I think there might still be a little bit of value in there, although obviously much less than there was yesterday, she's the obvious choice. I don't know why the markets were tilted so strongly towards Kamala.
Also pay attention to @peter_from_putney's post FPT, if she gets the VP nod then she's only a well-aimed stapler shot away from becoming the next POTUS.
Seeing as Amy Klobuchar is best-priced at 4/1 to become the Democratic V-P Nominee, then on an "only a heartbeat away" basis she simply has to be great value at Ladbrokes' odds-boosted 250/1 to become the next POTUS. DYOR.
Well-aimed but it would also need to be well-timed. A professional would check Ladbrokes' (and Betfair's and anyone else's) terms to see if they paid out on the November election or January inauguration but dyor.
Betfair says: This market will be settled according to the candidate that has the most projected Electoral College votes won at the 2020 presidential election.
So for Biden's VP pick to win, Biden would need to have selected a running mate by the August convention but withdrawn in time for said running mate to move to the top of the ticket before the November election, which is not a very large time window.
This illustrates why I am reluctant to get involved in betting this year. Normally, as per OGH's recent header, you would back both Biden and Trump to lock in a profit but this time it is plausible for one or both to withdraw for various reasons at any time, and so I find it too difficult to assess the probabilities involved.
The issue is let's say that hypothetically a candidate dies a week before polling day. Results come in and they've won. Electoral college gives it to the Veep candidate but it was still the deceased original candidates name on the ballot papers.
Who does Ladbrokes pay out on?
In those circumstances Ladbrokes might void the market for the same reason Betfair suspended the market on next Prime Minister last month.
Clever bets based on one or other presumptive nominee dying look very vulnerable to that risk.
I wonder if Bookies should be able to use a Rule 4 if one of the contenders passed away, same as if a horse withdraws from a race.
I'm sure, for better or for worse, if punters are laying an 80-yr old (!) to take office then somewhere in their calculations is the possibility that they might not make it to the election.
Not many 20-yr old geldings in 5f sprints...
I meant Bookies. The exchange seemed to set a precedent by suspending the market when Boris went into Intensive Care, I wonder if they'd have voided the market if he had passed away
Ah yes good point. Yes probably they would have, on the grounds of decency plus incidentally saving themselves a few quid.
I think it must be mainly decency/avoiding negative PR, because the exchange itself wins every time. They'd be costing themselves loads of commission by voiding
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
As I was saying yesterday. And counting failed, rejected and repeat tests, as well as the up to 30,000 daily being done for medical research purposes rather than on 'live' patients
"Why has Peterborough had six McDonald's locations reopen when the North has none? Whereas those living in some larger cities are yet to get their hands on a Big Mac, people in Peterborough are spoiled for choice."
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
As I was saying yesterday. And counting failed, rejected and repeat tests, as well as the up to 30,000 daily being done for medical research purposes rather than on 'live' patients
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Apologies for posting this link to the Oxford Dictionary of Family Names again but for anyone interested in ancestry / family history this fascinating resource is currently free online, until Monday apparently.
Thanks! Alas the (very unusual) surname of a relative isn't in there - though a ?variant is ...
If we are on freebies and family history, The National Archives are offering free downloads of scans on their site (you need to check the details, and it won't cover new scans, but for instance I have been downloading lots of early C19 wills for research, and my granddad's Great War medal card).
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
How did your exam go?
It took 14 hours, and it was incredibly dull, but I think it went ok thank you! Hopefully I'll never have think about EU law ever again.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
You're arguing with somebody else it seems. You suggested that ex-Labour voter Y in Blyth cares about nasal vs throat samples?
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
What of the anti-Boris, remainer Tories? Younger PBers might struggle to remember this but remaining in the EU was Conservative Party policy for most of the current millennium.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
As I was saying yesterday. And counting failed, rejected and repeat tests, as well as the up to 30,000 daily being done for medical research purposes rather than on 'live' patients
Really
Missed that.
I presume PB Tories approve
... of medical research being performed? On a disease that's killing thousands of people?
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
The accuracy of the tests is important, but so is not misleading the public by representing operational tests as individual tests. But you know that, don't you?
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
"Do we need extra lab capacity for these extra tests ?
Nah because its on the same person - just get the result for one and throw the other in the bin..."
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
You're arguing with somebody else it seems. You suggested that ex-Labour voter Y in Blyth cares about nasal vs throat samples?
If the media isn't reporting what the voter wants the media should do a better job.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
The accuracy of the tests is important, but so is not misleading the public by representing operational tests as individual tests. But you know that, don't you?
