Welcome Notice

Register Log in

Dutch scientists contradict scientists on settled science...

J

Joerg

Guest
On 2020-08-04 19:14, legg wrote:
On Tue, 04 Aug 2020 14:51:39 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

snip

El Dorado County is at 0.2 PPM. Yet this is a conservative county where
people stand their ground:

Didn\'t you say the county had 200,000 residents?

0.2ppm would mean that 0.04 people have died of covid19.

One person is 5ppm.
Yup, sorry, 5ppm. Very low. COVID has never been a big issue in our
county and now it has largely petered out.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 
J

Joerg

Guest
On 2020-08-04 20:02, whit3rd wrote:
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 3:23:13 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:

We have 11 counties with zero deaths. And a bunch more in the single
digits.

Total? Per month? All that takes, is
eleven counties with no suitable hospital faciilities, it doesn\'t indicate
mild-to-none cases of the pandemic.
That is not how it\'s handled. If a person gets sick in county A and then
gets cared for at a clinic in county B, that person still counts towards
the cases in county A.


Alpine county, CA, has about 1100 population; Los Angeles couny, over 10 million.
El Dorado County had one death at pop 0.2 million. LA County had AFAIK
about 5000 deaths and 10 million. So 5ppm versus 500ppm, that\'s two
orders of magnitude.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 
J

John Larkin

Guest
On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 14:47:16 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

On 2020-08-04 20:02, whit3rd wrote:
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 3:23:13 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:

We have 11 counties with zero deaths. And a bunch more in the single
digits.

Total? Per month?
Total deaths divided by population.

All that takes, is
eleven counties with no suitable hospital faciilities, it doesn\'t indicate
mild-to-none cases of the pandemic.
I know that Nevada county has excellent medical centers, because I\'ve
been there. 1 corona death total so far. The population is about 100K
but we get many times that many tourists per year, from all over the
world.


That is not how it\'s handled. If a person gets sick in county A and then
gets cared for at a clinic in county B, that person still counts towards
the cases in county A.


Alpine county, CA, has about 1100 population; Los Angeles couny, over 10 million.


El Dorado County had one death at pop 0.2 million. LA County had AFAIK
about 5000 deaths and 10 million. So 5ppm versus 500ppm, that\'s two
orders of magnitude.
New Jersey, almost 1800 PPM dead.
 
L

legg

Guest
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 09:42:15 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

<snip>
New Yorkers were ordered to stay at home. I don\'t know how tighter a
lock-down could possibly be, than that.

Lock down on its own is not enough you need testing as well.

Those sorts of statements seem bafflingly naive. How regularly
would you test the entire U.K.? How would this morning\'s negative
test guarantee that someone would still be not infected by dinner
time? Please explain how knowing someone is infected after the
fact, after they\'ve spread their viral load on surfaces and in
public places, is going to stop the spread?

Has that actually worked in the U.K.?

I see the U.K., that supposedly had better testing, earlier than the
U.S., has performed about 40% more per-capita tests than the United
States, and has about 40% more per-capita deaths.
High percapita mortality in the UK is driven by old-age care
facility tragedies that occured in all regions of the UK.
As in Canada, close to 80% of all deaths occurred in
old age homes, where physicians were armed only with
oxygen and morphine - their usual tools for treating
pneumonia, \'the old folks\' friend\' . . .

US testing potentially at 18.7% for simple tests percapita
UK testing 15.6% under the same analysis.

RL
 
D

David Brown

Guest
On 05/08/2020 00:28, Ricketty C wrote:
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 5:35:48 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 22:41:09 +0200, Gerhard Hoffmann
dk4xp@arcor.de> wrote:

Am 04.08.20 um 22:10 schrieb John Larkin:


No-lockdown Sweden isn\'t doing as bad as some nearby countries.
We\'ll really find out in winter.

Sometimes I wonder what is the color of the sky on your home
planet.

Only 40% more deaths per Meg of inhabitants than even US, or > 12
times more than neighboring Norway. Hotels were at 15% capacity,
normally 75% in June. No wonder, nobody wants to visit the
hotspot.

Sweden\'s Nordic neighbors have opened the borders amongst each
other, but not to Sweden.

Dream on.

Gerhard

Sweden is 569 PPM dead so far. Below Belguim, Spain, Italy, UK. So
so far, not an obviously catastrophic policy. Some european
countries may be starting ominous secondary bumps. There could well
be a winter effect coming too.

Sweden\'s 7-day-averaged daily death rate is now zero. Zero is good.
UK is 64.

I don\'t think that is correct. The numbers at worldometers seems to
be truncating rather than rounding. Wikipedia is reporting 9 deaths
on last Friday alone. I\'m not sure what form of arithmetic can round
9/7 down to zero.


If Sweden is not locked down, why has the death rate fallen to
zero? Why has it fallen at all, with total cases only 0.8% of the
population?

Very good question. Do you have any theories? Could it be due to
the beginning of winter there?
Eh, no. It\'s the middle of summer in Sweden.

Basically, a solid proportion of the most vulnerable people in old folks
homes are already dead, after months of a \"let people get the virus and
be done with it\" policy, and now it is mostly young people who have it.
These don\'t die as often, but they spread it well and they sometimes
get serious long-lasting (possibly life-time) health problems. It
really bugs me that the statistics don\'t track the numbers of people who
are crippled for months, years or the rest of their life by this virus -
that would give a better picture of the cost of the pandemic.

