SIGN UP

Level 4 Lockdown

Avatar Image
eve1974 | 12:17 Tue 22nd Sep 2020 | News
40 Answers
Is what’s predicted. I can’t recall what we cld / cldnt do with that. Can anyone remind me?

Answers

21 to 40 of 40rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Avatar Image
the lockdown isn't level 4, its the risk level that is level 4. What we can and cannot do is said to be going to change from the previous full lockdown.
12:45 Tue 22nd Sep 2020
A public announcement is to be made at 8pm I believe.
give em hell woof
how long has anyone let covid rip before acting ?
well it will be Ro rates (around 1.5) until so many have been infected that a contact results in a miss and not an infection - and that is 60% of 3m Brits = long way away

the data is out there - currently we are at 6%

//I read you can have sex but it's advisable to wear a mask while doing so.//. - I have a divers rubber suit if er anyone is interested. Decent rates to borrow
Yes we all know about grains of rice and chessboards but they have no grounds as far as I can see predicting that the cases will actually double like that. Indeed why stop there to use the chessboard analogy? Why not carry on for a further 3 months and predict 200 million cases?
In a way I welcome this provided they stick to it.
At least it provides some long term continuity that stops well short of complete lunacy.
Oh I think complete lunacy is in the rear-view mirror now, boggle-eyed frothing derangement is the next stop.

All change.
PP I am losing the will to give hell.
//...they showed what would happen if the current exponential (2 4 8 16 32 64) rates continues.//

//Yes we all know about grains of rice and chessboards...//

Indeed we do and what that has to do with this matter is a little unclear. The grains of rice on a chessboard remain there. The number of people who catch the virus do not - they either die or in the overwhelming proportion of cases, they recover.

The problem is the current rate is not quite so exponential as the grains of rice on a chessboard citation. The scientists said (according to "The Metro") that "that infections could reach 50,000 a day by the middle of next month if they continued to double every 24 hours." They were completely wrong. If infections doubled from yesterday's figure of 4,368 they would reach 69,888 by next Saturday (26th September).

The plain fact is that since the number of infections reached double figures there have been just three days when new infections doubled. These were all either when the infections were very low or when a "correction" had been made. The average rate of daily increase (excluding the days when a decrease was evident) is actually less than 30% and this includes days when adjustments were made and when the figures were very low. Since daily new infections passed the 1,000 mark again (9th August) in the latest surge which has caused such panic, the average daily increase in the number of new infections is under 7%. So why are the scientists painting scenarios which speak of the number of new infections doubling daily? It's obvious that infections will rise alarmingly if that were the case but it isn't happening and it never has.

Why do they spout this drivel?
I thought it was a weekly doubling?
Either way, questionable at the least
From the BBC News website,

'Speaking at Downing Street alongside chief medical adviser, Prof Chris Whitty, Sir Patrick stressed the figures given were not a prediction, but added: "At the moment we think the epidemic is doubling roughly every seven days.

"If, and that's quite a big if, but if that continues unabated, and this grows, doubling every seven days... if that continued you would end up with something like 50,000 cases in the middle of October per day.

"Fifty-thousand cases per day would be expected to lead a month later, so the middle of November say, to 200-plus deaths per day.

"The challenge, therefore, is to make sure the doubling time does not stay at seven days.

"That requires speed, it requires action and it requires enough in order to be able to bring that down."'

“Fifty-thousand cases per day would be expected to lead a month later, so the middle of November say, to 200-plus deaths per day. “

It would also mean 800,000 cases by then. Why did he not say that too?
Is there an epidemiological reason for supposing things would have eased off by then? If so why not say so?
Yeah "Why do they spout this drivel?"
Schoolboy error judge. Double every 7 days not every day. Might need to rethink your post
ichkeria, as far as I can see, he was looking at the possible death toll at the beginning of winter, in November, and extrapolated it from where the rate of infections was a month earlier.
I know what he was doing jno. The point is he had embarked on a mathematical extrapolation that felt - as he himself admitted - highly questionable
And of course it forgets that the positive count is not accurate. Up to 44% of them may actually be negative. OK, so its probably not the highest figure but there are a good proportion of false positives. So you should not count them in the exponential growth.

The whole thing is scaremongering and easily pulled part. That is why people dont trust them and conspirator theories abound.
Different to " Eat out to help out"
Teacake 12 53, not if there are more than six people present.
Furthermore it’s a scenario way way above the picture in France and Spain.
Do people need to be scared into compliance? And yet the police are supposedly overwhelmed with snitch calls although in fairness the police aren’t geared up for that presumably
//I thought it was a weekly doubling?
Either way, questionable at the least//

I thought so too, ikky. But the Metro definitely said daily.

//Schoolboy error judge. Double every 7 days not every day.//

Not mine. Quote from the Metro. I believe seven days is the number quoted by the scientists, but not reported properly by The Metro.

//Speaking at Downing Street alongside chief medical adviser, Prof Chris Whitty, Sir Patrick stressed the figures given were not a prediction, but added: "At the moment we think the epidemic is doubling roughly every seven days.//

I don’t know what leads them to that conclusion. Either that or they learnt different arithmetic to me. Since the new infections rose above 1,000 again only once have new infections doubled in seven days – from August 31st to September 7th. It has taken 16 days for the number on 8th September (2,460) to double to today’s figure of 4,925. Numbers are not doubling roughly every seven days – not even very roughly every seven days. I’m not saying they won’t (please take note Peter Pedant) but they are not at the moment.

The scientists’ predictions (or whatever they call them) are completely outside the realms of any other European country at a similar stage in the pandemic. There is only one reason Mr Johnson put them on the telly last night – to scare the population witless for a second time in six months so that they become pliant enough to accept the latest efforts to control something which cannot be controlled and which will inflict further huge damage to the country.
As soon as Mr doom and Mr gloom had finished, the BBC couldn't wait to headline the 'if' worst case projections as if they were the gospelast truth.
Infections can double as much as they want. Doesn't mean the hospital admissions or deaths/disabilities will build up at the same rate. a) we know more about it now, and of the errors made previously and b) viruses tend to be less damaging as it evolves in order to survive. A lot less knee jerk reaction, imposed by our unconfident control freak government, would be very welcome.

21 to 40 of 40rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Do you know the answer?

Level 4 Lockdown

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.