Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: CV and mad panic behaviour (Read 940969 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 73 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3555 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Just read that half the recent deaths in England of Covid19 were people who had been vaccinated.
Last night the UK Health minister announced no deaths of any vaccinated individuals in the last 40 or so COVID-19 deaths.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3556 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
Delta variant spreads quicker the first data in a study from the UK is showing the mortality rate lower only 0.3 and the symptoms less severe and more in line with a bad cold.
That's not really true, the Delta R0 is close to 7.0, while the normal COVID-19 R0 is 2.5, these are the base of an exponent n that represents infection cycles, so you know the even if the lethality of Delta is 100x less it would be still equal or more deadly because of the huge number of more people it infects!

R0n if n = 2, then 2.52 = 6.25, the infection grows over six cycles 2.56 approximately as 2.5, 6, 15, 39, 97, 244

R0n if n = 2, then 72 = 49, the infection grows over six cycles 7.06 approximately as 7, 49, 343, 2401, 16807, 117649

The report you reference is really a sly and cynical use of math, sly because reporting a death rate in the absence of a scale is deceptive, cynical because it assumes the listener has no concept of math, exponents and exponential growth, so by reporting small numbers they hope to persuade people for political purposes.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3557 –
Quote from: PaulP – on
Some of us don't have the time to investigate every garbologist, greengrocer, taxi driver, cardiologist etc., who think they know better than the experts in their field. And very few of us possess your obvious talents for data analysis.

If that makes me an ad hominem attacker, I can live with that.

We're just trying to follow the rules, the expert advice, and do the right thing, to protect ourselves, and protect others. If you believe it's all a hysterical overreaction, that is a matter for you.

https://www.a4m.com/peter-a-mccullough.html

Oh, a Masters in Public Health.

Which experts are you listening to Paul?

Have you checked their qualifications given.....?


Quote
Some of us don't have time....

Very funny.

Any chance you have a PAYG job Paul, LP?
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3558 –
All the crazy theories, published political opinions and nutter anti-vaxx conspiracies are undone by the most basic math, no matter what the claim it has to be supported by the available data or else it's simply wrong.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3559 –
Quote from: LP – on
That's not really true, the Delta R0 is close to 7.0, while the normal COVID-19 R0 is 2.5, these are the base of an exponent n that represents infection cycles, so you know the even if the lethality of Delta is 100x less it would be still equal or more deadly because of the huge number of more people it infects!

R0n if n = 2, then 2.52 = 6.25, the infection grows over six cycles 2.56 approximately as 2.5, 6, 15, 39, 97, 244

R0n if n = 2, then 72 = 49, the infection grows over six cycles 7.06 approximately as 7, 49, 343, 2401, 16807, 117649

The report you reference is really a sly and cynical use of math, sly because reporting a death rate in the absence of a scale is deceptive, cynical because it assumes the listener has no concept of math, exponents and exponential growth, so by reporting small numbers they hope to persuade people for political purposes.


And what is your source for stating an R0 of 7.0?

The rate of reproduction has nothing to do with death numbers LP.

And the proof is in the pudding - you know, actual deaths.

That is where your fear mongering fails entirely.

I've put up the NHS' paper previously, and if you need a hand understanding the data, just ask.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/997418/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing_17.pdf

Briefing Paper 16 also very good.
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3560 –
Quote from: Mav – on
You aren’t the only one with kids you contumelious c*#@.

And I don’t have any desire to see mine with long term physical or mental effects following Covid.

Save your snake oil for your own kids.

Snake oil?

Because the official narrative is questioned by a lot of very serious, well qualified folk?

Says a lot really - don't tell me you've bought yourself a couple of Brett Sutton pillow slips.

That sounds about right.
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3561 –
4 million deaths now  :(
It's still the Gulf of Mexico, Don Old!
 

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3562 –
This is obviously a very sensitive topic guys but let's try and keep the personal attacks and insults out of it. Thanks.
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3564 –
Quote from: DJC – on
4 million deaths now  :(

But in light of the fact that 56 million odd folk die each and every year....

And then we have some significant demarcation issues....

According to H. Ealy, M. McEvoy et al

“Had the CDC used its industry standard, Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003, as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years, the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2% lower  than it currently is.” (Covid-19: Questionable Policies, Manipulated Rules of Data Collection and Reporting. Is It Safe for Students to Return to School? By H. Ealy, M. McEvoy, and et al., August 09, 2020


The bottom line is that excess deaths simply aren't showing up in the data in most countries.

Make of that what you will.
Finals, then 4 in a row!

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3565 –
Quote from: flyboy77 – on

And what is your source for stating an R0 of 7.0?