Sweden has similar lock-down and restrictions as Norway. But they left
it far too late, and waited until the restrictions didn\'t have a chance
of limiting the spread.

(And before Larkin or others suggest it, no - they have no \"herd
immunity\" in Sweden.)


In the USA, the states that had no mandatory lockdown have had
about 1/3 the PPM deaths of the US average. That\'s not causal, but
it\'s interesting.

It is neither. You cherry pick data left and right. You use total
numbers to compare this thing, you use daily numbers to compare that
thing. You would be a horrible scientist because you don\'t
understand how to analyze data so as to compare apples with apples.
It could also be mixing cause and effect - many US states, like many
countries, have been waiting until their infection or death rates are
high before enforcing lockdowns.

Why do you ignore what is happening in Texas, Florida and your home
state of California??? Are you afraid of the facts?


California, locked down hard, is at about 50% of the US PPM death
count, mostly in the south.

Are you talking about the aggregate or the daily numbers? The
aggregate for the country is of little use in a comparison since it
mixes all manner of conditions and actions. If you want to compare
actions and results, it seems to make much more sense to look at
daily new infections.


This border closing thing is mostly politics and xenophobia.

Yes, with present infection levels it doesn\'t make a lot of sense
unless there is a wide discrepancy in infection levels. Even then
the real issue is how many infections would be prevented. However,
it doesn\'t take a rocket scientist to look at a map of how the
disease spread and see that it could have been very effective to
isolate the hot spots early in the infection. Within the US there is
no longer much point in closing borders.

It makes a lot of sense for other countries who largely have their
infections under control to isolate the countries where the disease
is running rampant... like here in the US. Thank you, DeSantis.
Thank you, Kemp.
In Europe at least, /opening/ borders is mostly a political thing.
Norway has given in to pressure to open its borders despite having lower
rates than most other countries. But they\'ve given in to pressure to
open borders to foreign tourists, and for Norwegians to go to other
countries, with the result that we are now increasing significantly again.
 
T

Tom Gardner

Guest
On 12/08/20 17:42, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:
On Saturday, August 8, 2020 at 9:13:29 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
Lock down on its own is not enough you need testing as well.

Those sorts of statements seem bafflingly naive. How regularly
would you test the entire U.K.? How would this morning\'s negative
test guarantee that someone would still be not infected by dinner
time? Please explain how knowing someone is infected after the
fact, after they\'ve spread their viral load on surfaces and in
public places, is going to stop the spread?
The same way vaccination works. Neither is an absolute
guarantee for an *individual*, but it is sufficient
to reduce the incidence in a *population*.


Has that actually worked in the U.K.?

I see the U.K., that supposedly had better testing, earlier than the
U.S., has performed about 40% more per-capita tests than the United
States, and has about 40% more per-capita deaths.
Factor1:

The testing in the UK was totally inadequate due to a
lack of capacity. For a long time we only tested
people with blatantly obvious symptoms.
We avoided testing some high probablity cases, e.g.
those discharged from hospital to care homes.

Factor 2:

Until yesterday if someone caught covid and died
six months later in a car crash, that was counted
as a covid death. That isn\'t stupid in the early
stages of a pandemic.

Yesterday that was changed to be in line with other
countries. Our death count *reduced* by 11%, from
46,706 to 41,329

Consequences:

We still have the worst death rate *and* worst
*recession* (-20%) of any G7 country. The two go hand
in hand with inadequate lockdowns.
 
T

Tom Gardner

Guest
On 13/08/20 07:32, Tom Gardner wrote:
Until yesterday if someone caught covid and died
six months later in a car crash, that was counted
as a covid death. That isn\'t stupid in the early
stages of a pandemic.
That non-stupidity is shown in this graph:
https://interactive.guim.co.uk/charts/embed/aug/2020-08-12T18:24:17/embed.html
 
M

Martin Brown

Guest
On 12/08/2020 22:06, David Brown wrote:
On 05/08/2020 00:28, Ricketty C wrote:
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 5:35:48 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

If Sweden is not locked down, why has the death rate fallen to
zero? Why has it fallen at all, with total cases only 0.8% of the
population?

Very good question. Do you have any theories? Could it be due to
the beginning of winter there?

Eh, no. It\'s the middle of summer in Sweden.

Basically, a solid proportion of the most vulnerable people in old folks
homes are already dead, after months of a \"let people get the virus and
be done with it\" policy, and now it is mostly young people who have it.
These don\'t die as often, but they spread it well and they sometimes
get serious long-lasting (possibly life-time) health problems. It
really bugs me that the statistics don\'t track the numbers of people who
are crippled for months, years or the rest of their life by this virus -
that would give a better picture of the cost of the pandemic.
There are certainly a few who potentially have life changing injuries
from Covid infections. A friend is in that position - not nice.
Sweden has similar lock-down and restrictions as Norway. But they left
it far too late, and waited until the restrictions didn\'t have a chance
of limiting the spread.

(And before Larkin or others suggest it, no - they have no \"herd
immunity\" in Sweden.)
UK survey has just reported nationally 6% and in London 13% with
antibodies using a reasonably credible test. Indications are that there
are a proportion of PCR Covid positive tested early on who do not now
test positive for antibodies now which is a little disconcerting.

