Coronavirus Thread

[danny.]

Hope it stays like this #optimism

 

 

[Sampson]

25 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

Its really worrying that you continue to quite figures from those espousing conspriracy theories without checking the legistamacy of the facts.  You need help!

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports

 

You can see the report on the government website. I might be missing them but I cannot see those figures in that twitter post anywhere on the report it quotes.

[Stivo]

1 hour ago, Sampson said:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports

 

You can see the report on the government website. I might be missing them but I cannot see those figures in that twitter post anywhere on the report it quotes.

I was rather hoping to get farrington fox to look into it!  
 

The 67.9% figure is indeed referenced, the other figures have been calculated based on an estimate of English population.

 

if you look at the ukhsa week 50 influenza and covid report table 10 gives the actual breakdown used by ukhsa.

 

The number of vaccinations given as first doses is 44M not  32M ( same as dashboard) and when you divide that by a reasonable estimate for English population and further take  off the number of children under 12 you get the percentage on the government dashboard.

 

Whatever you do you don’t get 67.9%.

 

The reason that ukhsa does indeed get 67.9% is that that the UKHSA uses the NIMS database which over estimates the population. The NIMS database  has excess entries because people have died, moved away from England or are registered at two gps ( e,g students)

 

The dashboard uses the 2020 mid year population estimate from ons, now it’s fair to acknowledge that it’s an estimate but it’s thought to be much more accurate than NIMS.

 

Edited 17 December 2021 by Stivo

[Robo61]

33 minutes ago, Sampson said:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports

 

You can see the report on the government website. I might be missing them but I cannot see those figures in that twitter post anywhere on the report it quotes.

Might be because there not there.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

1 hour ago, Chocolate Teapot said:

22% of people are ****ing miserable. Who knew?

That's mad isn't it. You know for a fact those 22% will visit family this Christmas, but if the government tell them to they'll militantly stay at home and look down at anyone that doesn't. 

[CosbehFox]

1 hour ago, danny. said:

Hope it stays like this #optimism

 

 

Deary me 

[filbertway]

7 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

That's mad isn't it. You know for a fact those 22% will visit family this Christmas, but if the government tell them to they'll militantly stay at home and look down at anyone that doesn't. 

 yep

 

This annoyed me with a lot of people. They would bleat on and on about what a saint they are because they're not risking other people's lives by mixing with other people. Then the government give them a little window to go and see other people and the same people are gladly mixing with relatives and friends. So weird

[Matt_Lcfc]

12 minutes ago, filbertway said:

 yep

 

This annoyed me with a lot of people. They would bleat on and on about what a saint they are because they're not risking other people's lives by mixing with other people. Then the government give them a little window to go and see other people and the same people are gladly mixing with relatives and friends. So weird

Yep, agree fully with both of these comments. This has actually irritated me for the entirety of the pandemic, people genuinely have a superiority complex over others because they think that they they follow the rules more than others.

 

People have no idea that others are in different positions and face other circumstances. Covid-19 has really highlighted how many virtue signallers live amongst us 

[Stivo]

54 minutes ago, Stivo said:

I was rather hoping to get farrington fox to look into it!  
 

The 67.9% figure is indeed referenced, the other figures have been calculated based on an estimate of English population.

 

if you look at the ukhsa week 50 influenza and covid report table 10 gives the actual breakdown used by ukhsa.

 

The number of vaccinations given as first doses is 44M not  32M ( same as dashboard) and when you divide that by a reasonable estimate for English population and further take  off the number of children under 12 you get the percentage on the government dashboard.

 

Whatever you do you don’t get 67.9%.

 

The reason that ukhsa does indeed get 67.9% is that that the UKHSA uses the NIMS database which over estimates the population. The NIMS database  has excess entries because people have died, moved away from England or are registered at two gps ( e,g students)

 

So the unvaccinated population quoted consists of 5m real people, 8m young children plus a bunch of ghosts, clones and people who don’t live in the uk.  
 

