When will this shit end?

[Homer]

5 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

I think it could take a few days to get a result, but don't they count postal votes beforehand? Not sure though. Anyone remember last time?

Yeah, trump won straight away. I remember because I woke up at about 3am and decided to check my phone to see just how far ahead Hillary was... then ended up driving to work having not been back to sleep having had the shock of my life. 

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Homer said:

Yeah, trump won straight away. I remember because I woke up at about 3am and decided to check my phone to see just how far ahead Hillary was... then ended up driving to work having not been back to sleep having had the shock of my life. 

yeah, similar for me...same with brexit....

[squirrelarmy]

5 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Would be glorious. Can't wait to see his stupid face when he loses.

Don’t underestimate the power of stupid. We did and ended up with Brexit and Boris. 

[zahidf]

1 hour ago, Homer said:

Report here for @zahidf and @Zoo Music Girl re our intermittent chat re London comedy clubs that are opening.

I saw last night that Up The Creek in Greenwich is reopening at the end of the month (when the Greenwich Com Festival is on, wonder if there will be any crossover/guests?). Checked the (amazing) Sunday Special (which happens there on Sundays) website and they don't have any update yet.

This led me to have a quick look on Chortle and both Banana Cabaret in Balham and Tattershall Castle on the Thames are afloat again.

They all claim to have social distancing in place.

Unfortunately the latter two only really work if you have a table of four people minimum going.

Laugh out loud London are doing shows in Tottenham!

 

In terms of clubs I've been too, very impressed by alwaysbecomedy in kennington. Very spaced out and good ventilation with the windows open. No mask requirement but most the regulars were wearing one anyway

 

21 soho Square, a new venue, on the othrr hand had everyone way too close.... was fun but less safe!

[Zoo Music Girl]

11 minutes ago, squirrelarmy said:

Don’t underestimate the power of stupid. We did and ended up with Brexit and Boris. 

Oh yeah I'm aware it's not a done deal. 

I really can't remember last time for some reason. Remember the inauguration day more.

 

[fatyeti24]

10 hours ago, steviewevie said:

 

Hard to argue with the second part.  If only everyone drafted could have had "bone spurs".

[Ozanne]

11 hours ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

Fucking hell I don't think Trump will win, but I think it's going to be so anxiety inducing and hideous. Anyone else want to pull an all nighter and watch the whole thing play out? I a bit do.

Yes! I definitely want to do this, I love election nights. 

[Toilet Duck]

2 hours ago, MEGABOWL said:

It ties in with what the New York Times was saying earlier in the week. 
 

Interestingly my Friend who works in an NHS lab says they actually do record the amount of virus found. But nobody in the NHS or PHE has ever asked for more than a Yes/No response to ‘does this sample have some traces of the virus.’

This adds ammo to those saying we need to move to mass instant testing. Those tests may not be as accurate but should still find a lot of those who are actually really infectious while allowing relaxing of a lot of the current restrictions on our Lives.

There’s two things really going on here, one is the sensitivity of PCR and the other is whether the test as it currently is can accurately quantify viral load. The sensitivity is an issue and could indeed pick up dead viral fragments or contamination. As it happens, it’s something I raised with the head of our diagnostics solutions group here in Ireland, since discharges from hospital were taking weeks past symptoms fading, but required two consecutive negative tests. Patients were still on COVID wards, surrounded by other patients shedding tons of virus, so I asked him if anyone had been moved to a single room to convalesce once symptoms disappeared and if they ended up he discharged quicker. He agreed that it was a worry, but there wasn’t the bed space to organise in such a way. So, yes, the test is super sensitive and there can be lots of positive results that may not be infectious...the second part is where the criticism levelled is by those that don’t really understand how PCR works. It’s basically a qualitative assay (yes/no), at best, semi-quantitative (which is where these CT values come in). They do give an indication of how much viral RNA is there, but only relative to something else. Input has a huge impact on the CT value, so unless every sample is collected in exactly the same way, it’s impossible to compare them to each other. There have been many studies (long before coronavirus) to see if CT values can accurately measure viral load, and most have concluded you can’t (those that show a correlation were smaller studies with the same person/centre collecting all samples  the same way). 
 

so, basically, yes, the test is too sensitive for the next phase of our management of this, but no, testing centres haven’t been deliberately not telling people whether they are infectious or not. The new rapid tests are only starting to get approval, so, testing was using the best we had available, but we can now start to shift the question we are asking from “infected?” to “infectious?”...the caveat being we don’t have a clear idea of how much virus makes you infectious!

[SwedgeAntilles]

1 hour ago, steviewevie said:

Might be a few weeks before we know the result with the postal vote thing?