Based on the UK\'s present 45k fatality to date that puts 60% herd
immunity on a community wide basis at 450k fatalities (80% 600k).
OTOH if you could keep it contained exclusively in the under 45\'s you
can almost get to 60% herd immunity just with another 20k deaths.

It looks like Fergusson\'s simulations may not have been that far off.
(he predicted 500k to herd immunity and was ridiculed for it)

In the USA, the states that had no mandatory lockdown have had
about 1/3 the PPM deaths of the US average. That\'s not causal, but
it\'s interesting.

It is neither. You cherry pick data left and right. You use total
numbers to compare this thing, you use daily numbers to compare that
thing. You would be a horrible scientist because you don\'t
understand how to analyze data so as to compare apples with apples.

It could also be mixing cause and effect - many US states, like many
countries, have been waiting until their infection or death rates are
high before enforcing lockdowns.
UK did that pretty much and it amounted to changing horses mid-stream
and so obtaining the worst characteristics of two viable strategies.

Personally I think a hard lockdown sooner on those over 45 and social
distancing and hygiene measures for everyone else would have been much
better. But they panicked on seeing the Fergusson paper and the rest is
history. Only when it is all done and dusted will we be able to tell who
was right about this. UK economy is now in extreme record breaking
recession down by 20% in the last quarter (2008 recession was 2%).

The biggest single mistake our government made in lockdown was to
completely give up on track and trace because it was \"too hard\". They
failed to realise that every infective contact prevented cuts off an
entire future subtree of infection going forward. It doesn\'t matter that
you can\'t do them all doing those that you can still makes a difference.

PHE made mistake after mistake with their centralised testing efforts
and the centralised tracing scheme they set up is so bad that local
authorities are setting up their own DIY systems to work around it.

This border closing thing is mostly politics and xenophobia.

Yes, with present infection levels it doesn\'t make a lot of sense
unless there is a wide discrepancy in infection levels. Even then
the real issue is how many infections would be prevented. However,
it doesn\'t take a rocket scientist to look at a map of how the
disease spread and see that it could have been very effective to
isolate the hot spots early in the infection. Within the US there is
no longer much point in closing borders.

It makes a lot of sense for other countries who largely have their
infections under control to isolate the countries where the disease
is running rampant... like here in the US. Thank you, DeSantis.
Thank you, Kemp.

In Europe at least, /opening/ borders is mostly a political thing.
Norway has given in to pressure to open its borders despite having lower
rates than most other countries. But they\'ve given in to pressure to
open borders to foreign tourists, and for Norwegians to go to other
countries, with the result that we are now increasing significantly again.
Countries where a lot of income is generated by tourism have a big
problem with this. Tank the economy or open the borders up to all.

In general it does make sense to limit the maximum distance you are
allowed to travel during a pandemic. England completely screwed this one
up too and had mostly young people from all over the country descend on
Brighton beach for what was in effect a massive Covid party. Death rates
didn\'t increase much though infections did (just broke through 1k/day).

Looking at our UK 7 day average curve I think it is just at the start of
exponential growth again (R>1). By the end of next week I will be
certain. Spain and France are ahead of us and now well on their way up.

Wales limited people to travelling no more than 5 miles from their home
which seems a bit mean to me - where I live in England it is 10 miles to
the nearest shop in every direction! Rural Wales it is even further.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
 
D

David Brown

Guest
On 13/08/2020 10:27, Martin Brown wrote:
On 12/08/2020 22:06, David Brown wrote:
On 05/08/2020 00:28, Ricketty C wrote:
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 5:35:48 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

If Sweden is not locked down, why has the death rate fallen to
zero? Why has it fallen at all, with total cases only 0.8% of the
population?

Very good question.  Do you have any theories?  Could it be due to
the beginning of winter there?

Eh, no.  It\'s the middle of summer in Sweden.

Basically, a solid proportion of the most vulnerable people in old folks
homes are already dead, after months of a \"let people get the virus and
be done with it\" policy, and now it is mostly young people who have it.
  These don\'t die as often, but they spread it well and they sometimes
get serious long-lasting (possibly life-time) health problems.  It
really bugs me that the statistics don\'t track the numbers of people who
are crippled for months, years or the rest of their life by this virus -
that would give a better picture of the cost of the pandemic.

There are certainly a few who potentially have life changing injuries
from Covid infections. A friend is in that position - not nice.
There are many, judging from reports and indirect stories (like stories
of recuperation facilities being overwhelmed even when hospitals and
ICU\'s are doing fine) - but no one seems to be publishing real numbers.

The biggest problems seem to be scaring on the lungs reducing their
efficiency, and mental problems as a result of low oxygen, \"sticky\"
blood, and PTSD. But it will obviously take a long time to understand
the long term effects.

Sweden has similar lock-down and restrictions as Norway.  But they left
it far too late, and waited until the restrictions didn\'t have a chance
of limiting the spread.

(And before Larkin or others suggest it, no - they have no \"herd
immunity\" in Sweden.)

UK survey has just reported nationally 6% and in London 13% with
antibodies using a reasonably credible test. Indications are that there
are a proportion of PCR Covid positive tested early on who do not now
test positive for antibodies now which is a little disconcerting.
It seems that a lot of people who get Covid, especially those with
little or no symptoms, don\'t develop significant antibodies. And many
who do have antibodies, loose them fairly quickly. And we don\'t know
how effective the antibodies are at preventing a new infection (though
antibody donation treatments show that they help cure the disease when
you have got it).