The dashboard uses the 2020 mid year population estimate from ons, now it’s fair to acknowledge that it’s an estimate but it’s thought to be much more accurate than NIMS.

 

So some maths now

 

gov.uk

43M 1st  doses Population estimate 56M ( England only), less 8M under 12 gives 48M eligible. , 5M unvaccinated and coverage of almost 90% in eligible 

 

ukhsa

42.6M 1st doses, population estimate  62M gives 67.9% coverage overall ,  79% in eligible.  The UKHSA population overestimate adds 5M  unvaccinated.

 

the figures from the website quoted appear to have taken the 67.9% figure and treated it as the % of the eligible.

It has taken a reasonable population estimate of 55.9M  removed 8M kids to get  47.9M and multiplied that by 67.9% (mistake) to calculate the number of vaccinations incorrectly (under by 10m!) and so arrived at a figure of 15M for the unvaccinated ( over by 10m). It’s then added the kids back in.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 17 December 2021 by Stivo

[Sol thewall Bamba]

27 minutes ago, filbertway said:

 yep

 

This annoyed me with a lot of people. They would bleat on and on about what a saint they are because they're not risking other people's lives by mixing with other people. Then the government give them a little window to go and see other people and the same people are gladly mixing with relatives and friends. So weird

Same people won't have had a mask on in shops since July, government tell them to and bang the triple mask and gloves are back on.

[pazzerfox]

2 hours ago, Robo61 said:

Its really worrying that you continue to quite figures from those espousing conspriracy theories without checking the legistamacy of the facts.  You need help!

It's more worrying that the biggest breakfast show in the UK got facts about hospitisations wrong by around 50%! What have we learnt from this...question everything!

[Phil Bowman]

10 minutes ago, pazzerfox said:

It's more worrying that the biggest breakfast show in the UK got facts about hospitisations wrong by around 50%! What have we learnt from this...question everything!

What have we learned? Maybe that breakfast telly is crap. If we didn’t know that already. Which, surely, we did?

As you were.

[SpacedX]

1 hour ago, Matt_Lcfc said:

Yep, agree fully with both of these comments. This has actually irritated me for the entirety of the pandemic, people genuinely have a superiority complex over others because they think that they they follow the rules more than others.

 

People have no idea that others are in different positions and face other circumstances. Covid-19 has really highlighted how many virtue signallers live amongst us 

There are also people out there that genuinely adhere to the rules and act responsibly possibly in similar or worse circumstances and have an utterly shit time doing it. I am mindful of my cousin whose entire world has come apart. My main immediate priority is safeguarding my elderly parents who are in their late 80s and in with particular concern for my Father who was this week diagnosed with Alzheimer's. I also firmly believe in doing whatever I can, however small or insignificant it may seem to help and respect those working in frontline health service professions, caring roles and also those that have endeavoured to keep the country functioning during the last 20 months of this chaos. No superiority complex - just simply disdain for some sections of the British public.

 

I try not to be judgemental - there's nothing I can do about idiots putting others at risk due to their own self-centred interest or innate selfishness, but I can at least continue to respond to some of the frankly idiotic posts on here. Covid-19 has really highlighted how many imbeciles live among us. 

Edited 17 December 2021 by Line-X

[HighPeakFox]

What is more annoying than reactionary twattery by people that vote differently to yourself?

 

Reactionary twattery by those that vote the SAME WAY.

 

Oh yes, and unbelievable unwarranted arrogance too.

Edited 17 December 2021 by HighPeakFox

[Paninistickers]

18 minutes ago, Line-X said:

There are also people out there that genuinely adhere to the rules and act responsibly in similar or worse circumstances and have an utterly shit time doing it. I am mindful of my cousin whose entire world has come apart. My main immediate priority is safeguarding my elderly parents who are in their late 80s and in with particular concern for my Father who was this week diagnosed with Alzheimer's. I also firmly believe in doing whatever I can, however small or insignificant it may seen to help and respect those working in frontline health service professions, caring roles and also those that have endeavoured to keep the country functioning during the last 20 months of this chaos. No superiority complex - just simply disdain for some sections of the British public.

