When will this shit end?

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

5 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

As I said, very convenient that they can now say the R isn't the most important figure and not be wrong. 

 

Again tell people that live in that area that the R going up isn't an issue for them, it clearly is an issue for people in that area. People that now are feeling (from comments online) that as the government were touting the R as the most important figure they should now be acting on measures in those areas. The government won't because they are desperate for things to get back to normal, and for bosses to get paid again. That's the reason they have move the goalposts yet again.

 

After all this, after all the mistakes people are still defending them. 357 people died in the last 24 hours yet we still get people defending the party line. 

Well 357 people have died at some point in the U.K. over the past three months, none of those people actually died in the past 24 hours.

But I’m not really defending them, just acknowledging the difference between the regional and national R number. 

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Well 357 people have died at some point in the U.K. over the past three months, none of those people actually died in the past 24 hours.

But I’m not really defending them, just acknowledging the difference between the regional and national R number. 

And presumably you acknowledge the switching of the data presentation ? 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

3 minutes ago, crazyfool1 said:

And presumably you acknowledge the switching of the data presentation ? 

I didn’t watch the briefing and rarely do so don’t know what you’re referring to. My comments are based on the information I’ve read about the ONS data released today, and how the regional R numbers have been worked out. 

[funkychick2007]

1 hour ago, crazyfool1 said:

Lockdown in Weston ? what utter bollocks !! they closed the hospital thats it !!!

Weston is definately not On lockdown! Either tht or Ive just broken the law!! 

[Crazyfool01]

2 minutes ago, funkychick2007 said:

Weston is definately not On lockdown! Either tht or Ive just broken the law!! 

👮‍♀️  🚔 🚨 .... it’s not I know  but Matt Hancock didn’t appear to 

[Ozanne]

10 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Well 357 people have died at some point in the U.K. over the past three months, none of those people actually died in the past 24 hours.

But I’m not really defending them, just acknowledging the difference between the regional and national R number. 

Every-time someone mentions a stat in relation to the coronavirus in the U.K. more often than not you’ll respond to add some caveat to it. You seem to want to defend the government whenever someone offers evidence to their appalling handling of this crises. You are defending the indefensible.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

7 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Every-time someone mentions a stat in relation to the coronavirus in the U.K. more often than not you’ll respond to add some caveat to it. You seem to want to defend the government whenever someone offers evidence to their appalling handling of this crises. You are defending the indefensible.

Generally because the ‘caveat’ is normally a significant piece of information. From this article:

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-06-05/death-toll-coronavirus-uk-friday-5-june-covid-19/

NHS England announced 123 new deaths of people who tested positive for Covid-19, bringing the total number of confirmed reported deaths in hospitals in England to 27,282. Of the 123 new deaths announced on Friday 19 occurred on June 4, 50 on June 3, 23 June 2 while seven people who had tested positive for Covid-19 died on June 1.The figures also show 19 of the new deaths took place in May, four occurred in April, and the remaining one death took place on March 25.

 

[Chapple12345]

1 hour ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

A lot higher than yesterday. Seems very up and down at the moment.

I saw some of yesterday's reported deaths were from over 50 seperate days and some went as far back as pre-lockdown, they seem to be doing a lot of backlogging at the moment too. Could it be possible there are fewer* deaths at the moment so they're able to report more from further back that may have not been originally counted 

*still far too high as has been said

[Zoo Music Girl]

30 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

Once again they're doing the old bait and switch. They've gone from insisting the R rating is the thing that matters, then when that went bad, to 'other measures live the 5 levels, then when that stayed bad they went back to R rating being the be all and end all, and now that's bad, they're saying it's not important anymore. An absolute joke.

This. It's all part of the general mishandling of the whole thing. All over the bloody show.

[Ozanne]

15 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

Generally because the ‘caveat’ is normally a significant piece of information. From this article:

https://www.itv.com/news/2020-06-05/death-toll-coronavirus-uk-friday-5-june-covid-19/

NHS England announced 123 new deaths of people who tested positive for Covid-19, bringing the total number of confirmed reported deaths in hospitals in England to 27,282. Of the 123 new deaths announced on Friday 19 occurred on June 4, 50 on June 3, 23 June 2 while seven people who had tested positive for Covid-19 died on June 1.The figures also show 19 of the new deaths took place in May, four occurred in April, and the remaining one death took place on March 25.