There is still a great deal we don\'t know.

Based on the UK\'s present 45k fatality to date that puts 60% herd
immunity on a community wide basis at 450k fatalities (80% 600k).
OTOH if you could keep it contained exclusively in the under 45\'s you
can almost get to 60% herd immunity just with another 20k deaths.
That\'s one idea - but since we don\'t know if herd immunity is achievable
at all, it\'s a pretty risky one!


It looks like Fergusson\'s simulations may not have been that far off.
(he predicted 500k to herd immunity and was ridiculed for it)

In the USA, the states that had no mandatory lockdown have had
about 1/3 the PPM deaths of the US average. That\'s not causal, but
it\'s interesting.

It is neither.  You cherry pick data left and right.  You use total
numbers to compare this thing, you use daily numbers to compare that
thing.  You would be a horrible scientist because you don\'t
understand  how to analyze data so as to compare apples with apples.

It could also be mixing cause and effect - many US states, like many
countries, have been waiting until their infection or death rates are
high before enforcing lockdowns.

UK did that pretty much and it amounted to changing horses mid-stream
and so obtaining the worst characteristics of two viable strategies.

Personally I think a hard lockdown sooner on those over 45 and social
distancing and hygiene measures for everyone else would have been much
better. But they panicked on seeing the Fergusson paper and the rest is
history. Only when it is all done and dusted will we be able to tell who
was right about this. UK economy is now in extreme record breaking
recession down by 20% in the last quarter (2008 recession was 2%).
Of course, it doesn\'t help the UK that this happened in the middle of
the biggest upheaval since WWII - Brexit and Bojo would have caused a
recession without Covid.

And these two total failures by the UK government and English-led
insanities have guaranteed that Scotland will break free sooner or
later. That will be another huge upheaval.


The biggest single mistake our government made in lockdown was to
completely give up on track and trace because it was \"too hard\". They
failed to realise that every infective contact prevented cuts off an
entire future subtree of infection going forward. It doesn\'t matter that
you can\'t do them all doing those that you can still makes a difference.

PHE made mistake after mistake with their centralised testing efforts
and the centralised tracing scheme they set up is so bad that local
authorities are setting up their own DIY systems to work around it.

This border closing thing is mostly politics and xenophobia.

Yes, with present infection levels it doesn\'t make a lot of sense
unless there is a wide discrepancy in infection levels.  Even then
the real issue is how many infections would be prevented.  However,
it doesn\'t take a rocket scientist to look at a map of how the
disease spread and see that it could have been very effective to
isolate the hot spots early in the infection.  Within the US there is
no longer much point in closing borders.

It makes a lot of sense for other countries who largely have their
infections under control to isolate the countries where the disease
is running rampant... like here in the US.  Thank you, DeSantis.
Thank you, Kemp.

In Europe at least, /opening/ borders is mostly a political thing.
Norway has given in to pressure to open its borders despite having lower
rates than most other countries.  But they\'ve given in to pressure to
open borders to foreign tourists, and for Norwegians to go to other
countries, with the result that we are now increasing significantly
again.

Countries where a lot of income is generated by tourism have a big
problem with this. Tank the economy or open the borders up to all.
Broken economies have a chance of recovery. Dead people do not.

Tourism is a significant part of Norwegian economy (though not nearly as
big a part as for southern Europe).

In general it does make sense to limit the maximum distance you are
allowed to travel during a pandemic.
Yes.

England completely screwed this one
up too and had mostly young people from all over the country descend on
Brighton beach for what was in effect a massive Covid party. Death rates
didn\'t increase much though infections did (just broke through 1k/day).
Scotland told people not to travel more than 5 miles unnecessarily.
This was not enforced very tightly, but a lot better than England.

Looking at our UK 7 day average curve I think it is just at the start of
exponential growth again (R>1). By the end of next week I will be
certain. Spain and France are ahead of us and now well on their way up.

Wales limited people to travelling no more than 5 miles from their home
which seems a bit mean to me - where I live in England it is 10 miles to
the nearest shop in every direction! Rural Wales it is even further.
The limit is for /unnecessary/ travel. You can travel for essential
shopping, or for work - but not for a beach party.
 
S

server

Guest
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 09:27:54 +0100, Martin Brown
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

On 12/08/2020 22:06, David Brown wrote:
On 05/08/2020 00:28, Ricketty C wrote:
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 5:35:48 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

If Sweden is not locked down, why has the death rate fallen to
zero? Why has it fallen at all, with total cases only 0.8% of the
population?

Very good question. Do you have any theories? Could it be due to
the beginning of winter there?

Eh, no. It\'s the middle of summer in Sweden.

Basically, a solid proportion of the most vulnerable people in old folks
homes are already dead, after months of a \"let people get the virus and
be done with it\" policy, and now it is mostly young people who have it.
These don\'t die as often, but they spread it well and they sometimes
get serious long-lasting (possibly life-time) health problems. It
really bugs me that the statistics don\'t track the numbers of people who
are crippled for months, years or the rest of their life by this virus -
that would give a better picture of the cost of the pandemic.

There are certainly a few who potentially have life changing injuries
from Covid infections. A friend is in that position - not nice.
Sweden has similar lock-down and restrictions as Norway. But they left
it far too late, and waited until the restrictions didn\'t have a chance
of limiting the spread.

(And before Larkin or others suggest it, no - they have no \"herd
immunity\" in Sweden.)