They don't - they provide the full information every frikking day.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
You're arguing with somebody else it seems. You suggested that ex-Labour voter Y in Blyth cares about nasal vs throat samples?
If the media isn't reporting what the voter wants the media should do a better job.
I don't disagree with you on that, but it was @TGOHF666 that couldn't help getting the "hurrr metropolitan lefty remainers don't know what the general public care about" slur in.
High Street spending down 18% is actually less than I would have imagined, given almost complete closure of the hospitality and large parts of retail, like clothes, shoes, much DIY and garden centres, etc.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
What of the anti-Boris, remainer Tories? Younger PBers might struggle to remember this but remaining in the EU was Conservative Party policy for most of the current millennium.
Times change. Accepting postwar nationalised industries was policy for about as long. Don't see any Tories wanting to go back to that.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
You're arguing with somebody else it seems. You suggested that ex-Labour voter Y in Blyth cares about nasal vs throat samples?
If the media isn't reporting what the voter wants the media should do a better job.
I don't disagree with you on that, but it was @TGOHF666 that couldn't help getting the "hurrr metropolitan lefty remainers don't know what the general public care about" slur in.
You were the poster proclaiming to know the mind of the common proles.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
You're arguing with somebody else it seems. You suggested that ex-Labour voter Y in Blyth cares about nasal vs throat samples?
If the media isn't reporting what the voter wants the media should do a better job.
I don't disagree with you on that, but it was @TGOHF666 that couldn't help getting the "hurrr metropolitan lefty remainers don't know what the general public care about" slur in.
You were the poster proclaiming to know the mind of the common proles.
Show your evidence of "misleading".
Answer the question: does ex-Labour voter "Dave" in Blyth care about nasal vs throat samples?
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
Which information is published daily.
This is Déjà vu. Clearly the Telegraph listened to 'More or Less' as well as me.
The issue is the Govt manipulating the figures.
Saying the data is all published is not correct as I pointed out yesterday. Not only do they not publish all the relevant data they have also admitted they don't even collect it all!
To the person on the Clapham Omnibus saying you have carried out x tests (even if you do say separately the number of individuals tested is different) is misleading if after you exclude double tests, non diagnostic tests and posted tests (for which they do not collect data on returns) the number is only 30% of the headline total given.
Most people will assume that a 2nd test is actually meaningful. However it isn't. It includes, tests dropped on the floor, tests where the person vomited over the test and tests that have 2 components. I assume for care home patients a lot will get wasted. These are all counted.
Initially the Govt couldn't even confirm they weren't counting tests going out and coming back twice. If they hadn't tried to massage the figures in the first place this wouldn't have arisen as an issue. Just count them on the way back as they should be doing. They have now sorted that (they claim), but it doesn't generate confidence.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
Take a step back and read what you've written, because it's incredibly naive.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
You're arguing with somebody else it seems. You suggested that ex-Labour voter Y in Blyth cares about nasal vs throat samples?
If the media isn't reporting what the voter wants the media should do a better job.
I don't disagree with you on that, but it was @TGOHF666 that couldn't help getting the "hurrr metropolitan lefty remainers don't know what the general public care about" slur in.
You were the poster proclaiming to know the mind of the common proles.
Show your evidence of "misleading".
Answer the question: does ex-Labour voter "Dave" in Blyth care about nasal vs throat samples?
If if he works in a testing lab and you suggest half is output is worthless then probably yes.
If the comparative testing leads to new tests or treatments then definitely yes.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
You're arguing with somebody else it seems. You suggested that ex-Labour voter Y in Blyth cares about nasal vs throat samples?
If the media isn't reporting what the voter wants the media should do a better job.
I don't disagree with you on that, but it was @TGOHF666 that couldn't help getting the "hurrr metropolitan lefty remainers don't know what the general public care about" slur in.
You were the poster proclaiming to know the mind of the common proles.
Show your evidence of "misleading".
Answer the question: does ex-Labour voter "Dave" in Blyth care about nasal vs throat samples?
If if he works in a testing lab and you suggest half is output is worthless then probably yes.
If the comparative testing leads to new tests or treatments then definitely yes.
So the answer is "no". Dave in Blyth does not care about nasal vs throat samples. Thanks for confirming that.
All this guy ever does is post links from ruddy twitter.
Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.
I lurk far more than I post and enjoy reading the group but posting random twitter links, often without any comment, or anything substantive, well what's the point ?