 

But then in a couple of weeks they may have been from yesterday. This excuse has been used for weeks. Every day for months the figures have been from ‘old’ deaths, so the comparison has been consistent through out. Are deaths ‘announced’ today higher than they should be in relation to the governments actions of late? Absolutely.

 

I'm waiting for you to now say we shouldn't pay attention to the daily death figures.

[mike86]

1 hour ago, DareToDibble said:

My friend has just sent me this video. I am convinced Hancock isn’t human.

They get to prepare for these questions. This is him prepared. He is in charge of peoples lives. 

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

But then in a couple of weeks they may have been from yesterday. This excuse has been used for weeks. Every day for months the figures have been from ‘old’ deaths, so the comparison has been consistent through out. Are deaths ‘announced’ today higher than they should be in relation to the governments actions of late? Absolutely.

 

I'm waiting for you to now say we shouldn't pay attention to the daily death figures.

In a couple of weeks they’ll be correspondingly lower though just like they are now compared to two weeks ago. 

357 people did not die from corona yesterday. We know 0.1% of the population were infected last week, that’s 9500 a day which at a rough guess would then work out at 95 deaths a day at a 1% mortality rate, or 28 deaths a day at a more realistic 0.3%.

I’ve shown you factual data that shows some of those 357 deaths happened in March and April, there isn’t much more I can do than that.

We could always adopt the Spanish method and just not report them at all and say we have none, which would be as accurate as 357.

[mike86]

6 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

In a couple of weeks they’ll be correspondingly lower though just like they are now compared to two weeks ago. 

357 people did not die from corona yesterday. We know 0.1% of the population were infected last week, that’s 9500 a day which at a rough guess would then work out at 95 deaths a day at a 1% mortality rate, or 28 deaths a day at a more realistic 0.3%.

I’ve shown you factual data that shows some of those 357 deaths happened in March and April, there isn’t much more I can do than that.

We could always adopt the Spanish method and just not report them at all and say we have none, which would be as accurate as 357.

I'm sure this has already been posted, but here are the actual daily figures. 

[Ozanne]

2 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

In a couple of weeks they’ll be correspondingly lower though just like they are now compared to two weeks ago. 

357 people did not die from corona yesterday. We know 0.1% of the population were infected last week, that’s 9500 a day which at a rough guess would then work out at 95 deaths a day at a 1% mortality rate, or 28 deaths a day at a more realistic 0.3%.

I’ve shown you factual data that shows some of those 357 deaths happened in March and April, there isn’t much more I can do than that.

We could always adopt the Spanish method and just not report them at all and say we have none, which would be as accurate as 357.

All you've proven is that we won't know how many have died from CV yesterday for a little while, I sincerely hope the trends do continue down although the 7 day rolling average of reported deaths is plateauing slightly. Those stats are reported that way by the government produce themselves every day.

 

I've also shown you over comparisons where the UK is categorically the worst country in Europe but you still tried to claim that those stats weren't relevant. Anything that shows how bad things are in this country and therefore how bad this government has been you come on here to defend or just claim it's not relevant. The baffling thing is you don't even watch the briefings yet come on to defend things that are said in the briefings that you don't even watch.

 

Reporting no deaths is the same as reporting the 357 of today? Right ok then.

[Deaf Nobby Burton]

6 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

All you've proven is that we won't know how many have died from CV yesterday for a little while, I sincerely hope the trends do continue down although the 7 day rolling average of reported deaths is plateauing slightly. Those stats are reported that way by the government produce themselves every day.

 

I've also shown you over comparisons where the UK is categorically the worst country in Europe but you still tried to claim that those stats weren't relevant. Anything that shows how bad things are in this country and therefore how bad this government has been you come on here to defend or just claim it's not relevant. The baffling thing is you don't even watch the briefings yet come on to defend things that are said in the briefings that you don't even watch.

 

Reporting no deaths is the same as reporting the 357 of today? Right ok then.

I have and would only ever dispute data that is factually inaccurate.