UK survey has just reported nationally 6% and in London 13% with
antibodies using a reasonably credible test. Indications are that there
are a proportion of PCR Covid positive tested early on who do not now
test positive for antibodies now which is a little disconcerting.

Based on the UK\'s present 45k fatality to date that puts 60% herd
immunity on a community wide basis at 450k fatalities (80% 600k).
OTOH if you could keep it contained exclusively in the under 45\'s you
can almost get to 60% herd immunity just with another 20k deaths.

It looks like Fergusson\'s simulations may not have been that far off.
(he predicted 500k to herd immunity and was ridiculed for it)

In the USA, the states that had no mandatory lockdown have had
about 1/3 the PPM deaths of the US average. That\'s not causal, but
it\'s interesting.

It is neither. You cherry pick data left and right. You use total
numbers to compare this thing, you use daily numbers to compare that
thing. You would be a horrible scientist because you don\'t
understand how to analyze data so as to compare apples with apples.

It could also be mixing cause and effect - many US states, like many
countries, have been waiting until their infection or death rates are
high before enforcing lockdowns.

UK did that pretty much and it amounted to changing horses mid-stream
and so obtaining the worst characteristics of two viable strategies.

Personally I think a hard lockdown sooner on those over 45 and social
distancing and hygiene measures for everyone else would have been much
better. But they panicked on seeing the Fergusson paper and the rest is
history. Only when it is all done and dusted will we be able to tell who
was right about this. UK economy is now in extreme record breaking
recession down by 20% in the last quarter (2008 recession was 2%).

The biggest single mistake our government made in lockdown was to
completely give up on track and trace because it was \"too hard\". They
failed to realise that every infective contact prevented cuts off an
entire future subtree of infection going forward. It doesn\'t matter that
you can\'t do them all doing those that you can still makes a difference.

PHE made mistake after mistake with their centralised testing efforts
and the centralised tracing scheme they set up is so bad that local
authorities are setting up their own DIY systems to work around it.

This border closing thing is mostly politics and xenophobia.

Yes, with present infection levels it doesn\'t make a lot of sense
unless there is a wide discrepancy in infection levels. Even then
the real issue is how many infections would be prevented. However,
it doesn\'t take a rocket scientist to look at a map of how the
disease spread and see that it could have been very effective to
isolate the hot spots early in the infection. Within the US there is
no longer much point in closing borders.

It makes a lot of sense for other countries who largely have their
infections under control to isolate the countries where the disease
is running rampant... like here in the US. Thank you, DeSantis.
Thank you, Kemp.

In Europe at least, /opening/ borders is mostly a political thing.
Norway has given in to pressure to open its borders despite having lower
rates than most other countries. But they\'ve given in to pressure to
open borders to foreign tourists, and for Norwegians to go to other
countries, with the result that we are now increasing significantly again.

Countries where a lot of income is generated by tourism have a big
problem with this. Tank the economy or open the borders up to all.

In general it does make sense to limit the maximum distance you are
allowed to travel during a pandemic. England completely screwed this one
up too and had mostly young people from all over the country descend on
Brighton beach for what was in effect a massive Covid party. Death rates
didn\'t increase much though infections did (just broke through 1k/day).
Lots of infections and few deaths is how epidemics best end.

Looking at our UK 7 day average curve I think it is just at the start of
exponential growth again (R>1). By the end of next week I will be
certain. Spain and France are ahead of us and now well on their way up.
There are secondary humps all over the world. Australia is the poster
child for that.

Wales limited people to travelling no more than 5 miles from their home
which seems a bit mean to me - where I live in England it is 10 miles to
the nearest shop in every direction! Rural Wales it is even further.
The only test that really matters is death rate. It\'s down to near
zero in Sweden, about 1% of peak and declining. Why?

What\'s the logic of a travel distance limit?



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
 
T

Tom Gardner

Guest
On 13/08/20 16:01, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> The only test that really matters is death rate.

No #1: the only reliable measure is the /excess/ death rate

No #2: severe long term side effects (which are slowly
beginning to become apparent) are arguably worse than
death.

Certainly I fear brain damage more than I fear death, and
I don\'t even have the comfortable thought of an afterlife
to look forward to.
 
S

server

Guest
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:22:46 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 13/08/20 16:01, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
The only test that really matters is death rate.

No #1: the only reliable measure is the /excess/ death rate

No #2: severe long term side effects (which are slowly
beginning to become apparent) are arguably worse than
death.

Certainly I fear brain damage more than I fear death, and
I don\'t even have the comfortable thought of an afterlife
to look forward to.
Why is the cv death rate in Sweden down to near zero?



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
 
J

Joerg

Guest
On 2020-08-09 10:53, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 09/08/20 18:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 09 Aug 2020 08:46:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 2020-08-09 07:34, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 06:57:04 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 09/08/20 01:47, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

[...]


Skiing isn\'t really very dangerous.

My daughter and I watched someone die at Breckenridge.
A local man fell, slid, made a memorable \"crump\" as he
hit a water cannon, and didn\'t move. I called out the
blood bath when our chairlift reached the top.


Our insurance agent almost died. He hit a tree. The tree won.


Any ordinary vacation, like a beach or something, I keep thinking
about stuff.

Yes. I can sit on a beach for a day or so, then I\'m off
using local busses to explore local towns, or off on the
train to another destination.


