Travelling to the UK during this pandemic.

[hullexile]

Do you consider yourself extreme Hull?

So no, your assertion is off the mark. I take views that display an overtly pessimistic view off the data and show them why that degree of pessimism is unjustified.

Case in point, your accusation in this thread that I used: "highly selective statistics such as choosing 23 days that just happen to be the lowest for many months and ignoring the 41,000 other deaths"

That you sought to drag the argument back to 41,000 deaths is compelling evidence (in the context of the discussion at the time) that you're unwilling to update your view of covid in light of it's health impact on the population as a whole today.

In the workforce this is described as an inability to adapt to changing conditions.

In the wider population, fear of the unknown is a lot more of a thing than 'joy at the unknown'
In the UK data, deaths are very accurate now and yet infections are massively underestimated - so it's obvious that the central narrative will misrepresent the reality. Anyone who refuse's to see that will be inclined to twist the debate into intangible concepts rather than focus on the more nebulous data that gives a truer picture.

41,000 deaths per 440K cases is a big problem. 41,000 deaths out of 5 million, whilst still a big problem, is a lot less significant one.

In 9 months in the UK, a population of 5m people would deliver 46,000 deaths normally. If the people dying of covid are the same ones as those who would be dying of other causes (as is the case with the vast majority), then the net change in our society is much much less dramatic than deaths vs infections suggests.

Excess deaths thus gives a better gauge, but 'the media' (people generally) seem to have largely ceased referencing excess deaths now that the picture they paint is a lot less headline grabbing - more evidence of pessimism.

Attachment 82570
Attachment 82568

You do talk rubbish. My bringing you back to the reality of 42000 deaths rather than the 239 you focused on is trying to get you to consider the big picture (as it is called in business, cut out the patronising please). If you focus entirely on "today" you will get a warped view.

If you left it at statistics you might be OK but you go from there to subjective conclusions based on your need to defend earlier positions.

P.S. twice you said the population of the UK is 5 million?

[Sage]

You do talk rubbish. My bringing you back to the reality of 42000 deaths rather than the 239 you focused on is trying to get you to consider the big picture (as it is called in business, cut out the patronising please). If you focus entirely on "today" you will get a warped view.

If you left it at statistics you might be OK but you go from there to subjective conclusions based on your need to defend earlier positions.

P.S. twice you said the population of the UK is 5 million?

Your big picture its in the past, my big picture is in the present. My whole argument in this thread is a comparison between April and the present, your counter argument has been "but you're not considering the past!" eh? That makes no sense at all, it's like you're simply not looking at the data or something?

So I suggest you look at the graphs and react to those, things have changed since April.

If you think I might have written that the population of the UK is 5 million, you're simply spending too much time on your opinions and not enough time following the arguments via the data.

439k= total UK recorded infections.
5.2m = A conservative estimate (by seropositivity test in England, ref the economist and my many many comments on the disparity between the two) of the number of actual infections the UK has had......

[hullexile]

Your big picture its in the past, my big picture is in the present. My whole argument in this thread is a comparison between April and the present, your counter argument has been "but you're not considering the past!" eh? That makes no sense at all, it's like you're simply not looking at the data or something?

So I suggest you look at the graphs and react to those, things have changed since April.

If you think I might have written that the population of the UK is 5 million, you're simply spending too much time on your opinions and not enough time following the arguments via the data.

439k= total UK recorded infections.
5.2m = A conservative estimate (by seropositivity test in England, ref the economist and my many many comments on the disparity between the two) of the number of actual infections the UK has had......

Your 5 million was not clear which is why I put it as PostScript and with a question mark. You really do have a high opinion of yourself.

I will react to what I want to react to, which is your desperate attempt to defend your "it's all an overreaction" long held view. I do not take my opinions from unqualified amateurs on the internet but listen to experts.

[hannah01]

Follow the data in this thread it's spelled out in plain terms.

I need a "solid" proof, not some random data spelled out in plain terms.


Also, if I may draw your attention here and there (scroll down) :



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnb...-pandemic.html


https://newatlas.com/health-wellbein...-flu-pandemic/




There are many more but the two should suffice.

[TheBrit]

Pretty futile attempts to make this a political issue for the UK.

I'm no Tory but have lived through countless Labour governments that have screwed up the UK. The only exception I can think of was the first few New Labour years.
I'm seeing nothing constructive from Labour during Covid.

