Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
28 Mar 20
13:33
Joined:
Date Joined:
26 Jan 05
(which drove the lockdown policies that put you under house arrest and destroyed your livelihood) now says under 20,000 will die and peak in two weeks.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 183
|
By:
Take a bow Neil Ferguson
|
|
By:
yes you f-cking idiot - the death toll/sickness toll is less because of the lockdown - the 500k was based on letting the disease run rampant.
|
|
By:
This Ferguson is refusing to openly share his modelling technique with other academics
he created it 13 years ago |
|
By:
think you've missed out the bits about social distancing,lockdowns etc, 500,000 was a figure if we just let it run amok
but not a bad try to misrepresent someones position |
|
By:
if you see someone with grass on their shoes and paint on their backside say hello terry how,s it going,
 |
|
By:
AS long as it doesn't affect you Ist time that's alright then
 |
|
By:
don't have a pop at me because you've made a kooont of youself TM
|
|
By:
"So why the change of heart from Ferguson"?
Ferguson whose "terrifying" reseach from just 10 days ago predicted 2.2 millions death in the U.S and that the U.K would need to be under quarantine for 18 months or more now says that c/v will not overwhelm the U.K"s ICU beds and over half of those it will kill would have died by the end of the year anyway because they were so old and sick". |
|
By:
So this man"s insane "predictions" led to lockdown which he now totally backtracks from.
Another bod from Imperial College that doesn't know his arse from his elbow. |
|
By:
Terry, before you go off on one of your rants, take some time to understand the report.
 |
|
By:
You cannot Lock people down for ever , The LOCKDOWN is a timebuyer the Virus will still be here when we come out if 3 or 6 weeks as for the
Chinese figures they are the Biggest load of shyte ever produced ... |
|
By:
I am assuming that you have the capacity to read and understand.
 |
|
By:
 |
|
By:
Ok, let's start with the graph.
The red line (a constant) represents the surge critical care bed capacity available within the NHS. The other five lines show the likely demand that would be placed on critical care bed capacity as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak given a range of scenarios. The black line is if no measures are taken to manage the outbreak and is the scary one that prompted action. The other lines are "what if" estimates assuming the implementation of defined measures. Moving on to the table of data. You will see on the left, it has a column for R0. From Wikipedia In epidemiology, the basic reproduction number (sometimes called basic reproductive ratio, or incorrectly basic reproductive rate, and denoted R0, pronounced R nought or R zero) of an infection can be thought of as the expected number of cases directly generated by one case in a population where all individuals are susceptible to infection. Various assumptions are then made for the value of R0, and they are used to provide numbers of deaths, peak demand for ICU beds, and with the length of time the proposed measures are in place dependant on the measures that have been implemented. If we take the top left section, concentrating on deaths only, and at trigger value 400, the model generates the following number of deaths: No measures implemented : 410,000 Implement care isolation + household quarantine + social distancing : 44,000 deaths Implement closure of schools & universities + case isolation + social distancing : 30,000 deaths Implement closure of schools & universities + case isolation + household quarantine + social distancing : 26,000 deaths Faced with this data, it is little wonder that Johnson rapidly changed tack. What would be helpful to have seen is the figures produced by the same model prior to it being updated with data from Italy. If you then look at the table describing the various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI's) or measures, you will see a number of assumptions that have been built in. For example, with case isolation, there is an assumption that 70% of households comply with the policy. |
|
By:
Now will this get mention on MSM and lockdown stopped because of Professors Pr1cks original nutty "predictions"? Not a chance.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
The British Prime Minister has since ordered a nationwide lockdown of at least three weeks.
