Thread: Coronavirus (OLD)
View Single Post
Old 30-03-2020, 21:18   #1562
OLD BOY
Rise above the players
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wokingham
Services: 2 V6 with 360 software, ITVX, 4+, Prime, Netflix, Apple+, Disney+, Paramount+, Discovery+
Posts: 15,140
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
OLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronzeOLD BOY is cast in bronze
Re: Coronavirus
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman View Post

---------- Post added at 20:05 ---------- Previous post was at 20:03 ----------

[/COLOR]

That’s not actually what that study said - you have simply read the FT headline and taken that as gospel. Had you actually read and understood the study it makes presumptions about how infection the virus is, and what that would mean in terms of the total population with it, and when it likely arose in the UK.

It was an entirely hypothetical study, which offered three less rose tinted outcomes than the one you describe. As you say though you choose the studies you want to believe rather than act on the science. I can’t help with that.
You do make me laugh, jfman! Always jumping off at the deep end and disagreeing with everything in sight.

For your information, I did read the article, and yes it was hypothetical. As are all the projections you will see about this virus. And the reason for that is that only a small minority of the population have been tested for the virus.
OLD BOY is offline