Generic Virus Thread

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

if my aunt or uncle or mom dies of Coronavirus, I won't take any comfort in the fact that you think they would probably have died soon anyway

He hasn't remotely argued that. I don't share @LakotaDakota's view on it, but he's been quoting stats about death rates and so on. He has made no comment any any of your relatives. Statistically, he's pointed out that elderly people are prone to dying, and that the annual or quarterly death rate before CV19 was X. When anyone talks about statistics, it's really really unhelpful to suppose a particular thought crosses their mind about an individuals relatives.

The whole lockdown and response after lockdown needs to be stats and maths based (but not solely so), in terms of what the scientists and medics look at when making decisions to change from one status to another. "how many vaccinations do we have, how many hospital places, how many at risk people, how long does it take to...etc. Facts. We need much more information. And it needs to be used accurately, not slanted, misinterpreted, or used to bolster pre=held opinions where that suits and ignored where it doesn't, which is rather what the Gov't seem to be doing (as well as making up their own facts).

[Stevo985]

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

He hasn't remotely argued that. I don't share @LakotaDakota's view on it, but he's been quoting stats about death rates and so on. He has made no comment any any of your relatives.

No shit

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

Statistically, he's pointed out that elderly people are prone to dying, and that the annual or quarterly death rate before CV19 was X. When anyone talks about statistics, it's really really unhelpful to suppose a particular thought crosses their mind about an individuals relatives.

Obviously I know he wasn't speaking about my relatives in particular ffs  
I was making a point that old people who probably would have died anyway are SOMEBODY'S relatives. And they matter. Whether they would have died in a couple of years or not

2 minutes ago, blandy said:

The whole lockdown and response after lockdown needs to be stats and maths based (but not solely so), in terms of what the scientists and medics look at when making decisions to change from one status to another. "how many vaccinations do we have, how many hospital places, how many at risk people, how long does it take to...etc. Facts. We need much more information. And it needs to be used accurately, not slanted, misinterpreted, or used to bolster pre=held opinions where that suits and ignored where it doesn't, which is rather what the Gov't seem to be doing (as well as making up their own facts).

I agree

Edited April 21, 2020 by Stevo985

[chrisp65]

Oops

[LakotaDakota]

Anyway, onto more important stuff

[LakotaDakota]

19 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

No shit

Obviously I know he wasn't speaking about my relatives in particular ffs  
I was making a point that old people who probably would have died anyway are SOMEBODY'S relatives. And they matter. Whether they would have died in a couple of years or not

I agree

They are someones relatives, may well be mine but if they are over 85 then the sad reality is that 15% of them will probably die this year anyway .Hell my one remaining grandparent died 4 weeks ago when I was in quarantine. It was shit, I couldn't go to see her in hospital, couldn't be there with my parents, 1 of whom couldn't go either due to having heart surgery recently. There were 5 people at the funeral which would have usually had 200+. Everything about it was & is shit.not that it really matters but She didn't die of covid, she died of being old, just happened to be at the worst possible time.

Edited April 21, 2020 by LakotaDakota

[Stevo985]

5 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

They are someones relatives, may well be minebut if they are over 85 15% of them will probably die this year anyway

So 15% of the 39% of people who have died will have died this year anyway.

That's about 5% of the total.

So of 20,000 people dead in the UK, 1,000 of them would have died this year anyway.

 

So what about the other 19,000?

[LakotaDakota]

7 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

So 15% of the 39% of people who have died will have died this year anyway.

That's about 5% of the total.

So of 20,000 people dead in the UK, 1,000 of them would have died this year anyway.

 

So what about the other 19,000?

No, that is only over 85s. Plenty of 65-84 would also have died, as would some random  younger ones, especially those that already have existing health conditions like just about every single person dying of covid ag age is far from the only factor here.

Edited April 21, 2020 by LakotaDakota

[snowychap]

Some of the people who have died of Coronavirus may well have died of something else if Coronavirus hadn't been around.

Well, hold the **** front page.

[LakotaDakota]

3 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Some of the people who have died of Coronavirus may well have died of something else if Coronavirus hadn't been around.

Well, hold the **** front page.

Glad it's finally sunk in, I know these things can be complicated...

[Awol]

Looks like the great government twitter astroturfing conspiracy is fake news. Ironic really. 

 

[Chindie]

The fake NHS Twitter profile everyone was looking at was painfully obviously some right wing clearing in the woods trolling.

[DCJonah]

33 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

No, that is only over 85s. Plenty of 65-84 would also have died, as would some random  younger ones, especially those that already have existing health conditions like just about every single person dying of covid ag age is far from the only factor here.

So why do you think the world has locked down and global economies crashed? If this is just standard people dying.

I'm really confused at the point you're trying to make. Or is the point to just seem as heartless as possible? I don't get it at all. 

[Enda]

Edit: long-haired general told me my UBI joke wasn’t as funny as I thought

Edited April 21, 2020 by Enda

[Lichfield Dean]

14 minutes ago, Chindie said:

The fake NHS Twitter profile everyone was looking at was painfully obviously some right wing clearing in the woods trolling.

Seems likely. And if so, claiming it is part of a government conspiracy is as bad as it being a government conspiracy in the first place.

[Stevo985]

50 minutes ago, LakotaDakota said:

No, that is only over 85s. Plenty of 65-84 would also have died, as would some random  younger ones, especially those that already have existing health conditions like just about every single person dying of covid ag age is far from the only factor here.

“Plenty”. But only 15% of over 85’s. So surely a much smaller percentage of 65-84. 
so what another 500 at most?

 

so 18,500 people left then. What about those?

[chrisp65]

12 minutes ago, Enda said:

Edit: long-haired general told me my UBI joke wasn’t as funny as I thought

[snowychap]

42 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

I'm really confused at the point you're trying to make.

There isn't really one of any insight there.

It's just a particular argument (i.e. it's not really that big a thing in terms of deaths and that it's 'primarily just wiping those out that the flu missed this year') stated and restated in different terms, which varies slightly depending both upon which particular avalanche of sometimes relevant, but often irrelevant, numbers and calculations are hurled in to the fray, and whether the previous bit of supporting data has since failed to be quite so supportive.

Edited April 21, 2020 by snowychap

[Awol]

26 minutes ago, snowychap said:

There isn't really one of any insight there.

It's just a particular argument (i.e. it's not really that big a thing in terms of deaths and that it's 'primarily just wiping those out that the flu missed this year') stated and restated in different terms, which varies slightly depending both upon which particular avalanche of sometimes relevant, but often irrelevant, numbers and calculations are hurled in to the fray, and whether the previous bit of supporting data has since failed to be quite so supportive.

Scenario 2: no lockdown, 250-500,000 dead across the UK. How does the ‘they were gonna die soon anyway’ argument stack up then? 

Seems you (not you) have to justify that counterfactual for it to have any credibility at all. 

[Stevo985]

Just now, Awol said:

Scenario 2: no lockdown, 250-500,000 dead across the UK. How does the ‘they were gonna die soon anyway’ argument stack up then? 

This is what I don't get. People making the argument Lakota is making are making it based off the numbers of deaths that have occurred in the scenario where we have put all of these preventative measures in place. He's not the first to make this kind of statement in this thread.

It's like saying "well Aston Villa didn't need to spend £200m on a new defence in the summer as they only conceded 10 goals the following season"

[chrisp65]

Tomorrow’s Financial Times reckons the true figure, based on their analysis of ONS figures, is potentially double the official figure, at 41,000 deaths.

 

 

I have no idea if the Financial Times is any good at numbers.