Yeah but as @Zoo Music Girl and @Ozanne have already said, the election night itself - even without a definitive result - is entertainment enough in itself.

[SwedgeAntilles]

1 hour ago, Homer said:

You got any recommendations for books on current/recent politics (please)?

I've actually been pretty lazy with reading recently, but the last I read and enjoyed was 'Dark Money,' by Jane Mayer. Was released in 2016 so still pretty relevant. 

Actually, Poverty Safari by Darren McGarvey/Loki was a great read too.

[Fuzzy Afro]

11 hours ago, steviewevie said:

Ok, only young people are getting it so it's all over.

 

 

75% of cases being in over 50's in the spring is surely a function of the selection bias in testing towards the seriously ill? I don't doubt the age demographic has moved somewhat towards younger people but I don't truly believe 75% of infections in the first wave were over 50, just that those people were more likely to be hospitalised and hence qualify for a test.

 

I've always been a fan of the 20-20-60 model to protect the economy, protect mental health and achieve herd immunity. Basically you have:

 

The 20%: "The shielded", basically the very old (I think you'd need to be 80% to be automatically in this group without underlying conditions) or those with underlying health conditions. 

 

The other 20%: "The shielders". Basically those who would act as the link-men in society between the shielded and everyone else. Testing capacity would be overwhelmingly aimed at this group, and they'd be encouraged to practice social distancing where possible.

 

The remaining 60%: Basically the aim would be to spread the virus through this 60% as quickly as possible. These would be younger people without underlying health conditions. They'd be encouraged to live their lives as normally as possible and not practice social distancing. Once this group have all been infected we would have a herd immunity.

[sime]

27 minutes ago, SwedgeAntilles said:

Yeah but as @Zoo Music Girl and @Ozanne have already said, the election night itself - even without a definitive result - is entertainment enough in itself.

If there is a clear winner with a big majority on the night, then (obvious thing to say I know!) a winner can be declared that night and that still could happen this year. Postal voting has already started in a couple of states and more will start soon. So there will be plenty of results in by Election day.

However, things may be tight, Trump will call himself the winner whatever happens and it's sure to be an interesting night. I'm definitely booking the next day off so that I can watch it live too 🙂

I blame The West Wing for my fascination with American politics. Love that show!

[steviewevie]

56 minutes ago, SwedgeAntilles said:

Yeah but as @Zoo Music Girl and @Ozanne have already said, the election night itself - even without a definitive result - is entertainment enough in itself.

yeah, sure...could be a horror show.

[steviewevie]

28 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

 

 

75% of cases being in over 50's in the spring is surely a function of the selection bias in testing towards the seriously ill? I don't doubt the age demographic has moved somewhat towards younger people but I don't truly believe 75% of infections in the first wave were over 50, just that those people were more likely to be hospitalised and hence qualify for a test.

 

I've always been a fan of the 20-20-60 model to protect the economy, protect mental health and achieve herd immunity. Basically you have:

 

The 20%: "The shielded", basically the very old (I think you'd need to be 80% to be automatically in this group without underlying conditions) or those with underlying health conditions. 

 

The other 20%: "The shielders". Basically those who would act as the link-men in society between the shielded and everyone else. Testing capacity would be overwhelmingly aimed at this group, and they'd be encouraged to practice social distancing where possible.

 

The remaining 60%: Basically the aim would be to spread the virus through this 60% as quickly as possible. These would be younger people without underlying health conditions. They'd be encouraged to live their lives as normally as possible and not practice social distancing. Once this group have all been infected we would have a herd immunity.

wasn't that the plan in early part of March and then the imperial college models showed loads of deaths, NHS overwhelmed etc, so they switched to the full lockdown thing. Might be different for next time....

[st dan]

I do wonder what the daily figures would have been if we’d had mass testing available in the Springtime - would imagine probably have been around 50k+ a day at the peak ... if not more. 

[Matt42]

1 hour ago, squirrelarmy said:

Don’t underestimate the power of stupid. We did and ended up with Brexit and Boris. 

Exactly. I’m still extremely confident that trump will walk this election. There are some pretty big things he has in his arsenal that will play on voter minds on election night.

I think Joe Biden (personally) is about to be demolished by Trump. I’d probably say that Trump is one of the most popular American presidents with working/middle america that I have seen.

edit: the progressive americans you see in the media and academia are unfortunately the minority. Most americans are not progressive at all.

The more his team plays the race war, Biden being a terrorist, and Biden selling us to China strategy the more I think he secures a victory imo.

I think the election will go pretty similar to how Boris won this time. People thought it would be much narrower than it was. 
 

Fox News know how to get trump back in. They are playing the card of scaring their voting base into voting trump again. They are trying to frame Biden as someone likely to get in so their viewers will be afraid and vote trump again.