Twitter is one of the best sources for breaking news
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
Great comment. Great contribution.
If you don't think testing subjects twice at the same time using two different methods gives valuable information to scientists then well - stick to Benelux law.
You're arguing with somebody else it seems. You suggested that ex-Labour voter Y in Blyth cares about nasal vs throat samples?
If the media isn't reporting what the voter wants the media should do a better job.
I don't disagree with you on that, but it was @TGOHF666 that couldn't help getting the "hurrr metropolitan lefty remainers don't know what the general public care about" slur in.
You were the poster proclaiming to know the mind of the common proles.
Show your evidence of "misleading".
Answer the question: does ex-Labour voter "Dave" in Blyth care about nasal vs throat samples?
If if he works in a testing lab and you suggest half is output is worthless then probably yes.
If the comparative testing leads to new tests or treatments then definitely yes.
So the answer is "no". Dave in Blyth does not care about nasal vs throat samples. Thanks for confirming that.
Just called Dave in Blyth - he says he cares a lot. Thanks for confirming that.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
Why do you keep saying the data is there when it clearly isn't. The Govt for instance has no clue (so can't tell you) how many postal tests were carried out because it has admitted it is not collecting that data.
On testing I am not particularly concerned by the numbers. 100k is an arbitrary round big number. It is unlikely it is particularly relevant to what we need.
Far more concerning is the turnaround time. Reports are common of tests taking 5 days and when people may only be spreading the virus for 7 days, that is close to pointless.
And at yesterdays presser the head of testing didnt want to get tied in to a 24 hr goal for testing, which suggests to me are not close to that, nor expect to be so.
Without it, test, track and trace is going to be pretty ineffective.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Wait until the shriekers find out a large proportion of those being tested (TWICE!!) are part of studies with subjects chosen who don't even have symptoms.
High Street spending down 18% is actually less than I would have imagined, given almost complete closure of the hospitality and large parts of retail, like clothes, shoes, much DIY and garden centres, etc.
The overall reduction in economic activity has actually been a lot less than I'd have expected. A lot is down to the shift towards online activity, of course, so it does make you think: what if all this had happened 10 or 20 years earlier?
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
Why do you keep saying the data is there when it clearly isn't. The Govt for instance has no clue (so can't tell you) how many postal tests were carried out because it has admitted it is not collecting that data.
It should be as close enough to the amount sent out as to make no difference. Who is ordering a test, receiving it but not completing it? And why?
My home test was picked up half an hour ago by a courier.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.
There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.
By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.
One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.
Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.
At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.
One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.
Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.
You seem to hang out almost exclusively with raving lefty hypocrites. It can't be good for you.
All this guy ever does is post links from ruddy twitter.
Is it not possible to bring in an ignore function to the group.
I lurk far more than I post and enjoy reading the group but posting random twitter links, often without any comment, or anything substantive, well what's the point ?
Twitter is one of the best sources for breaking news
Agree. I was waiting for you to post HYUFD.
You must be vying for the top spot of Twitter poster with Scott. I must admit I find them very informative from both of you.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
A genuine question - do you mean the lockdown unwind should go quicker or slower?
Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.
There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.
By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.
One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.
Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.
At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.
One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.
Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.
You seem to hang out almost exclusively with raving lefty hypocrites. It can't be good for you.
This is a very leftwing site but we do what we can
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
Why do you keep saying the data is there when it clearly isn't. The Govt for instance has no clue (so can't tell you) how many postal tests were carried out because it has admitted it is not collecting that data.
It should be as close enough to the amount sent out as to make no difference. Who is ordering a test, receiving it but not completing it? And why?
My home test was picked up half an hour ago by a courier.
I probably agree (although by the sounds of it there are an inconsequential number of failed tests), but why not just do it properly? The only conceivable reason was to meet a pointless target.
The 20 minute on-site test being trialled. Dependent on how easy and straightforward it is, it could (if made cheap, easy, and ubiquitous) open up so many prospects. Such as allowing any visitors who take the test and pass (when your household also take the test and pass) - which opens up all sorts of opportunities for family and friends visiting. Or flights where it is taken as part of onboarding. Or sports when all attending (playing or spectating) take the test and pass before being allowed within social distancing parameters. Or restaurants and pubs.
Of course, most of these need for it to be cheap, able to be carried out with minimal supervision (eg like a litmus paper test) and so forth, but it's certainly going in the right direction.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
High Street spending down 18% is actually less than I would have imagined, given almost complete closure of the hospitality and large parts of retail, like clothes, shoes, much DIY and garden centres, etc.
