Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, crazyfool1 said:

Totally agree ... large sports stadiums are being used all over despite the increasing infection numbers .... our Government doesnt want to play ball unfortunately 

Roofe! Now that’s what I call a socially distanced goal! Eat your heart out Beckham. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 41k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • steviewevie

    4825

  • Ozanne

    3504

  • crazyfool1

    3450

  • zahidf

    2247

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think on a music festival message board it’s a legitimate question to ask. It doesn’t suggest the OP doesn’t give a shit about anything else. Of course there are much bigger things to be worrie

I can’t get the following thought out of my head and it’s making the old bottom lip wobble: Wednesday evening at the 2021 festival, the sun has been out all day but temperature not stifling, perf

Howdy folks...sorry I'm late to the party! Was in a meeting and could see notifications coming up! So, looks very promising indeed. The vaccinated group not only didn't develop severe disease, bu

Posted Images

11 minutes ago, Punksnotdead said:

From my experience (and I do love a bet!), that isn't how most people approach betting. Usually people bet on either what they think will happen or on what they want to happen. Not usually the other way round!

I wish I could share your optimism, but I am bracing myself for a Trump shock win!

Haha, yes really I know I'm clutching at straws (and rare is the time I've been considered an optimistic person!) 

I'm fully having to prepare myself mentally for a Trump win. It would be a lovely surprise if Biden comes out the victor. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just had my first gig rescheduled to 2022! It had already been rescheduled once to April 2021, now moved to March 2022.

To be fair, it's The Chats who are Australian and can fully understand them not wanting to do a European tour next year. 

Edited by Zoo Music Girl
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

I've just had my first gig rescheduled to 2022! It had already been rescheduled once to April 2021, now moved to March 2022.

To be fair, it's The Chats who are Australian and can fully understand them not wanting to do a European tour next year. 

I've seen them popping up on one of the Brighton venue's feeds.  What are they like, worth checking out?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is woeful

Let’s have a focus group with a mix of voters but only show coverage of people who talk positively about trump.

If anyone says anything about Biden, edit it out - and make the host of the debate grill you if you say ANYTHING positive about Biden. If someone says something about Trump that’s positive and facts unchecked, no challenge whatsoever! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

I've just had my first gig rescheduled to 2022! It had already been rescheduled once to April 2021, now moved to March 2022.

To be fair, it's The Chats who are Australian and can fully understand them not wanting to do a European tour next year. 

I think Australia have said they wont reopen borders until end of 2021

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ozanne said:

Don’t get me wrong I’m worried Trump might win and there is a chance he can. However all data I’m seeing at the moment points to a Biden win, which gives me comfort. 

Yeah, if you look at a political twitter account called 'redistrict' which polls counties, Trump is well behind so far in counties he won last year

 

Hes only 6 up in KANSAS, which he won by 20 last time around. Hes definitely losing ground, and has limited time to catch it up again

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

My own instinct is that the result will be closer than the polls suggest, and even tho I lean towards a Biden win I'm still worried about Trump 'winning' - tho that might be by devious means. 

I believe that in some states the postal votes can't start being counted until after the polls close, and that there's essentially a time limit to how long they will count them for, much like what happened with Al Gore.

But do you think he will win california?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WestCountryGirl said:

I choose to believe that this is because people are covering their backs in a "well, at least if he wins I'll have made some money" type of way!

Odds are better on trump and people are shy about believing the polls after 2016. 

 

Jez and Labour got a lot more bets than the Tories in 2019. GOP got more bets than the Dems in 2018 midterms

 

politicalbetting has several articles on this. The guy who runs it is sticking with Biden winning and Biden winning Texas.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Odds are better on trump and people are shy about believing the polls after 2016. 

 

Jez and Labour got a lot more bets than the Tories in 2019. GOP got more bets than the Dems in 2018 midterms

 

politicalbetting has several articles on this. The guy who runs it is sticking with Biden winning and Biden winning Texas.

I have a ten pound bet with stuartbert two hats that Trump will win, so it's win-win for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

PISS OFF NERDS

 

 

A ban on public events is the single best way to reduce the spread of coronavirus, researchers have found, although a combination of measures is even better.

The study, published in The Lancet Infectious Diseases, involved analysing data relating to non-pharmaceutical interventions in 131 countries, together with changes in their R figure – the average number of people each infected person goes on to infect.

While experts have cautioned that it is unwise to focus on just one metric when it comes to looking at an epidemic, R is an important figure as it gives a sense of whether an epidemic is growing or shrinking.

The new study examined the impact of applying and then relaxing various different interventions, from closing schools to working from home, on the R figure up to 28 days after the rule change was made.

The results reveal that banning public events reduced the R figure by 24% by day 28, with the team suggesting that could be down to it preventing super-spreading events.

Prof Harish Nair, co-author of the study from the University of Edinburgh, said:

Although no single measure is sufficient, [a] ban on public events is perhaps the single intervention that has maximum impact on spread of SARS CoV-2.