Based on your preferred method of excess deaths, the U.K. is actually second to Spain when population adjusted but that is neither here nor there.

Reporting 0 deaths or 357 deaths for the previous day was is exactly the same if neither figure was actually accurate. 

[dizzymoo]

13 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

But then in a couple of weeks they may have been from yesterday. This excuse has been used for weeks. Every day for months the figures have been from ‘old’ deaths, so the comparison has been consistent through out. Are deaths ‘announced’ today higher than they should be in relation to the governments actions of late? Absolutely.

 

I'm waiting for you to now say we shouldn't pay attention to the daily death figures.

It's worth listening to the series 'More or Less' on Radio 4. This week's episode https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p08fvs16  explains how death statistics are being presented and stresses the ONS is the most reliable source. More or Less sheds light on the way numbers are used to justify political positions across the spectrum.  They have been particulary diligent in demolishing the claims to be testing 100k people a day

[Ozanne]

12 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I have and would only ever dispute data that is factually inaccurate.

Based on your preferred method of excess deaths, the U.K. is actually second to Spain when population adjusted but that is neither here nor there.

Reporting 0 deaths or 357 deaths for the previous day was is exactly the same if neither figure was actually accurate. 

I've given several different methods of presenting the deaths, all to combat you claiming none of them are relevant. Figures put together by the top academics in this country, but you claim to know better than them. In those 3 different graphs I posted the other day it showed the UK as worst hit in Europe which given we had more time to prepare is indefensible. But there you are again desperate to show the UK isn't as bad.

 

It isn't my preferred method, the excess deaths, that was the way to measure them as stated by the Chief Medical Officer, we can go back to total deaths if you like even though we are 2 weeks behind. Or was it 3 or even 4 weeks behind, I'm not sure you kept saying differently the other day.

Edited June 5, 2020 by Ozanne

[Stave_1974]

22 minutes ago, Deaf Nobby Burton said:

I have and would only ever dispute data that is factually inaccurate.

Based on your preferred method of excess deaths, the U.K. is actually second to Spain when population adjusted but that is neither here nor there.

Reporting 0 deaths or 357 deaths for the previous day was is exactly the same if neither figure was actually accurate. 

 

14 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I've given several different methods of presenting the deaths, all to combat you claiming none of them are relevant. Figures put together by the top academics in this country, but you claim to know better than them. In those 3 different graphs I posted the other day it showed the UK as worst hit in Europe which given we had more time to prepare is indefensible. But there you are again desperate to show the UK isn't as bad.

 

It isn't my preferred method, the excess deaths, that was the way to measure them as stated by the Chief Medical Officer, we can go back to total deaths if you like even though we are 2 weeks behind. Or was it 3 or even 4 weeks behind, I'm not sure you kept saying differently the other day.

This is like watching a good tennis match....😁

Shall we get the popcorn?

Pimms and Strawberries optional 😋

[steviewevie]

Trump is such a fuckin moron.

[Toilet Duck]

Lads, ye have another letter/number to be arguing about as well...K! (Which has a big impact on R)...appears especially relevant for this virus and how we handle it.

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Lads, ye have another letter/number to be arguing about as well...K! (Which has a big impact on R)...appears especially relevant for this virus and how we handle it.

lots of K in Manchester.

[Zoo Music Girl]

6 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Lads, ye have another letter/number to be arguing about as well...K! (Which has a big impact on R)...appears especially relevant for this virus and how we handle it.

Go on then... what's K?

[Ozanne]

6 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

Lads, ye have another letter/number to be arguing about as well...K! (Which has a big impact on R)...appears especially relevant for this virus and how we handle it.

Just read a bit about it, seems pretty interesting especially we relax certain measures.

 

@Zoo Music Girl - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/01/k-number-what-is-coronavirus-metric-crucial-lockdown-eases

Edited June 5, 2020 by Ozanne

[Zoo Music Girl]

This might be getting a bit techy for me! But will give a read, thanks.

[Toilet Duck]

6 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Go on then... what's K?

Basically it’s the amount of variation in R (kind of!)...diseases with a high K number have lots of people who contribute to its spread, diseases with a low one have super-spreaders...COVID has a low K number meaning that not everyone is driving the R number. Control super spreading events and you can control R!