Skiing is totally absorbing, an entirely different world,
and you can do it all day.

Gliding is intense relaxed concentration, very similar
to skiing except it can be done locally.

I tried parachuting, but the duty cycle was absurd. At great expense
(and risk) you might actually do it for 10 minutes per day.


Not if you open up three seconds after the exit once in a while. The
others thought it was foolish to waste all this freefall fun but once in
a while I just wanted to \"soar\", find thermals and all that. Especially
if the pilot would drop us above 16,000 ft. Which, of course, wasn\'t
100% legit sans oxygen but fun.

[...]

I only made a few static jumps, from 3000\' or so, and the view was
cool, but it didn\'t seem to last long. How long does it take from 16K
feet?

I guess a wing-type chute could soar for a while. What\'s the glide
slope like on a good chute?

Apparently paragliders are 12:1, which is pisspoor - a 747
manages 15:1. Perhaps that is why many paragliders have big
fans on their back!

An old wooden glider will do >20:1, a modern plastic glider >50:1.
Parachutes are way worse. A high-priced monstrous military version can
give you 5:1 but the stuff we used was always below 4:1. Usually well below.

https://airborne-sys.com/product/hi-5-military-ram-air-parachute/

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/
 
M

Martin Brown

Guest
On 13/08/2020 10:55, David Brown wrote:
On 13/08/2020 10:27, Martin Brown wrote:
On 12/08/2020 22:06, David Brown wrote:
On 05/08/2020 00:28, Ricketty C wrote:
On Tuesday, August 4, 2020 at 5:35:48 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

If Sweden is not locked down, why has the death rate fallen to
zero? Why has it fallen at all, with total cases only 0.8% of the
population?

Very good question.  Do you have any theories?  Could it be due to
the beginning of winter there?

Eh, no.  It\'s the middle of summer in Sweden.

Basically, a solid proportion of the most vulnerable people in old folks
homes are already dead, after months of a \"let people get the virus and
be done with it\" policy, and now it is mostly young people who have it.
  These don\'t die as often, but they spread it well and they sometimes
get serious long-lasting (possibly life-time) health problems.  It
really bugs me that the statistics don\'t track the numbers of people who
are crippled for months, years or the rest of their life by this virus -
that would give a better picture of the cost of the pandemic.

There are certainly a few who potentially have life changing injuries
from Covid infections. A friend is in that position - not nice.

There are many, judging from reports and indirect stories (like stories
of recuperation facilities being overwhelmed even when hospitals and
ICU\'s are doing fine) - but no one seems to be publishing real numbers.
There was a bit of anecdotal mention of this problem in a recent BBC
programme which include two twin Dutch doctors one of whom had a
spectacularly bad experience with Covid (as in complications which led
to them stopping his heart to reset it and doing it on camera).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000ljnb/surviving-the-virus-my-brother-me

The biggest problems seem to be scaring on the lungs reducing their
efficiency, and mental problems as a result of low oxygen, \"sticky\"
blood, and PTSD. But it will obviously take a long time to understand
the long term effects.
Certainly for those who have been in ICU then PTSD is a real likelihood.
I think the sticky blood wears off after a while - but not good to have
blood group A in that respect. The lung scarring is the most persistent
and it is as yet unclear how well people will recover long term. I hope
my friend will be OK eventually they were a fit skier prior to this.
Sweden has similar lock-down and restrictions as Norway.  But they left
it far too late, and waited until the restrictions didn\'t have a chance
of limiting the spread.

(And before Larkin or others suggest it, no - they have no \"herd
immunity\" in Sweden.)

UK survey has just reported nationally 6% and in London 13% with
antibodies using a reasonably credible test. Indications are that there
are a proportion of PCR Covid positive tested early on who do not now
test positive for antibodies now which is a little disconcerting.

It seems that a lot of people who get Covid, especially those with
little or no symptoms, don\'t develop significant antibodies. And many
who do have antibodies, loose them fairly quickly. And we don\'t know
how effective the antibodies are at preventing a new infection (though
antibody donation treatments show that they help cure the disease when
you have got it).

There is still a great deal we don\'t know.
Indeed. Though even with imperfect information decisions have to be made.
That is one reason why I am prepared to cut the UK government a fair
amount of slack.

Based on the UK\'s present 45k fatality to date that puts 60% herd
immunity on a community wide basis at 450k fatalities (80% 600k).
OTOH if you could keep it contained exclusively in the under 45\'s you
can almost get to 60% herd immunity just with another 20k deaths.

That\'s one idea - but since we don\'t know if herd immunity is achievable
at all, it\'s a pretty risky one!
Until we have an effective vaccine it is the only game in town. The
objective at present must be to limit the economic damage with the
fewest overall number of fatalities. And that includes those who die
indirectly from other serious conditions through not being treated due
to Covid. Or because hospitals and governments run out of money.

It looks like Fergusson\'s simulations may not have been that far off.
(he predicted 500k to herd immunity and was ridiculed for it)

In the USA, the states that had no mandatory lockdown have had
about 1/3 the PPM deaths of the US average. That\'s not causal, but
it\'s interesting.

It is neither.  You cherry pick data left and right.  You use total
numbers to compare this thing, you use daily numbers to compare that
thing.  You would be a horrible scientist because you don\'t
understand  how to analyze data so as to compare apples with apples.

It could also be mixing cause and effect - many US states, like many
countries, have been waiting until their infection or death rates are
high before enforcing lockdowns.

