Cable Forum - Coronavirus

I'm not sure why 100% resistance is being held up as the bar when the Government (and others) use the term vaccine escape to describe reduced efficacy.

As I said to Pierre his ludicrous binary approach would have a vaccine that works 10% of the time as "working". That said, given he considers Coronavirus "mild" and continues to wilfully downplay the pandemic, it's no real surprise that he extends his ignorance to vaccine escape.

However his blind optimism usually results in disappointment so I take some comfort from that.

You can’t help yourself can you?

pip08456

31-05-2021 11:17

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36081405)

That doesn't take account of intervention.

I see, vaccination isn't intervention. Got it!

Pierre

31-05-2021 11:19

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36081399)

She told me that the local hospitals are gearing up for in increase in hospitalisations for COVID patients.

Considering that this will now most likely be a seasonal illness, then we should expect an increase around from august onwards.

I would hope any and every hospital are always in a state of readiness.

jfman

31-05-2021 11:19

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36081407)

I see, vaccination isn't intervention. Got it!

That's clearly not what I said.

Those models are projections that have assumptions in them.

Vaccination is intervention. Lockdown is intervention. Unless one of those lines matches exactly what happened (forecast vaccine rollout, vaccine efficacy, levels of restrictions) it's impossible to say that the modelling was wrong.

Pierre

31-05-2021 11:22

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaymoss (Post 36081402)

End of the day I am glad it is not people like Pierre that makes the hard choices because if it was there would have been a lot more deaths and grieving families this last 15 months.

How do you know I’m not Matt Hancock?

Quote:

I personally do not think we are ready for back to normal and do not think we will be for a long long time but that does not mean we can not re open everything we just need to take care and we also need to be protected from those who refuse to face realities. Some form of social distancing and mask wearing needs to remain in my opinion ie antivaxxers deniers and selfish a holes can stay away from me

So we’ll just keep continually wearing masks for the thrill it gives us, and not base it on any evidence.

jfman

31-05-2021 11:24

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36081410)

How do you know I’m not Matt Hancock?

Easy.

He has advocated lockdown and restrictions.

Pierre

31-05-2021 11:25

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36081409)

Those models are projections that have assumptions in them.

That were clearly wrong

---------- Post added at 11:25 ---------- Previous post was at 11:24 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36081411)

Easy.

He’s advocated lockdown and restrictions.

Only to the face of the public.

jfman

31-05-2021 11:28

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36081412)

That were clearly wrong

Grateful if you could point to the line that most closely matches our vaccine rollout, school closures and various levels of restrictions from January to date? (Oh, and also forecast a new variant).

Otherwise I’m happy to chalk this up as further baseless speculation on your part.

spiderplant

31-05-2021 11:32

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36081404)

And still continuing.

What is the source for your chart?

Jaymoss

31-05-2021 11:38

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36081410)

How do you know I’m not Matt Hancock?

So we’ll just keep continually wearing masks for the thrill it gives us, and not base it on any evidence.

a lot of people in the orient have worn masks due to the environment for years and years and they managed. What is wrong with taking precautions ?

Proverbs 22:3 The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it.

jfman

31-05-2021 11:48

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaymoss (Post 36081417)

Unfortunately the simplistic analysis from some works on the basis that masks aren’t 100% effective therefore they are ineffective.

Just as well they don’t think of vaccines the same way.

pip08456

31-05-2021 11:53

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by spiderplant (Post 36081415)

What is the source for your chart?

https://data.spectator.co.uk/

joglynne

31-05-2021 12:06

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36081419)

https://data.spectator.co.uk/

The actual report can be found here and it appears to contain whole a shed load of information to keep all those who enjoy nitpicking through any links posted.
https://assets.publishing.service.go...r_England_.pdf

However I decided I have better, and less brain numbing, things to do on such a lovely day than do more that speed read it. :D

Over to someone who enjoys ploughing through government articles.

Carth

31-05-2021 12:45

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36081409)

(snip)
Those models are projections that have assumptions in them. (/snip)

Am I seeing things, or is this the first sign of admission that all the projections made by the many and varied 'experts' in the Covid scenarios are nothing more than educated guesses?

:D :p: ;)

oh, and even I mentioned new variants 'arriving soon' about a week ago, they always seem to spring up nearing a lifting of restrictions ;)

Sephiroth

31-05-2021 12:46

Re: Coronavirus

Quote:

Originally Posted by joglynne (Post 36081420)

The problem with that government article is that it is undated - thus quite useless. Studies based on latest information are the only ones that provide potential value because outcomes are still unfolding.

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:35.

Page 366 of 569

366

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page