of those spoof film reviews that comedies occasionally put on their posters.

    That isn't the most comforting use of "most likely" I've ever come across, either.
    Compared to most serious diseases 88% is good odds and that is not even an 88% survival rate, merely 88% chance of avoiding heart complications
    The 88% is predicated on you surviving the initial disease! If you combine the chances of not surviving with the chance of surviving with heart complications, your odds are worse than 88%.

    Also, your categorisation of the virus as a "serious disease" is somewhat at odds with your repeated assurances that the best treatment for most people was broth.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    RobD said:

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
    If you read the story instead of defaulting to crazed Europhobia, you’ll see it’s very likely.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962

    RobD said:

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
    If you read the story instead of defaulting to crazed Europhobia, you’ll see it’s very likely.
    I based my statement on this part of the article:

    European doctors and nurses are preparing to receive the first of €1.5bn (£1.3bn) worth of personal protective equipment (PPE) within days or a maximum of two weeks through a joint procurement scheme involving 25 countries and eight companies, according to internal EU documents.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Let's not count our protective equipment chickens just yet. If I understand the article correctly, the scheme still hasn't delivered any actual results, and might not for another two weeks.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
    If you read the story instead of defaulting to crazed Europhobia, you’ll see it’s very likely.
    I based my statement on this part of the article:

    European doctors and nurses are preparing to receive the first of €1.5bn (£1.3bn) worth of personal protective equipment (PPE) within days or a maximum of two weeks through a joint procurement scheme involving 25 countries and eight companies, according to internal EU documents.
    Then I suggest you read it again, read more carefully and do some thinking instead of Europhobic foaming.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,989
    Endillion said:

    HYUFD said:

    Endillion said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Ah, so a mere 1 in 8 chance of significant organ damage. Comforting.
    Compared to the likes of pancreatic cancer yes and that is only of those who get it in the first place and most likely for older people who get it whose bodies are less strong anyway
    "Less bad than pancreatic cancer" sounds like one of those spoof film reviews that comedies occasionally put on their posters.

    That isn't the most comforting use of "most likely" I've ever come across, either.
    Compared to most serious diseases 88% is good odds and that is not even an 88% survival rate, merely 88% chance of avoiding heart complications
    The 88% is predicated on you surviving the initial disease! If you combine the chances of not surviving with the chance of surviving with heart complications, your odds are worse than 88%.

    Also, your categorisation of the virus as a "serious disease" is somewhat at odds with your repeated assurances that the best treatment for most people was broth.
    If you are under 60 you have a 95%+ chance of surviving the initial disease and just because you have heart complications does not mean you will die from them.

    For most people especially younger people hot broth and rest remains the best solution if they catch it
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
    If you read the story instead of defaulting to crazed Europhobia, you’ll see it’s very likely.
    I based my statement on this part of the article:

    European doctors and nurses are preparing to receive the first of €1.5bn (£1.3bn) worth of personal protective equipment (PPE) within days or a maximum of two weeks through a joint procurement scheme involving 25 countries and eight companies, according to internal EU documents.
    Then I suggest you read it again, read more carefully and do some thinking instead of Europhobic foaming.
    Can you point to the part in the article which suggests people in the UK have already died due to the lack of the UK's participation in this scheme?
  • Options
    DensparkDenspark Posts: 68
    Endillion said:

    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    The last word of your post (excluding the link) is probably the most important. A two-thirds reduction in under a week is quite a comedown.

    Note that the 717 you quote is deaths reported today, which breaks down to about 15-20% that happened yesterday, 50% the day before (Apr 11) and the rest earlier than that. Today could be around a thousand in terms of hospital deaths, but probably quite a lot more when including all deaths.