The overall reduction in economic activity has actually been a lot less than I'd have expected. A lot is down to the shift towards online activity, of course, so it does make you think: what if all this had happened 10 or 20 years earlier?
Remote teaching would have been “read these chapters in the text book and do these questions” if you were lucky (and if you had a textbook at home). In my lessons today I have sent them videos of me going though the notes, set questions online which are marked electronically and the results sent to me in real time, and had text conversations with those that wanted help.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
Not on getting the economy going again, they are not. They don`t appreciate the extent of the damage. I`m taken aback by three of my family members, Boris fans and strong brexiteers, who have become very critical of the government. Key issues I`m picking up from them are PPE and continued airplane activity. On the latter point, this is why the government have changed tack on arrivals. Not because it`s the right thing to do (I don`t think it is) but it`s populism again.
This government, which I have been supportive of generally, are the ultimate political weathervanes and this may prove its undoing. The public knows jack shit and is fickle.
Wait until the shriekers find out a large proportion of those being tested (TWICE!!) are part of studies with subjects chosen who don't even have symptoms.
This government, which I have been supportive of generally, are the ultimate political weathervanes and this may prove its undoing. The public knows jack shit and are fickle.
Be careful, you're starting to sound like a lefty metropolitan remainer.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
Why do you keep saying the data is there when it clearly isn't. The Govt for instance has no clue (so can't tell you) how many postal tests were carried out because it has admitted it is not collecting that data.
It should be as close enough to the amount sent out as to make no difference. Who is ordering a test, receiving it but not completing it? And why?
My home test was picked up half an hour ago by a courier.
Apologies for posting this link to the Oxford Dictionary of Family Names again but for anyone interested in ancestry / family history this fascinating resource is currently free online, until Monday apparently.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
A genuine question - do you mean the lockdown unwind should go quicker or slower?
Personally, I think quicker. But my post was about Johnson. I think that he thinks quicker too, and is hearing rising concerns from his backbenchers in the same vein - but won`t move significantly until polling shows the public is behind him. Which I believe may be never, because they are financially cushioned and frit. Hence the trap.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.
There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.
By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.
One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.
Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.
At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.
One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.
Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.
You seem to hang out almost exclusively with raving lefty hypocrites. It can't be good for you.
I enjoy collecting hypocrisy - collecting wine is more expensive, and hypocrisy has the merit of being infinitely renewable.
The moment someone starts banging on about how infinitely loving and fair they are, southing in my head goes "target acquired".
Part of it is my enjoyment of leading people down a path. Like the time I got some students to suggest that Seventh Day Adventists should be persecuted by the state....
This government, which I have been supportive of generally, are the ultimate political weathervanes and this may prove its undoing. The public knows jack shit and are fickle.
Be careful, you're starting to sound like a lefty metropolitan remainer.
Well I am partly that, especially in that I don`t hold democracy in the god-like manner that many libertarians and leavers and others on the right do.
Democracy is like the NHS - impossible to criticise.
Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.
There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.
By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.
One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.
Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.
At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.
One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.
Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.
You seem to hang out almost exclusively with raving lefty hypocrites. It can't be good for you.
Trying to self immunise against the ghastly virus of cultural Marxism presumably.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
Why do you keep saying the data is there when it clearly isn't. The Govt for instance has no clue (so can't tell you) how many postal tests were carried out because it has admitted it is not collecting that data.
It should be as close enough to the amount sent out as to make no difference. Who is ordering a test, receiving it but not completing it? And why?
My home test was picked up half an hour ago by a courier.
I probably agree (although by the sounds of it there are an inconsequential number of failed tests), but why not just do it properly? The only conceivable reason was to meet a pointless target.
Sorry missed out the word 'not' in front of 'inconsequential' there which rather changes the meaning of what I said. Whoops.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.
There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.
By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.
One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.
Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.
At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.
One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.
Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.
You seem to hang out almost exclusively with raving lefty hypocrites. It can't be good for you.
This is a very leftwing site but we do what we can
Wait until the shriekers find out a large proportion of those being tested (TWICE!!) are part of studies with subjects chosen who don't even have symptoms.
High Street spending down 18% is actually less than I would have imagined, given almost complete closure of the hospitality and large parts of retail, like clothes, shoes, much DIY and garden centres, etc.
The overall reduction in economic activity has actually been a lot less than I'd have expected. A lot is down to the shift towards online activity, of course, so it does make you think: what if all this had happened 10 or 20 years earlier?