I am glad that extreme social distancing has been enforced. I do not think that either the young or the old would have taken the pandemic seriously until they saw schools and offices close. But once these measures have proven their effect, and the virus is demonstrably suppressed, public health authorities could consider ratcheting restrictions down in a way that respects demographic vulnerability. Perhaps two weeks from now, healthy people under 40 could return to work provided that they have no vulnerable people in their household. Perhaps a week after that, healthy people aged 40-50 could join them, and nurseries could reopen. I have discussed this strategy here as a matter of consideration for ongoing public health conversations. I absolutely do not raise it for personal decision-making. Whether or not you are convinced of this reasoning, you do not have license to disobey public health pronouncements in your jurisdiction. But maybe, just maybe, once all the data is in and things are under control, this could be our collective way out of here. Matt Strauss is the former medical director of the critical care unit at Guelph General Hospital, Canada. He is now an assistant professor of medicine at Queen’s University. A bit of balance from another subject matter expert. |
|
By:
Anyway Angoose its good news as its going to be nowhere as bad as they thought
 |
|
By:
You"ll be delighted to know
. |
|
By:
O fair enough Ist time
 |
|
By:
Angoose • March 28, 2020 1:11 PM GMT
Terry, before you go off on one of your rants, take some time to understand the report. Angoose • March 28, 2020 1:13 PM GMT I am assuming that you have the capacity to read and understand. terry mccann • March 28, 2020 1:18 PM GMT Now will this get mention on MSM and lockdown stopped because of Professors Pr1cks original nutty "predictions"? Not a chance. So that would be a no - he's is the stupidest person who has ever learned to walk. |
|
By:
Where are you getting your info from which you have very kindly given us Angoose?
|
|
By:
The report was made publicly available.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf |
|
By:
Would the Government have got the support of the people to lock us down if they told us there will be 20,000 deaths but 10,000 of those are very old and sick so its really 10,000. "We will take away your freedom and millions of you will suffer financially"Nobody would go with it as it simply wouldn't be worth it,its never been before,Hong Kong in "68 was much worse than this according to the figures but we didn't overreact and cripple the economy.
|
|
By:
FFS NO ones this foooking thick
its only down to 20,000 because of the measures taken,they ran a million miles from herd immunity when confronted with the figures, or did you want them to ignore the experts and hope they were wrong, risking half a million lives |
|
By:
say this very,very slowly for the absolute stone bonking thickos
theres is no carry on regardless plan that results in 20,000 deaths or less |
|
By:
so is it going to be 20,000 as long as we all stay in lockdown for the rest of our lives ?
|
|
By:
whats the exit plan from Lockdown ?? you seem to have all the answers
|
|
By:
20,000 deaths but 10,000 of those are very old and sick so its really 10,000.
I think your numbers are way off the mark Terry, more like 20,000 deaths but 19,000 of those are very old and sick so it's really 1,000. |
|
By:
Belarus has carried on regardless not a single death. It has a population of 9m.
|
|
By:
‘No action’ was never on the cards. Just a question of how much action.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Personally, up front, I'm not a conspiracy nut or detractorty
BUT! If you step back, deaths are deaths. So say a cancer patient who should have lived dies due ot a ward shut due to hysteria and nobody would died. The resource rearrangement going on here is incredible! Let's say we have a 0.6% in GDP into health care that now won't happen ... etc. Most people unfortunately wont even understand these things never mind consider them unprovoked. HAVE YOU? Serioulsy. Has anyone reading this very sentence considered that a 1% reduction in a goverment budget might mean dsay 10 kids might die who would've got cancer treatment? Thought not. Life is a hugely complex thing. Just look at the mongs ranting about Richard Branson to see how little is understood.... |
|
By:
Sh1t I just realised I responded to a TM thread. Take my response as of itself, nothing to do with the ill OP...
|
|
By:
Its the half-wits who whinge that the government is putting the health of the economy before the health of the people....as if the two aren't massively entwined.
|
|
By:
I would've done better I have proof read the above before posting and not come across like a mentalist, I know what I meant but it reads like a turd But there you go :) First day on the internet, I'm allowed! :)
|
|
By:
Will global spending on healthcare contract if the world economy crashes?
If so, thousands will die. |
|
By:
Not checking has checked f uck all as per-yawn
|