    Edit: Lol. The lower bound on the Italy, Spain and Frances ranges are already below the reported figures according to Worldometer.
    Aye but the figures they're using for deaths is the hospital deaths as reported on each day. So their 737 yesterday is the figure announced by DHSC at 2pm. The 917 the day before ditto.

    yeah the 717 doesn't include community deaths but then neither does the model....
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
    If you read the story instead of defaulting to crazed Europhobia, you’ll see it’s very likely.
    I based my statement on this part of the article:

    European doctors and nurses are preparing to receive the first of €1.5bn (£1.3bn) worth of personal protective equipment (PPE) within days or a maximum of two weeks through a joint procurement scheme involving 25 countries and eight companies, according to internal EU documents.
    Then I suggest you read it again, read more carefully and do some thinking instead of Europhobic foaming.
    Can you point to the part in the article which suggests people in the UK have already died due to the lack of the UK's participation in this scheme?
    Can you point to where I said it did?

    There’s this amazing thing that follows both the past and the present. It does not surprise me at all, however, to learn that Europhobes have no concept of the future.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,725
    I'm confused considering an end to the lockdown is apparently not due for quite some time yet. But clearly ministers are moaning into their texts to journalists, which is never a good sign.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,662
    There are some other strange anomalies with that IHME report. E.g.:

    UK total hospital beds available noted as 17,765; Germany = 147,938.
    UK ICU beds available noted as 6,781; Germany = 5,891.

    France is recorded as only having 1,761 ICU beds, bizarrely.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    The EU’s “swift work” means they are expecting to receive the first delivery of PPE between “the next few days and few weeks”

    Slow hand clap
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,057
    Endillion said:

    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    The last word of your post (excluding the link) is probably the most important. A two-thirds reduction in under a week is quite a comedown.

    Note that the 717 you quote is deaths reported today, which breaks down to about 15-20% that happened yesterday, 50% the day before (Apr 11) and the rest earlier than that. Today could be around a thousand in terms of hospital deaths, but probably quite a lot more when including all deaths.

    Edit: Lol. The lower bound on the Italy, Spain and Frances ranges are already below the reported figures according to Worldometer.
    It looks like complete nonsense based on an assumption the death rate will inevitably reach zero within short order.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
    If you read the story instead of defaulting to crazed Europhobia, you’ll see it’s very likely.
    I based my statement on this part of the article:

    European doctors and nurses are preparing to receive the first of €1.5bn (£1.3bn) worth of personal protective equipment (PPE) within days or a maximum of two weeks through a joint procurement scheme involving 25 countries and eight companies, according to internal EU documents.
    Then I suggest you read it again, read more carefully and do some thinking instead of Europhobic foaming.
    Can you point to the part in the article which suggests people in the UK have already died due to the lack of the UK's participation in this scheme?
    Can you point to where I said it did?

    There’s this amazing thing that follows both the past and the present. It does not surprise me at all, however, to learn that Europhobes have no concept of the future.
    You said it has almost certainly cost lives, which I took to mean that the lives had already been lost.

    Let's see what happens with the EU's scheme. Their ventilator procurement didn't exactly go well.
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900


    UK ICU beds available noted as 6,781; Germany = 5,891.

    Germany had something like 30k ICU beds even before the virus arrived.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962
    Andrew said:


    UK ICU beds available noted as 6,781; Germany = 5,891.

    Germany had something like 30k ICU beds even before the virus arrived.
    Is there anything right in this model?
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    Denspark said:

    Endillion said:

    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    The last word of your post (excluding the link) is probably the most important. A two-thirds reduction in under a week is quite a comedown.

    Note that the 717 you quote is deaths reported today, which breaks down to about 15-20% that happened yesterday, 50% the day before (Apr 11) and the rest earlier than that. Today could be around a thousand in terms of hospital deaths, but probably quite a lot more when including all deaths.

    Edit: Lol. The lower bound on the Italy, Spain and Frances ranges are already below the reported figures according to Worldometer.
    Aye but the figures they're using for deaths is the hospital deaths as reported on each day. So their 737 yesterday is the figure announced by DHSC at 2pm. The 917 the day before ditto.

    yeah the 717 doesn't include community deaths but then neither does the model....
    I'm not totally sure that's right (mainly because their methodology isn't brilliantly worded) but let's work with it. So that's a like-for-like comparison, which helps. And a mean prediction for tomorrow's reported number of 1,156, with a 95% confidence interval of 247 to 4,255. I'm just off to fit a distribution through that, and come up with my own estimate. Back in a bit.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376
    RobD said:

    Andrew said:


    UK ICU beds available noted as 6,781; Germany = 5,891.