I agree, some other sectors (online, for example - if we can lump that all together any more) must be picking up some of the slack.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
High Street spending down 18% is actually less than I would have imagined, given almost complete closure of the hospitality and large parts of retail, like clothes, shoes, much DIY and garden centres, etc.
The overall reduction in economic activity has actually been a lot less than I'd have expected. A lot is down to the shift towards online activity, of course, so it does make you think: what if all this had happened 10 or 20 years earlier?
It looks like being one of the odd features of this recession. Some sectors (travel, hospitality... what others?) are pretty much stuffed for the duration. Others are going on pretty much business as usual. It's very black and white. Furthermore, a lot of the sectors that are hit are things which make life better, and are important for the livelihoods they provide, but they aren't essential to national survival.
This government, which I have been supportive of generally, are the ultimate political weathervanes and this may prove its undoing. The public knows jack shit and are fickle.
Be careful, you're starting to sound like a lefty metropolitan remainer.
Well I am partly that, especially in that I don`t hold democracy in the god-like manner that many libertarians and leavers and others on the right do.
Democracy is like the NHS - impossible to criticise.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though.
That chart also shows that in the time that Boris has been Prime Minister, the Government's net approval rating has increased by 60 points.
Pesky facts, eh?
And now it's coming down. What's your point?
That it's still significantly higher than it was in December when we inflicted Labour's worst defeat in 84 years. Don't get too cocky!
Winning a GE in December has no relevance to whether the public is with the Government now on their COVID-19 policy, as @Philip_Thompson asserted. It seems to me like you're trying to have a different argument to the one we are having.
We get it. You won a majority in December. Get over it.
Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.
There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.
By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.
One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.
Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.
At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.
One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.
Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.
You seem to hang out almost exclusively with raving lefty hypocrites. It can't be good for you.
This is a very leftwing site but we do what we can
Wait until the shriekers find out a large proportion of those being tested (TWICE!!) are part of studies with subjects chosen who don't even have symptoms.
You really are an obnoxious prat aren't you.
It's a kinder gentler left wing site.
a) I am not left wing b) I am not the one (other than to you) being rude to everyone c) Your behaviour several weeks ago re dementia says everything anyone needs to know about you d) I would in fact consider myself to be kind. You clearly from your posts and previous behaviour are clearly not.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though.
That chart also shows that in the time that Boris has been Prime Minister, the Government's net approval rating has increased by 60 points.
Pesky facts, eh?
And now it's coming down. What's your point?
Should the government be chasing approval ratings or should they be following scientific advice? Or, maybe, somewhere in between, they recognise that it would be impossible to implement science-based policy without widespread public support? Most of the media has been working to undermine public approval day after day, making consensual government impossible just when we need it most.
High Street spending down 18% is actually less than I would have imagined, given almost complete closure of the hospitality and large parts of retail, like clothes, shoes, much DIY and garden centres, etc.
The overall reduction in economic activity has actually been a lot less than I'd have expected. A lot is down to the shift towards online activity, of course, so it does make you think: what if all this had happened 10 or 20 years earlier?
I was expecting everyone to start doing video-conferencing in the early 1990s and was surprised when it didn't happen then on a large scale.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though.
That chart also shows that in the time that Boris has been Prime Minister, the Government's net approval rating has increased by 60 points.
Pesky facts, eh?
And now it's coming down. What's your point?
That it's still significantly higher than it was in December when we inflicted Labour's worst defeat in 84 years. Don't get too cocky!
Winning a GE in December has no relevance to whether the public is with the Government now on their COVID-19 policy, as @Philip_Thompson asserted. It seems to me like you're trying to have a different argument to the one we are having.
We get it. You won a majority in December. Get over it.
It has great relevance because over-excited lefties thought they had the public on their side then and were comically mistaken. The same is likely to be true now
High Street spending down 18% is actually less than I would have imagined, given almost complete closure of the hospitality and large parts of retail, like clothes, shoes, much DIY and garden centres, etc.
The overall reduction in economic activity has actually been a lot less than I'd have expected. A lot is down to the shift towards online activity, of course, so it does make you think: what if all this had happened 10 or 20 years earlier?
Remote teaching would have been “read these chapters in the text book and do these questions” if you were lucky (and if you had a textbook at home). In my lessons today I have sent them videos of me going though the notes, set questions online which are marked electronically and the results sent to me in real time, and had text conversations with those that wanted help.
Where is the link to the 18% High Street spending reduction? That seems like an extraordinary low reduction to me, given the circumstances.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though.