However, measures such as telling people to stay at home or only gather in groups of less than 10 had little impact by day 28 – something the team suggests might be down, at least in part, to people not sticking to the rules, or such measures being imposed later.

When looking at which measures led to an uptick in R, the team found reopening schools and relaxing bans on gatherings of more than ten people had the biggest effect, increasing R by 24% and 25% respectively by day 28.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Toilet Duck said:

Hi Gizmo, I won't really comment on the motive (basically, the way I see it, case numbers reach a point where they make little difference, once it gets out of control, it doesn't really matter whether it's 10,000 per day or 20,000, the trend is more important than the exact number...when people are streaming through the doors of the hospital, filling up ICU and dying in large numbers, then continuing to maintain the whole thing is a hoax seems a bit mental to me...ask @Lycra if his missus thinks the patients on her ward are faking it (I'm not suggesting that this is what you personally are implying by the way!))...Positive cases make a difference when things are open, as those with a positive result can't work and need to self-isolate (so getting it right is very important), and once things are under control, they help to spot trends in transmission to predict where things might be going, but if you are using hospital admissions as your trigger for NPI decisions, then it reaches a point where exact case numbers become academic until they start to drop again and indicate that your interventions are working (and until we have another way of controlling things, the last remaining option is to shut stuff down). 

...but, you aren't entirely paranoid in questioning PCR as the most appropriate method for keeping track of things. It's super sensitive, and dead easy to design, but not only is it prone to false positives in terms of infectiousness (as we've discussed at length), but it's also prone to contamination. Without stringent protocols, cross contamination from other positive samples can occur. There are controls built in for the actual PCR reaction (there's always a sample that should be negative in the run, if it comes back positive, the entire run is chucked out and done again), but depending on how well run the testing facility is, it's theoretically possible to cross contaminate during the liquid handling part where the nucleic acids are extracted (in our facility this step is done by a robot). I've no idea whether this happens, and if it does, how widespread it is. So, most likely not some grand conspiracy to artificially inflate case numbers, more likely to be massive pressure to deliver test results quickly leading to mistakes. Like Jeremy Farrar, I'd have preferred to see expert local molecular diagnostic labs, with highly experienced med lab technicians utilised for this rather than setting up a whole new private testing regime.

I know I've been banging on about rapid antigen tests for a while now, but a big benefit of point-of-care testing (in addition to convenience) is that the possibility for cross contamination with other positive samples is reduced (you take your sample, pop it in the test, result comes back in 15 minutes or so...no massive liquid handling robots, no batch running of thousands of samples at the same time, or if lots of samples are being processed together, the tests aren't as sensitive as PCR so less prone to picking up something from another sample anyway). When these get approved for saliva, they will be even easier and will be able to be performed at home (so cross contamination will be even less of an issue, if it currently is, I honestly don't know, it's just a theoretical possibility). Our version of NICE here in Ireland released their report on the various rapid tests on Wednesday and recommended their roll out in Ireland (with PCR verification in some cases). Hopefully this will help us get a more accurate picture, on a more regular basis, of what the virus is doing in our communities and who is actually infectious.

Thanks for the detailed response, though I'm not sure if you think he faked it or it was a false positive! He says in the video he ordered 2 tests but doesn't explain why or what he did with the other one. I suspect he had a test and was positive and thought it was wrong either because he had no symptoms or it was a true error, he then made the video to demonstrate the "fact", so yes he faked it IMO, still it's very strange thing to do even for someone with too much time on their hands!

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Quark said:

I've seen them popping up on one of the Brighton venue's feeds.  What are they like, worth checking out?

To be honest I see them as kind of  a novelty band, but thought they'd be a good laugh. Kind of raucous fun punk. Check out Smoko.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, crazyfool1 said:

and improved medical care I would imagine ... 

yeah, that too...but seeing as many people die of it at least 4 weeks after infection...and in July and August there really wasn't much of it about compared to the spring, or now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If people really don't give a toss about catching CV and want to live their lives, I'd be happy for them to do so.

Condition is that they follow the same tracking and isolation protocols as the rest of us, and waive right to hospital treatment for themselves and their households in the event they catch it.

Face the day with courage in your heart, but don't grumble when you're hacking your last at home on your own.

EDIT: as pointed out by @Stu H this is something of a harsh take. Exaggerated to make the point that I don't believe people really think out the full consequences of their bravado. Clearly I don't want people to die.

Edited by Quark
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Quark said:

If people really don't give a toss about catching CV and want to live their lives, I'd be happy for them to do so.

Condition is that they follow the same tracking and isolation protocols as the rest of us, and waive right to hospital treatment for themselves and their households in the event they catch it.

Face the day with courage in your heart, but don't grumble when you're hacking your last at home on your own.

Trouble is with their I don't give a sod let's just crack on bullshit they end up spreading the virus and people who actually do give a sod are infected.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, steviewevie said:

Trouble is with their I don't give a sod let's just crack on bullshit they end up spreading the virus and people who actually do give a sod are infected.

Yup, hence the isolation condition.

This idea of "I'll take the risk" boils my piss so much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...