    Germany had something like 30k ICU beds even before the virus arrived.
    Is there anything right in this model?
    Both "UK" and "Germany" appear to be spelt correctly.
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    The journalist aka Tosser Newton Dung seems to miss the obvious that senior ministers who recognise this are in the perfect place to enact a remedy. If they fail to recgnise the issue they will not provide solution. Celebrate that they are aware and fear that they do nought.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
  • Options
    stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,779
    kle4 said:

    Primus inter pares.

    I had no idea we were pares.
    Of course we are pares. Weren’t you on the Conference call?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376
    kle4 said:

    I'm confused considering an end to the lockdown is apparently not due for quite some time yet. But clearly ministers are moaning into their texts to journalists, which is never a good sign.
    A "senior" journalist informed us with 100% confidence, based on sources, that the Chancellor was going to do absolutely nothing to help the UK economy....

    Hours before he announced the first of a massive set of measures to aid business, employees and the self employed.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
    If you read the story instead of defaulting to crazed Europhobia, you’ll see it’s very likely.
    I based my statement on this part of the article:

    European doctors and nurses are preparing to receive the first of €1.5bn (£1.3bn) worth of personal protective equipment (PPE) within days or a maximum of two weeks through a joint procurement scheme involving 25 countries and eight companies, according to internal EU documents.
    Then I suggest you read it again, read more carefully and do some thinking instead of Europhobic foaming.
    Can you point to the part in the article which suggests people in the UK have already died due to the lack of the UK's participation in this scheme?
    Can you point to where I said it did?

    There’s this amazing thing that follows both the past and the present. It does not surprise me at all, however, to learn that Europhobes have no concept of the future.
    The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.

    Admittedly you don’t directly link it to the PPE scheme although context makes it a reasonable inference. “has almost certainly” is a reference to a previous event
  • Options
    RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,157
    edited April 2020
    Gorgeous George claims he's an living example of Jeremy Corbyn's betrayals (presumably because he wasn't allowed back in the Labour party and given a safe seat).
    https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/status/1249729345549205505
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195

    What the fuck is Labour doing.

    About the same as for the last 3 years.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100
    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    RobD said:
    By deciding not to participate, when invited, in the EU procurement scheme. The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.
    Given that not a single piece of PPE has been delivered via this scheme, that seems quite unlikely.
    If you read the story instead of defaulting to crazed Europhobia, you’ll see it’s very likely.
    I based my statement on this part of the article:

    European doctors and nurses are preparing to receive the first of €1.5bn (£1.3bn) worth of personal protective equipment (PPE) within days or a maximum of two weeks through a joint procurement scheme involving 25 countries and eight companies, according to internal EU documents.
    Then I suggest you read it again, read more carefully and do some thinking instead of Europhobic foaming.
    Can you point to the part in the article which suggests people in the UK have already died due to the lack of the UK's participation in this scheme?
    Can you point to where I said it did?

    There’s this amazing thing that follows both the past and the present. It does not surprise me at all, however, to learn that Europhobes have no concept of the future.
    The blind Europhobic ideology of the current government has almost certainly cost lives as a result.

    Admittedly you don’t directly link it to the PPE scheme although context makes it a reasonable inference. “has almost certainly” is a reference to a previous event
    There's short term memory and then there's AM memory.
  • Options
    alteregoalterego Posts: 1,100

    kle4 said:

    I'm confused considering an end to the lockdown is apparently not due for quite some time yet. But clearly ministers are moaning into their texts to journalists, which is never a good sign.
    A "senior" journalist informed us with 100% confidence, based on sources, that the Chancellor was going to do absolutely nothing to help the UK economy....

    Hours before he announced the first of a massive set of measures to aid business, employees and the self employed.
    MSM has morphed into Moronic Shits Media, all desperate to shout "me, me" the loudest.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,577
    Enough of the bad tempered squabbling.
    Good night all.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    Endillion said:

    Denspark said:

    Endillion said:

    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    The last word of your post (excluding the link) is probably the most important. A two-thirds reduction in under a week is quite a comedown.