That chart also shows that in the time that Boris has been Prime Minister, the Government's net approval rating has increased by 60 points.
Pesky facts, eh?
And now it's coming down. What's your point?
Should the government be chasing approval ratings or should they be following scientific advice? Or, maybe, somewhere in between, they recognise that it would be impossible to implement science-based policy without widespread public support? Most of the media has been working to undermine public approval day after day, making consensual government impossible just when we need it most.
I don't disagree with you. However @Philip_Thompson asserted that the public was "with the Government" and thus that is what we're discussing.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
Why do you keep saying the data is there when it clearly isn't. The Govt for instance has no clue (so can't tell you) how many postal tests were carried out because it has admitted it is not collecting that data.
It should be as close enough to the amount sent out as to make no difference. Who is ordering a test, receiving it but not completing it? And why?
My home test was picked up half an hour ago by a courier.
I probably agree (although by the sounds of it there are an inconsequential number of failed tests), but why not just do it properly? The only conceivable reason was to meet a pointless target.
The other conceivable reason is they lacked the ability to collect that data without it causing delays.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though.
That chart also shows that in the time that Boris has been Prime Minister, the Government's net approval rating has increased by 60 points.
Pesky facts, eh?
And now it's coming down. What's your point?
That it's still significantly higher than it was in December when we inflicted Labour's worst defeat in 84 years. Don't get too cocky!
Winning a GE in December has no relevance to whether the public is with the Government now on their COVID-19 policy, as @Philip_Thompson asserted. It seems to me like you're trying to have a different argument to the one we are having.
We get it. You won a majority in December. Get over it.
It has great relevance because over-excited lefties thought they had the public on their side then and were comically mistaken. The same is likely to be true now
Well it isn't true, as I have demonstrated. More of the public disapprove of the Government than approve. So you're just incorrect.
Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.
There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.
By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.
One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.
Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.
At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.
One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.
Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.
You seem to hang out almost exclusively with raving lefty hypocrites. It can't be good for you.
This is a very leftwing site but we do what we can
Wait until the shriekers find out a large proportion of those being tested (TWICE!!) are part of studies with subjects chosen who don't even have symptoms.
You really are an obnoxious prat aren't you.
It's a kinder gentler left wing site.
a) I am not left wing b) I am not the one (other than to you) being rude to everyone c) Your behaviour several weeks ago re dementia says everything anyone needs to know about you d) I would in fact consider myself to be kind. You clearly from your posts and previous behaviour are clearly not.
a) Hmm b) Calling out vomit inducing arrogance could be deemed rude - you got me. c) I didn't mention dementia. d) Man up.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
People tested is a stat that is released every day. I think it's probably best to use that.
Me too. But the Government insists on a headline of "number of tests" that while accurate is quite misleading. It's ideological to suggest otherwise.
The government doesn't insist on that headline. This is the chart the government headlines with. The rest is up to the media.
There's no point arguing with you on this because you'll continually insist that the Government announcing a plan to have the capacity to do 100k tests per day does not imply to normal people that 100k people will be being tested per day. Yes, you're right, that's not what the Government said, but that's not the point is it?
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
If the government meant to say we will test 100,000 people per day they would have said we will test 100,000 people per day.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
Why do you keep saying the data is there when it clearly isn't. The Govt for instance has no clue (so can't tell you) how many postal tests were carried out because it has admitted it is not collecting that data.
It should be as close enough to the amount sent out as to make no difference. Who is ordering a test, receiving it but not completing it? And why?
My home test was picked up half an hour ago by a courier.
How was it Philip? Was it easy? Uncomfortable?
Easy but very uncomfortable. Did it at 1am, throat still hurts now.
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though.
That chart also shows that in the time that Boris has been Prime Minister, the Government's net approval rating has increased by 60 points.
Pesky facts, eh?
And now it's coming down. What's your point?
That it's still significantly higher than it was in December when we inflicted Labour's worst defeat in 84 years. Don't get too cocky!
Winning a GE in December has no relevance to whether the public is with the Government now on their COVID-19 policy, as @Philip_Thompson asserted. It seems to me like you're trying to have a different argument to the one we are having.
We get it. You won a majority in December. Get over it.
Nor does that poll you quoted. It isn't asking about COVID19 policy.
Let's see how long they stick with this policy once France, Greece, Italy and Spain open up for tourism and the masses start itching to get on their summer hols - i.e. in about a month.
There will be people who don't want to go to work, don't want to send their kids to school but are willing to fly abroad on holiday.
