Jump to content
IGNORED

The Coronavirus and its impact on sport/Fans Return (Merged)


Loderingo

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, pillred said:

Well it reads differently to me, and I'm fairly sure he meant 20,000 deaths not 200 even if he didn't word it very well.

 

2 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

No I didn't.

The last sentence was ambiguous to me, could have been confirmed infected (you could have correct me earlier when I replied), but fine, you now mean't deaths.  

Either way, kind of sums up a major part of the problem for me.

You casually banding around these huge figures, the number of deaths the government expect, up to 50, 000 people and still think they got their policy "spot on"?

Well, i'm not really sure what to say to that, other than that is an unacceptable figure on any level and I hope to God people who make these kind of statements, or agree with them as somehow being acceptable or inevitable, don't have a loved one affected by it.

Anyway, i'm not going to get into a massive debate about it, but suffice to say, "spot on" and 50,000 deaths don't compute, IMO.

I'm no expert either but I think the government has it spot on.

Current estimates of those with/had the virus is 35,000 (we don't know the exact numbers, same for most countries) with 103 deaths. Currently way under 1% mortality rate. 

Government expectation is 20k - 50k with possibly closer to/under 20k if everyone follows the advice given (which they won't). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a dreadful press conference, more ambiguity, more bullshit, few answers. He seems bored and out of ideas, even seeming to complain that it was the 4th one this week and wants to retreat to doing a live stream!

This is the problem with the man he’s making things worse like he’s done wherever he’s worked. 

Edited by Odysseus
  • Like 3
  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

They cracked down after SARS too but it just drove loads of it underground.

It was most likely a virus originally from a bat, but the reservoir and source of infection to humans was a pangolin they reckon

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200317175442.htm

Edited by Stortz
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Odysseus said:

That was a dreadful press conference, more ambiguity, more bullshit, few answers. He seems bored and out of ideas, even seeming to complain that it was the 4th one this week and wants to retreat to doing a live stream!

This is the problem with the man he’s making things worse like he’s done wherever he’s worked. 

No it wasn't. The country couldn't handle all the bad news at once but its coming.  You don't like him we get it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair I think Boris is doing pretty well in the circumstances. There’s no way he can be expected to know all the detail of what is going on but comes across as being in control. I think he is trying to be as honest as he can without overly panicking people. He’s a far more assured leader than Trump but that said the bar is very low.
I was glad to see Prof Witty back today as when he was off yesterday I thought he may have tested positive. I would hope that these experts are being wrapped up in cotton wool.

Edited by Cardy
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Vincent Vega said:

No it wasn't. The country couldn't handle all the bad news at once but its coming.  You don't like him we get it.

How did you get to that conclusion.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
45 minutes ago, One Team In Keynsham said:

Damn, fell foul of my usual rule of double checking meme content - it just seemed so likely to be true.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pillred said:

Well it reads differently to me, and I'm fairly sure he meant 20,000 deaths not 200 even if he didn't word it very well.

Patrick Vallance said yesterday (or the day before?) that if we can keep it to below 20,000 deaths that would be a ‘good outcome’ and hopefully we can achieve that with the new measures the Government are introducing.

He also acknowledged that 20,000 deaths can never be ‘good’ but I guess in comparison to what the death toll could be if nothing was done then that would be considered reasonable.

 

Edited by Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

Patrick Vallance said yesterday (or the day before?) that if we can keep it to below 20,000 deaths that would be a ‘good outcome’ and hopefully we can achieve that with the new measures the Government are introducing.

He also acknowledged that 20,000 deaths can never be ‘good’ but I guess in comparison to what the death toll could be if nothing was done then that would be considered reasonable.

 

Ultimately the government's approach will be judged on the UK death toll versus other nations such as France and Germany. It'll be a long time before we can apply this comparison though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

Patrick Vallance said yesterday (or the day before?) that if we can keep it to below 20,000 deaths that would be a ‘good outcome’ and hopefully we can achieve that with the new measures the Government are introducing.

He also acknowledged that 20,000 deaths can never be ‘good’ but I guess in comparison to what the death toll could be if nothing was done then that would be considered reasonable.

 

Exactly.

But you will still get those types who will bandy about 400,000 deaths.

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mozo said:

Ultimately the government's approach will be judged on the UK death toll versus other nations such as France and Germany. It'll be a long time before we can apply this comparison though.

I don't see how there can be a comparison given the different demographics, populations, and cultures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
35 minutes ago, mozo said:

Ultimately the government's approach will be judged on the UK death toll versus other nations such as France and Germany. It'll be a long time before we can apply this comparison though.

There will be differences, percentage of smokers, workers conditions - dust, pollution etc.- ages, so that data will all need normalising before it means anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

Not sure if it’s me; I like the way BJ seems to write notes during the conference when people mention things.

I find it worrying! The journalists are providing thought provoking detail that Boris & his team haven't already thought of???

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
3 minutes ago, Seneca the Younger said:

I find it worrying! The journalists are providing thought provoking detail that Boris & his team haven't already thought of???

He’s just jotting down the names of the ones asking awkward questions, maybe he’s taking lessons from China.........

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Maesknoll Red said:

There will be differences, percentage of smokers, workers conditions - dust, pollution etc.- ages, so that data will all need normalising before it means anything.

That data is probably already out there. Doesn't sound like a difficult comparison if someone wanted to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Just watched channel 4 news interview a woman in a crowded London street proudly saying she won't follow social distancing advice because "it means we're just giving in" to it. Unbelievable. 

Hopefully natural selection takes care of these belters. My local butcher told me today that this is a government conspiracy. Be careful these people walk among us.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
19 minutes ago, mozo said:

That data is probably already out there. Doesn't sound like a difficult comparison if someone wanted to do it.

It probably is, but unless someone does it, the figures are meaningless.  It seems that many of the papers etc. run with headlines that contain figures from data that has no normalisation done.  Just creating more hysteria.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...