Politics did NOT get the UK into the COVID mess they are now in. The flip flopping hasn't helped but the sheer selfishness of people is the MAJOR factor.

In the early days on here I was part of a large anti mask brigade and we saw similar behaviour in public.Reasoned debate has changed us original doubters. In the UK the more rules put in, masks or otherwise, the more polarised the antis are becoming

Even your beloved BoJo doesn't bother to understand the rules he is subjecting millions of people to suffer under.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...t-news-latest/

Boris Johnson has apologised for having "misspoke" after he confused his own lockdown rules.

The Prime Minister was asked to clarify what the rule was for people in the North East of England, where from tomorrow two households are legally banned from mixing indoors, after a junior minister admitted this morning she did not know whether that applied to outdoor environments.

But Mr Johnson got into a muddle, mixing up the household ban with the rule of six.

"In the North East and other areas where extra-tight measures have been brought in, you should follow the guidance of local authorities but it is six in a home, six in hospitality but as I understand it, not six outside," he said.

Angela Rayner, deputy Labour leader, said: "For the Prime Minister to not understand his own rules is grossly incompetent.

"These new restrictions are due to come into force across huge parts of the country tonight. The government needs to get a grip."

[HK_Katherine]

I need a "solid" proof, not some random data spelled out in plain terms.


Also, if I may draw your attention here and there (scroll down) :



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnb...-pandemic.html


https://newatlas.com/health-wellbein...-flu-pandemic/




There are many more but the two should suffice.

That second article is only looking at the peak months in March and April. So by definition it totally fails to capture the point being made by Sage that things are different at the moment. And only New York, which was particularly badly hit, so who knows what the reality it. Pretty poor science.

[ByeByeEngland]

Even your beloved BoJo doesn't bother to understand the rules he is subjecting millions of people to suffer under.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...t-news-latest/

He’s not my beloved Bojo (he’s a very naughty boy) but eminently more attractive than any current UK alternative apart from, ironically, the SNP.

by the way is this another one if you’re ‘I’m not politicising’ posts? We’ve had the Brexit yawn fest where people still don’t want to recognise democracy. Now we’ve got the US election ultra yawn fest where one decrepit old man’s best policy against another decrepit old man is to declare the election void due to postal anomaly

[hannah01]

Pretty poor science.

Okay, then let us see what you've "found out" -- the base to support what you've found out backed by evidence we all can mutually agree on.


Oh, wait. You have your own private hypothesis that do not run congruent to actual science but just your personal sentiments and values.. So, I spare you from that. You go, live in your world, I - in mine.

[Sage]

I need a "solid" proof, not some random data spelled out in plain terms.


Also, if I may draw your attention here and there (scroll down) :

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnb...-pandemic.html
https://newatlas.com/health-wellbein...-flu-pandemic/

There are many more but the two should suffice.

You have no interest in actual proof. You accept your own interpretation as gospel and yet demand 'solid proof' (that presumably meets the international 'hannah standard') , to review your faith that survivability of covid hasn't improved.

As for the Spanish Flu garbage - Nobody gives a shit about 'Spanish Flu' all they care about is 50m deaths or 100m deaths and their ilk. Covid will achieve but a fraction of that (and from people who are significantly older than avg life expectancy in 1916 to boot). Even with a global population approaching 4 x what it was in 1918, we still only have 1m deaths out of a global total of 107m who die ever year.

[hannah01]

You have no interest in actual proof. You accept your own interpretation as gospel and yet demand 'solid proof' (that presumably meets the international 'hannah standard') , to review your faith that survivability of covid hasn't improved.

As for the Spanish Flu garbage - Nobody gives a shit about 'Spanish Flu' all they care about is 50m deaths or 100m deaths and their ilk. Covid will achieve but a fraction of that (and from people who are significantly older than avg life expectancy in 1916 to boot). Even with a global population approaching 4 x what it was in 1918, we still only have 1m deaths out of a global total of 107m who die ever year.

You, sir, are accusing me of what you are committing. Your statement itself is a perfect illustration of arguing back solely on the basis of your own "interpretation".


Need I say more?


In the end, none of us here is qualified to assert their " claims" of "Covid is this , Covid is that" (whether it's verified by scientists/related personnel in the field, or our own - in your own words - interpretation).


So, I'm repeating what I did to Madam Katherine -- you go, live in your own world, I - in my own, shall we?