The rate of reproduction has nothing to do with death numbers LP.
The current R0 fundamental estimate for Delta variant is derived from the latest Delta variant data from the UK, it's in the official reports.

The number of deaths is directly related to the reproduction rate(R0) in the most basic way. How R0 can be controlled by vaccines, early detection and effective treatments is a critical factor in reducing overall deaths. At the potential point Delta overwhelms hospitals the concept of control and contain because irrelevant and the R0 reverts to the fundamental rate with less traditional entities like workplaces now vying to issue vaccines.

Boris has taken a very interesting political stance, basically only unvaccinated people are now dying in the UK, and he has a large hold-out in the population refusing to be vaccinated, so he's opened the flood gates. When he did this it seems the vaccine resistance crumbled and the very early figures indicate they have experienced a massive surge in vaccine uptake.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3566 –
Very good news overnight for vaccinated females.

Early reports are that female vaccination is safe for women wishing to fall pregnant, and is very likely to be safe for women who are already pregnant, far far safer than risking a bout of COVID-19.

A large UK study of vaccinated women found no transfer of vaccine to the fetus or baby, this finding was as expected because there is no know mechanism for a vaccine to transfer to the fetus or infant from the mother, so the finding confirms the vaccination is functionally safe for pregnant mothers.

Secondarily, there is no detection of the vaccines in mother's milk and there is detection and transfer of antibodies in mother's milk. How infants naturally get immunity to many diseases is by the uptake of antibodies from their mother's milk in the first few weeks of life. This is seriously good news, because it means children born to mother's who have been vaccinated will probably have some level of natural and potentially life long immunity to Sars-CoV-2.

Immunity formed in infants is different to immunity formed in adults, due to changes in how our bodies behave as we age, adult gained immunity is unlikely to be permanent and will require boosters, but infant gained immunity has a very good chance of being some form of life long resistance. I don't know the specifics of how or why it works like this, just that is the way it is.
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3567 –
Quote from: flyboy77 – on
But in light of the fact that 56 million odd folk die each and every year....

And then we have some significant demarcation issues....

According to H. Ealy, M. McEvoy et al

The bottom line is that excess deaths simply aren't showing up in the data in most countries.
Brought to you and sponsored by Robert F. Kennedy Jr, aka., the King of Anti-vaxxers, credibility lost!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3568 –
Without wanting to say a lot about whats right or wrong, there is a lot of testing of individuals happening who arent actually sick.

If its so dangerous you need to be tested to know you have it, is it even dangerous?

This is hard to quantify too.  People who are positive today in future might experience longevitiy of life issues through other illness and we cant test for that.  It could be nothing or it could be something, but depending on the assumptions made, it skews the data.

Darned if you do, darned if you dont.

Its why I look at both sides of the argument and cant work out what the best course of action is so to see a government erroring on the side of caution is likely a reasonable outcome.  Where it falls flat for mine, is that the response doesnt match the risk, therefore, its a rethink required.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: CV and mad panic behaviour

Reply #3569 –
Quote from: Thryleon – on
Where it falls flat for mine, is that the response doesnt match the risk, therefore, its a rethink required.
The real risk is exposed in those countries without a valid response, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, they show the fundamentals.

Here the apparent reduced risk a result of the lockdowns and other measures to restrict the R0, you can't remove those controls and expect the numbers to remain low, the suggestion the response can be scaled back and it'll still be OK is the exact opposite of what the rest of the globe is experiencing.

A massive tell is how quiet some wealthy influential regions have become, in particular some that were initially loudly sceptical and propagated herd immunity as the only solution have almost disappeared from the debate, that is in part because they are now falling like dominoes into the line with the reality of the pandemic situation.

The fundamentals are the same everywhere, restrict or slow the transmission, keep the case numbers low allowing hospitals to deal with he ill in sensible levels and death rates are reduced.

Even in it's heavily vaccinated environment, the UK which has almost 70% of it's population vaccinated, is predicting 50000 Delta variant cases a day in the coming weeks as lockdown is removed. I don't know what that translates to in Australia's environment if you open up and only have 15% of the population vaccinated, but the risk indicates it is potentially devastating for our tiny economy. Interesting too, in the UK the critics are nervous Boris is not accounting for the costs and effects of long COVID in his sums, he just wants the economy back to normal as quickly as possible. If the numbers remain as is, and the Delta variant hits 50,000 cases a day, that's still about 30 to 50 deaths per day in unvaccinated individuals. It's not hard to see what Boris has done, he has basically initiated a get vaccinated or suffer the consequences policy.

Keep in mind, because the Delta variant R0 is much higher, the resistance levels for herd immunity must be greater than 90%, so 70% vaccination doesn't cut it!
"Extremists on either side will always meet in the Middle!"