 

Polls honestly don’t mean shit. The average American doesn’t want to admit that they like trump. They prefer to take it to the voting booth.

 

I’d love to be proven wrong but I’m extremely confident that Trump will win again. I’ve seen virtually no evidence that Biden is going to win back any of the states that Hilary lost.

 

 The republicans are going to play very dirty in order to get in again. I’m afraid Biden is playing it too safe at the moment.

 

we will see on Election Day but I’m extremely confident trump will win again.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Matt42

[Homer]

41 minutes ago, sime said:

If there is a clear winner with a big majority on the night, then (obvious thing to say I know!) a winner can be declared that night and that still could happen this year. Postal voting has already started in a couple of states and more will start soon. So there will be plenty of results in by Election day.

However, things may be tight, Trump will call himself the winner whatever happens and it's sure to be an interesting night. I'm definitely booking the next day off so that I can watch it live too 🙂

I blame The West Wing for my fascination with American politics. Love that show!

Just remembered, if anyone wants to relive Trump winning the last one v quickly on election night, you can watch the whole thing unravel in a montage at the beginning of Farenheit 11/9 (I watched it back the other day on Net - it's like I hate myself).

[Fuzzy Afro]

36 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

wasn't that the plan in early part of March and then the imperial college models showed loads of deaths, NHS overwhelmed etc, so they switched to the full lockdown thing. Might be different for next time....

That imperial model was widely discredited

[steviewevie]

26 minutes ago, Matt42 said:

Exactly. I’m still extremely confident that trump will walk this election. There are some pretty big things he has in his arsenal that will play on voter minds on election night.

I think Joe Biden (personally) is about to be demolished by Trump. I’d probably say that Trump is one of the most popular American presidents with working/middle america that I have seen.

edit: the progressive americans you see in the media and academia are unfortunately the minority. Most americans are not progressive at all.

The more his team plays the race war, Biden being a terrorist, and Biden selling us to China strategy the more I think he secures a victory imo.

I think the election will go pretty similar to how Boris won this time. People thought it would be much narrower than it was. 
 

Fox News know how to get trump back in. They are playing the card of scaring their voting base into voting trump again. They are trying to frame Biden as someone likely to get in so their viewers will be afraid and vote trump again.

 

Polls honestly don’t mean shit. The average American doesn’t want to admit that they like trump. They prefer to take it to the voting booth.

 

I’d love to be proven wrong but I’m extremely confident that Trump will win again. I’ve seen virtually no evidence that Biden is going to win back any of the states that Hilary lost.

 

 The republicans are going to play very dirty in order to get in again. I’m afraid Biden is playing it too safe at the moment.

 

we will see on Election Day but I’m extremely confident trump will win again.

Trump has never got above 50% approval ratings...but I think he could well lose the popular vote but win the presidency,

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

That imperial model was widely discredited

it's what the government went with, otherwise we could have had a lot more deaths than we did,

[Toilet Duck]

43 minutes ago, st dan said:

I do wonder what the daily figures would have been if we’d had mass testing available in the Springtime - would imagine probably have been around 50k+ a day at the peak ... if not more. 

The suggestion from REACT2 is that over 3m have been infected in England so far (and I think this is an underestimation based on how the seroprevalence study was conducted)...so, certainly, if we were testing asymptomatic cases, numbers would have been way higher at the peak. Modelling (and now some actual hard data) suggested actual infection numbers were at least 10 fold higher than reported, so it may have been north of 100,000 per day!

[steviewevie]

I wonder what daily figures would have been back in February and early March.

Edited September 5, 2020 by steviewevie

[Toilet Duck]

13 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

That imperial model was widely discredited

Really? Where? Still looks pretty accurate to me. In fact, it underestimated excess deaths (predicted 48,000 at the least stringent triggers, actual excess deaths are above 60,000). Based on the data that was available at the time, the science was sound. What transpired wasn’t far off what was predicted (no model can account for everything, biology is too complex!)...FWIW, I don’t think herd immunity to this virus will ever be attained (sterilising immunity that is). 

[steviewevie]

NS election forecast model has 82% chance of a Biden win...dropping a percent or two every day...

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Toilet Duck said:

Really? Where? Still looks pretty accurate to me. In fact, it underestimated excess deaths (predicted 48,000 at the least stringent triggers, actual excess deaths are above 60,000). Based on the data that was available at the time, the science was sound. What transpired wasn’t far off what was predicted (no model can account for everything, biology is too complex!)...FWIW, I don’t think herd immunity to this virus will ever be attained (sterilising immunity that is). 

it was discredited by some right wing press. Didn't the model give a broad range of outcomes, from 10s of thousands to 100s of thousands...all depending on people's behaviour and events.