By the end of the year they will then be complaining that they're unemployed and have no money.
One friend of my wife is an ultra-lock-downer, who holds parties at her house. Because she is bored. She is upset that we don't go round. Presumably to hear her rants about how selfish some people are.
Yes, there do seem to be some people who this is bringing out the worst of their hypocrisy.
At least the bloke on video at the seaside swigging beer with a dozen family members yesterday admitted it was a bit rum of him to be complaining about all the people breaking lockdown.
One of the reasons I find falling people into signing up for insanely un-progressive ideas, is this kind of for-thee-not-for-me hypocrisy.
Another acquaintance who is of the EmpireShouldPayReparations persuasion was very upset that in a former UK colony, he was not allowed to buy the beach in front of his holiday house. To stop the locals using it.
You seem to hang out almost exclusively with raving lefty hypocrites. It can't be good for you.
I enjoy collecting hypocrisy - collecting wine is more expensive, and hypocrisy has the merit of being infinitely renewable.
The moment someone starts banging on about how infinitely loving and fair they are, southing in my head goes "target acquired".
Part of it is my enjoyment of leading people down a path. Like the time I got some students to suggest that Seventh Day Adventists should be persecuted by the state....
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
The polling suggests the opposite, but hey, you're a Brexit supporter so everything you think must be what the public thinks.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though.
That chart also shows that in the time that Boris has been Prime Minister, the Government's net approval rating has increased by 60 points.
Pesky facts, eh?
And now it's coming down. What's your point?
That it's still significantly higher than it was in December when we inflicted Labour's worst defeat in 84 years. Don't get too cocky!
Winning a GE in December has no relevance to whether the public is with the Government now on their COVID-19 policy, as @Philip_Thompson asserted. It seems to me like you're trying to have a different argument to the one we are having.
We get it. You won a majority in December. Get over it.
Nor does that poll you quoted. It isn't asking about COVID19 policy.
It's more evidence than you have provided, which is merely: "I'm a Tory and therefore I know what the public wants".
I see PHE has told the Torygraph the Government is double counting nasal swab and saliva test carried out on the same individual at the same time as 2 tests. Torygraph says this amounts to tens of thousands of over reporting.
The lab needs to test both - so when calculating test capacity its 2. Seems obvious.
Of course comparison of the two methods is incredibly valuable data for developing future faster tests.
Only the most churlish would complain about this.
Schrodinger's Tests - two individual test types but only one individual being tested. Is it one test or two?
You know that that only thing that matters is whether an individual tests positive or negative, so counting the number of discrete operations to determine that fact is not really the issue.
To report operational tests rather than individuals tested is fine, so long as it is 100% clear that that is what is being reported.
So you don't think that comparing the accuracy of nasal vs throat samples is important.
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Not to the general public. The general public doesn't give two shits about nasal vs throat samples, they just want to know how many people have been tested and how many people tested positive.
I think we have seen as recently as December that there is a large gap between what anti-Boris, remainer lefties think the general public care about and reality.
I think that Johnson is despairing at the moment. He knows what to do but can`t do it because the public are simply not with him on this. He`s paralysed by populism ... funny if you you think about it. Trapped by the rescue packages and the public`s heightened fear - both of which are of his own government`s making. Can he ditch his populist tendency? Will he jack it in?
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
I think Johnson knows what to do and the public are with him ...
Not on getting the economy going again, they are not. They don`t appreciate the extent of the damage. I`m taken aback by three of my family members, Boris fans and strong brexiteers, who have become very critical of the government. Key issues I`m picking up from them are PPE and continued airplane activity. On the latter point, this is why the government have changed tack on arrivals. Not because it`s the right thing to do (I don`t think it is) but it`s populism again.
This government, which I have been supportive of generally, are the ultimate political weathervanes and this may prove its undoing. The public knows jack shit and is fickle.
I don't think Johnson is for getting the economy going again. I think Johnson is for getting the economy going in baby steps, like the public is.
Comments
(Merrill Lynch invested $50m in that. And lost it. It was blindingly obvious it was a fraud. But it gave me an excuse to go to Xi’an)
Missed that.
I presume PB Tories approve
"Why has Peterborough had six McDonald's locations reopen when the North has none?
Whereas those living in some larger cities are yet to get their hands on a Big Mac, people in Peterborough are spoiled for choice."
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-why-has-peterborough-had-six-mcdonalds-locations-reopen-when-the-north-has-none-11992489
Nor comparing how many subjects have 1 positive, one negative test.
Ok Professor..