UK did that pretty much and it amounted to changing horses mid-stream
and so obtaining the worst characteristics of two viable strategies.

Personally I think a hard lockdown sooner on those over 45 and social
distancing and hygiene measures for everyone else would have been much
better. But they panicked on seeing the Fergusson paper and the rest is
history. Only when it is all done and dusted will we be able to tell who
was right about this. UK economy is now in extreme record breaking
recession down by 20% in the last quarter (2008 recession was 2%).


Of course, it doesn\'t help the UK that this happened in the middle of
the biggest upheaval since WWII - Brexit and Bojo would have caused a
recession without Covid.
That joy is still to come. I know a lot about Japan having lived there
and was bemused by the breakdown of bilateral trade negotiations earlier
this week over Stilton cheese! Only expats buy it so the cheese market
in Japan is of negligible value. Our \"negotiators\" are utterly clueless.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53737388?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38507481

Headline writers loved it:
\"Stilton drives wedge between UK-Japan Brexit deal\".

And these two total failures by the UK government and English-led
insanities have guaranteed that Scotland will break free sooner or
later. That will be another huge upheaval.
The only thing that might make them stay is that North Sea oil is in
freefall.
They cannot make money at the current oil price.

In Europe at least, /opening/ borders is mostly a political thing.
Norway has given in to pressure to open its borders despite having lower
rates than most other countries.  But they\'ve given in to pressure to
open borders to foreign tourists, and for Norwegians to go to other
countries, with the result that we are now increasing significantly
again.

Countries where a lot of income is generated by tourism have a big
problem with this. Tank the economy or open the borders up to all.

Broken economies have a chance of recovery. Dead people do not.
Depends how dead you make the economy. Risk analysis by one of the
Bristol group suggested that if the economic recession exceeds 12% then
the longer term indirect fatalities arising from that will be broadly
comparable with the directly caused fatalities from Covid.

UK recession is already 20%.
Tourism is a significant part of Norwegian economy (though not nearly as
big a part as for southern Europe).


In general it does make sense to limit the maximum distance you are
allowed to travel during a pandemic.

Yes.

England completely screwed this one
up too and had mostly young people from all over the country descend on
Brighton beach for what was in effect a massive Covid party. Death rates
didn\'t increase much though infections did (just broke through 1k/day).

Scotland told people not to travel more than 5 miles unnecessarily.
This was not enforced very tightly, but a lot better than England.
Containment went to hell in a handcart when Cummings went walkabout
taking the Covid infection with him and got away with it.
Looking at our UK 7 day average curve I think it is just at the start of
exponential growth again (R>1). By the end of next week I will be
certain. Spain and France are ahead of us and now well on their way up.

Wales limited people to travelling no more than 5 miles from their home
which seems a bit mean to me - where I live in England it is 10 miles to
the nearest shop in every direction! Rural Wales it is even further.

The limit is for /unnecessary/ travel. You can travel for essential
shopping, or for work - but not for a beach party.
Having so many different sets of rules floating about and changing daily
it becomes impossible to keep track.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
 
M

Martin Brown

Guest
On 13/08/2020 16:01, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 09:27:54 +0100, Martin Brown
\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

Looking at our UK 7 day average curve I think it is just at the start of
exponential growth again (R>1). By the end of next week I will be
certain. Spain and France are ahead of us and now well on their way up.

There are secondary humps all over the world. Australia is the poster
child for that.
If they don\'t successfully contain it then it will run free.

Wales limited people to travelling no more than 5 miles from their home
which seems a bit mean to me - where I live in England it is 10 miles to
the nearest shop in every direction! Rural Wales it is even further.

The only test that really matters is death rate.
You have to worry about the KSI values too. For every one that dies two
are seriously injured possibly with life changing consequences. I feel
for the medics on the front line - some have had a very bad time of it.

It\'s down to near
zero in Sweden, about 1% of peak and declining. Why?
Mostly young people on holiday getting infected at the moment. Same
across most of Europe hot sunshine beaches and booze.
What\'s the logic of a travel distance limit?
Think of it as a diffusion problem.

Once you have a single live case then the virus can jump one mean free
path x in any direction covering an area which scales as x.t^(1/2). When
x is small like walking distance then you have a single containable
outbreak with a slowly increasing perimeter.

Allow just a few of them to move 100 miles and you have new outbreaks
all over the place and with previously unaffected nearest neighbours.

I am genuinely surprised how often food preparation plants are having
massive outbreaks- another big one today in the UK hundreds affected.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-53762233

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
 
T

Tom Gardner

Guest
On 13/08/20 16:53, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:22:46 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 13/08/20 16:01, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
The only test that really matters is death rate.

No #1: the only reliable measure is the /excess/ death rate

No #2: severe long term side effects (which are slowly
beginning to become apparent) are arguably worse than
death.

Certainly I fear brain damage more than I fear death, and
I don\'t even have the comfortable thought of an afterlife
to look forward to.

Why is the cv death rate in Sweden down to near zero?
Who cares? It is also low in England, but that is missing
the point about people that will have a miserable
existence after contracting covid.
 
W

whit3rd

Guest
On Thursday, August 13, 2020 at 8:02:02 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

> Lots of infections and few deaths is how epidemics best end.

False. Zero infections is optimal. You don\'t want cholera-and-survival,
you want no-cholera.