    Note that the 717 you quote is deaths reported today, which breaks down to about 15-20% that happened yesterday, 50% the day before (Apr 11) and the rest earlier than that. Today could be around a thousand in terms of hospital deaths, but probably quite a lot more when including all deaths.

    Edit: Lol. The lower bound on the Italy, Spain and Frances ranges are already below the reported figures according to Worldometer.
    Aye but the figures they're using for deaths is the hospital deaths as reported on each day. So their 737 yesterday is the figure announced by DHSC at 2pm. The 917 the day before ditto.

    yeah the 717 doesn't include community deaths but then neither does the model....
    I'm not totally sure that's right (mainly because their methodology isn't brilliantly worded) but let's work with it. So that's a like-for-like comparison, which helps. And a mean prediction for tomorrow's reported number of 1,156, with a 95% confidence interval of 247 to 4,255. I'm just off to fit a distribution through that, and come up with my own estimate. Back in a bit.
    Righto. They're probably not using a lognormal distribution, but it's not a million miles off. Coefficient of volatility (SD/mean) looks to be around 100%. Based on the past week, I'd say 10-12% is a reasonable estimate, and 15-20% would be fairly prudent.
  • Options
    MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 755
    I am but a simple peasant, but could the leaker not have redacted the names of the victims/complainants in the leaked Labour report? I suppose it's keyensian in that it makes jobs for lawyers though.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376
    Nigelb said:

    Enough of the bad tempered squabbling.
    Good night all.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAeqVGP-GPM
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    If anyone has any tips for actually getting fit instead of just gorging on chocolate and snacks during the lockdown I am all ears.
    I already know good lung health and low BMI are helpful if you get the virus but that's not seeming to do it.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,376
    edited April 2020
    Monkeys said:

    I am but a simple peasant, but could the leaker not have redacted the names of the victims/complainants in the leaked Labour report? I suppose it's keyensian in that it makes jobs for lawyers though.

    The purpose of the leak was to create a shit storm. Unless it was leaked by a moron. Unless it was leaked to create a shit storm, *by* a moron. Or leaked to....

    Come to think of it, don't try and understand. Just giggle inanely. It's like trying to understand what Donald Trump thinks. You are better off not knowing.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,962

    What the fuck is Labour doing.

    Providing a welcome relief to the monotony of lockdown. :p
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,925

    kle4 said:

    I'm confused considering an end to the lockdown is apparently not due for quite some time yet. But clearly ministers are moaning into their texts to journalists, which is never a good sign.
    A "senior" journalist informed us with 100% confidence, based on sources, that the Chancellor was going to do absolutely nothing to help the UK economy....

    Hours before he announced the first of a massive set of measures to aid business, employees and the self employed.
    “Everyone is pretty much agreed that it's vital to start getting people back to work as soon as possible, but there is also agreement that nobody has any clue how to do that safely yet."

    The guidance doesn't even prohibit work, just says that employers should make every effort to get people to WFH (Which seems sensible to hold indefinitely).

    What is the Sun wittering on about ?
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,432
    Freggles said:

    If anyone has any tips for actually getting fit instead of just gorging on chocolate and snacks during the lockdown I am all ears.
    I already know good lung health and low BMI are helpful if you get the virus but that's not seeming to do it.

    Do you have a bike? If you haven't cycled in a while, now is the time to start. There is almost no vehicle traffic on the roads and the weather is perfect. My wife has gone from no cycling at all to a few miles a day just around the pleasantly empty local roads and has discovered she loves it when not having to worry about traffic; I am doing 10-20 miles a day in the time I would ordinarily be wasting commuting.

    That said, I am also consuming chocolate like never before. So the general health impact for me of lockdown is neutral at best.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,925
    Freggles said:

    If anyone has any tips for actually getting fit instead of just gorging on chocolate and snacks during the lockdown I am all ears.
    I already know good lung health and low BMI are helpful if you get the virus but that's not seeming to do it.