Is pretty good with unusual surnames
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1263460601843548163?s=19
... yes I approve?
Thanks for the ad-hom attack BTW
Nah because its on the same person - just get the result for one and throw the other in the bin..."
Either way, this entire conversation is pointless and is of no consequence.
Show your evidence of "misleading"..
I`d say he needs to grow some balls but there`s clear evidence that he has a couple of good ones already.
Show your evidence of "misleading".
This is Déjà vu. Clearly the Telegraph listened to 'More or Less' as well as me.
The issue is the Govt manipulating the figures.
Saying the data is all published is not correct as I pointed out yesterday. Not only do they not publish all the relevant data they have also admitted they don't even collect it all!
To the person on the Clapham Omnibus saying you have carried out x tests (even if you do say separately the number of individuals tested is different) is misleading if after you exclude double tests, non diagnostic tests and posted tests (for which they do not collect data on returns) the number is only 30% of the headline total given.
Most people will assume that a 2nd test is actually meaningful. However it isn't. It includes, tests dropped on the floor, tests where the person vomited over the test and tests that have 2 components. I assume for care home patients a lot will get wasted. These are all counted.
Initially the Govt couldn't even confirm they weren't counting tests going out and coming back twice. If they hadn't tried to massage the figures in the first place this wouldn't have arisen as an issue. Just count them on the way back as they should be doing. They have now sorted that (they claim), but it doesn't generate confidence.
Words matter. If people don't understand what they mean that's not misleading. The data is there crystal clear with no attempts to mislead whatsoever.
If the comparative testing leads to new tests or treatments then definitely yes.
"But this 20k track and trace hires goal set and achieved - some of them have other jobs like being a nurse - why did Boris deceive us all ?"
Far more concerning is the turnaround time. Reports are common of tests taking 5 days and when people may only be spreading the virus for 7 days, that is close to pointless.
And at yesterdays presser the head of testing didnt want to get tied in to a 24 hr goal for testing, which suggests to me are not close to that, nor expect to be so.
Without it, test, track and trace is going to be pretty ineffective.
My home test was picked up half an hour ago by a courier.
You must be vying for the top spot of Twitter poster with Scott. I must admit I find them very informative from both of you.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52762153
The 20 minute on-site test being trialled. Dependent on how easy and straightforward it is, it could (if made cheap, easy, and ubiquitous) open up so many prospects. Such as allowing any visitors who take the test and pass (when your household also take the test and pass) - which opens up all sorts of opportunities for family and friends visiting. Or flights where it is taken as part of onboarding. Or sports when all attending (playing or spectating) take the test and pass before being allowed within social distancing parameters. Or restaurants and pubs.
Of course, most of these need for it to be cheap, able to be carried out with minimal supervision (eg like a litmus paper test) and so forth, but it's certainly going in the right direction.
Plus we have that the Oxford vaccine has just opened out to children and the elderly, which is also encouraging:
http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-05-22-oxford-covid-19-vaccine-begin-phase-iiiii-human-trials
Much positive news at the moment.
Don't let facts get in the way of a good argument though.
In my lessons today I have sent them videos of me going though the notes, set questions online which are marked electronically and the results sent to me in real time, and had text conversations with those that wanted help.
This government, which I have been supportive of generally, are the ultimate political weathervanes and this may prove its undoing. The public knows jack shit and is fickle.
The moment someone starts banging on about how infinitely loving and fair they are, southing in my head goes "target acquired".
Part of it is my enjoyment of leading people down a path. Like the time I got some students to suggest that Seventh Day Adventists should be persecuted by the state....
Democracy is like the NHS - impossible to criticise.
Pesky facts, eh?
https://twitter.com/brokenbottleboy/status/1263445628400685056?s=20
How should a government deal with this situation?
What will this government attempt to do?
We get it. You won a majority in December. Get over it.
b) I am not the one (other than to you) being rude to everyone
c) Your behaviour several weeks ago re dementia says everything anyone needs to know about you
d) I would in fact consider myself to be kind. You clearly from your posts and previous behaviour are clearly not.
Is this it -
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/22/government-forced-to-borrow-62bn-as-high-street-feels--coronavirus-strain-of-crisis ??
b) Calling out vomit inducing arrogance could be deemed rude - you got me.
c) I didn't mention dementia.
d) Man up.
Looks like Danish football has started again.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/football/friendly-matches/esbjerg-v-fredericia-betting-29812720
British Growers Association reported yesterday that they are OK for now.
(Yes they think it was Charlie Boy who did it.)