> The only test that really matters is death rate.

False. Test and measurement of disease isn\'t easy,
but is worth doing in the presence of a multiplicity of
strategies; you get epidemiologic results that way.

International reporting (WHO) means that \'death rate\' is nominally
reported widely, with a minimum of country-to-country variation, but
it\'s FAR from perfectly accurate. It certainly is NOT complete information.
 
J

John Larkin

Guest
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 18:08:32 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 13/08/20 16:53, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:22:46 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 13/08/20 16:01, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
The only test that really matters is death rate.

No #1: the only reliable measure is the /excess/ death rate

No #2: severe long term side effects (which are slowly
beginning to become apparent) are arguably worse than
death.

Certainly I fear brain damage more than I fear death, and
I don\'t even have the comfortable thought of an afterlife
to look forward to.

Why is the cv death rate in Sweden down to near zero?

Who cares? It is also low in England, but that is missing
the point about people that will have a miserable
existence after contracting covid.
I\'ve had it. Wasn\'t bad.
 
J

John Larkin

Guest
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 17:57:55 +0100, Martin Brown
<\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

On 13/08/2020 16:01, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 09:27:54 +0100, Martin Brown
\'\'\'newspam\'\'\'@nonad.co.uk> wrote:

Looking at our UK 7 day average curve I think it is just at the start of
exponential growth again (R>1). By the end of next week I will be
certain. Spain and France are ahead of us and now well on their way up.

There are secondary humps all over the world. Australia is the poster
child for that.

If they don\'t successfully contain it then it will run free.
It will do that anyhow. They can change the time sacle.



Wales limited people to travelling no more than 5 miles from their home
which seems a bit mean to me - where I live in England it is 10 miles to
the nearest shop in every direction! Rural Wales it is even further.

The only test that really matters is death rate.

You have to worry about the KSI values too. For every one that dies two
are seriously injured possibly with life changing consequences. I feel
for the medics on the front line - some have had a very bad time of it.

It\'s down to near
zero in Sweden, about 1% of peak and declining. Why?

Mostly young people on holiday getting infected at the moment. Same
across most of Europe hot sunshine beaches and booze.
The daily new-case rate in most of europe is way down from peak, and
very far down in Sweden, about 1/4 of peak. Deaths there are close to
zero.

Sounds like herd immunity to me, especially if the kids are partying
again.

And they didn\'t trash their economy as much.



What\'s the logic of a travel distance limit?

Think of it as a diffusion problem.
If people from the next town shop here, and we shop there, and we are
equally likely to be infected, I can\'t see that as being any different
from shopping near home. Seven customers in a shop, all with the same
probabilities.

The virus is most everywhere now. Too late to wall it off.

Once you have a single live case then the virus can jump one mean free
path x in any direction covering an area which scales as x.t^(1/2). When
x is small like walking distance then you have a single containable
outbreak with a slowly increasing perimeter.

Allow just a few of them to move 100 miles and you have new outbreaks
all over the place and with previously unaffected nearest neighbours.

I am genuinely surprised how often food preparation plants are having
massive outbreaks- another big one today in the UK hundreds affected.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-53762233
The UK death rate is near zero too.

I probably killed off the most vulnerable first-pass.

And it may be genetically drifting to be more infectous and less
deadly. These things do that.
 
J

John Larkin

Guest
On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 09:13:41 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

On 2020-08-09 10:53, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 09/08/20 18:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 09 Aug 2020 08:46:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:

On 2020-08-09 07:34, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 9 Aug 2020 06:57:04 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 09/08/20 01:47, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

[...]


Skiing isn\'t really very dangerous.

My daughter and I watched someone die at Breckenridge.
A local man fell, slid, made a memorable \"crump\" as he
hit a water cannon, and didn\'t move. I called out the
blood bath when our chairlift reached the top.


Our insurance agent almost died. He hit a tree. The tree won.


Any ordinary vacation, like a beach or something, I keep thinking
about stuff.

Yes. I can sit on a beach for a day or so, then I\'m off
using local busses to explore local towns, or off on the
train to another destination.


Skiing is totally absorbing, an entirely different world,
and you can do it all day.

Gliding is intense relaxed concentration, very similar
to skiing except it can be done locally.

I tried parachuting, but the duty cycle was absurd. At great expense
(and risk) you might actually do it for 10 minutes per day.


Not if you open up three seconds after the exit once in a while. The
others thought it was foolish to waste all this freefall fun but once in
a while I just wanted to \"soar\", find thermals and all that. Especially
if the pilot would drop us above 16,000 ft. Which, of course, wasn\'t
100% legit sans oxygen but fun.

[...]

I only made a few static jumps, from 3000\' or so, and the view was
cool, but it didn\'t seem to last long. How long does it take from 16K
feet?

I guess a wing-type chute could soar for a while. What\'s the glide
slope like on a good chute?

Apparently paragliders are 12:1, which is pisspoor - a 747
manages 15:1. Perhaps that is why many paragliders have big
fans on their back!

An old wooden glider will do >20:1, a modern plastic glider >50:1.


Parachutes are way worse. A high-priced monstrous military version can
give you 5:1 but the stuff we used was always below 4:1. Usually well below.

https://airborne-sys.com/product/hi-5-military-ram-air-parachute/
I jumped with a 22\' war surplus chute. It hit the ground HARD.

You should have seen the plane.
 
Toggle Sidebar

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top