    You're allowed out for exercise still.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,167
    Pulpstar said:

    kle4 said:

    I'm confused considering an end to the lockdown is apparently not due for quite some time yet. But clearly ministers are moaning into their texts to journalists, which is never a good sign.
    A "senior" journalist informed us with 100% confidence, based on sources, that the Chancellor was going to do absolutely nothing to help the UK economy....

    Hours before he announced the first of a massive set of measures to aid business, employees and the self employed.
    “Everyone is pretty much agreed that it's vital to start getting people back to work as soon as possible, but there is also agreement that nobody has any clue how to do that safely yet."

    The guidance doesn't even prohibit work, just says that employers should make every effort to get people to WFH (Which seems sensible to hold indefinitely).

    What is the Sun wittering on about ?
    If the Sun can lobby to lift the lockdown and the data spikes once again the Sun has another story.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,167

    What the fuck is Labour doing.

    Don't feed the beast!
  • Options
    FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Pulpstar said:

    Freggles said:

    If anyone has any tips for actually getting fit instead of just gorging on chocolate and snacks during the lockdown I am all ears.
    I already know good lung health and low BMI are helpful if you get the virus but that's not seeming to do it.

    You're allowed out for exercise still.
    Yeah, that is the shameful part...
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,592
    Front cover of the Times says what I was saying about a week ago: lockdown for 3 more weeks = 6 weeks in total.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,925
    Andy_JS said:

    Front cover of the Times says what I was saying about a week ago: lockdown for 3 more weeks = 6 weeks in total.

    I wish the Gov't would come out with '3 more weeks' instead of the whole "Lockdown will last at least another week"
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,925
    Freggles said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Freggles said:

    If anyone has any tips for actually getting fit instead of just gorging on chocolate and snacks during the lockdown I am all ears.
    I already know good lung health and low BMI are helpful if you get the virus but that's not seeming to do it.

    You're allowed out for exercise still.
    Yeah, that is the shameful part...
    Depends on where you are as to whether you can do that safely. I'm fortunate that I'm in a low pop density areas where even the cheap houses are pretty huge. Every minor celeb on Youtube is doing Home workout stuff
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,432
    edited April 2020
    Does 'lockdown' = schools closed? Or is there a stage in which lockdown is lifted but schools are still closed? It's hard to get the economy properly going again while the kids are still kicking around the house. Primary school children, in any case.

    In all honesty, my oldest two (10 and 8) are no trouble whatsoever. But it is hard to get anything meaningful done with a child of 6 or under in the house.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,922
    We have until May 10th to cancel our holiday in France, and Macron’s shut it down til the 11th!
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,963

    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    You have to laugh really. This latest report suggests that the UK has 6,781 ICU beds, which sounds plausible.

    The earlier widely reported IHME report (the one that predicted 66k UK deaths) assumed the UK had 799 ICU beds. Don't they sense check these things before issuing?
    AFAIU, the IHME report was using the number of *free* ICU beds.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,592
    edited April 2020
    "NHS hospitals have four times more empty beds than normal

    Official figures state 40.9 per cent of acute beds unoccupied — about four times the normal number.
    Follow major efforts to discharge patients, and sharp drop in admissions.
    Critical care in hotspots at more than normal total capacity, especially in Birmingham and the Black Country, and thousands on oxygen."

    https://www.hsj.co.uk/acute-care/nhs-hospitals-have-four-times-more-empty-beds-than-normal/
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,592
    Denspark said:

    And the latest update of the IHME model landed at 9pm uk time.

    UK predicted deaths down to 23,791 from 37k on friday and 66k on tuesday.

    Today apparently was the peak day of the UK wave 1 with 1,156 deaths rather than the 717 reported.

    Note this model was released 7 hours after the UK reported the 717 deaths.

    Big change this time was sweden predicted deaths up 40% from fridays guess.

    http://www.healthdata.org/covid/updates

    A prediction for the UK that ranges from 14,076 to 50,820 is completely useless.
This discussion has been closed.