 

I try not to be judgemental - there's nothing I can do about idiots putting others at risk due to their own self-centred interest or innate selfishness, but I can at least continue to respond to some of the frankly idiotic posts on here. 

I guess I am one of these idiots you refer to, as I haven't taken a blind bit of notice of 75% of the rules since about June 2020. Mainly as 75% of rules are absurd, pointless, futile and/or just plain spiteful. 

 

I've used my own common sense, my own sense of fairness and just basic politeness theoughout and guess what? I've never caught it (not even asymptomatically) BUT MORE  IMPORTANTLY I have never given it to anyone.  

 

Maybe a few more 'idiots' using common sense rather than blindly following pointless rules would see less transmission!

[Ric Flair]

1 hour ago, filbertway said:

 yep

 

This annoyed me with a lot of people. They would bleat on and on about what a saint they are because they're not risking other people's lives by mixing with other people. Then the government give them a little window to go and see other people and the same people are gladly mixing with relatives and friends. So weird

Because there is a % of people that are conditioned to do whatever they are told to do and won't question it. That's how scary it is that if there was something sinister going on by those in charge that I'm not convinced a chunk of the population would ever stand up to it, just go along with it even if it ruined their lives.

 

The best are those that would have gone and seen family on Christmas day last year for one day only but then go back to not seeing them again for more than on end because the government told them not to. 

 

[SpacedX]

13 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I guess I am one of these idiots you refer to, as I haven't taken a blind bit of notice of 75% of the rules since about June 2020. Mainly as 75% of rules are absurd, pointless, futile and/or just plain spiteful. 

 

Clever lad. 

 

Or you mean that they simply interfere and intrude upon your self-centred existence? What rules after June? Do you mean the current ones? 75%? - Righto, could you perhaps for the benefit of myself and those reading this, detail what you are referring to? Who knows? I may well agree with you about a few. I absolutely guarantee what you'll come back with.

 

13 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

 

I've used my own common sense, my own sense of fairness and just basic politeness theoughout and guess what? I've never caught it (not even asymptomatically) BUT MORE  IMPORTANTLY I have never given it to anyone.  

 

How do you know? I've done the same and I have absolutely no idea whether I have been infected asymptomatically during the last 20 months. That's precisely the point, you can be unwittingly passing it on, which is why it's so dangerous. Incidentally, your caps lock appears to be intermittently malfunctioning. 

 

13 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Maybe a few more 'idiots' using common sense rather than blindly following pointless rules would see less transmission!

This "common sense" that you refer to. It hasn't been in evidence in the majority of your previous posts on this thread. Would you like me to provide some recent examples?

 

Edited 17 December 2021 by Line-X

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Stivo said:

So some maths now

 

gov.uk

43M 1st  doses Population estimate 56M ( England only), less 8M under 12 gives 48M eligible. , 5M unvaccinated and coverage of almost 90% in eligible 

 

ukhsa

42.6M 1st doses, population estimate  62M gives 67.9% coverage overall ,  79% in eligible.  The UKHSA population overestimate adds 5M  unvaccinated.

 

the figures from the website quoted appear to have taken the 67.9% figure and treated it as the % of the eligible.

It has taken a reasonable population estimate of 55.9M  removed 8M kids to get  47.9M and multiplied that by 67.9% (mistake) to calculate the number of vaccinations incorrectly (under by 10m!) and so arrived at a figure of 15M for the unvaccinated ( over by 10m). It’s then added the kids back in.

 

 

Mate - why are you trying to rationalise a tweet from a conspiracy nutter from Darlington ???

[Paninistickers]

20 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Clever lad. 

 

Or you mean that they simply interfere and intrude upon your self-centred existence? What rules after June? Do you mean the current ones? 75%? - Righto, could you perhaps for the benefit of myself and those reading this, detail what you are referring to? Who knows? I may well agree with you about a few. I absolutely guarantee what you'll come back with.

 

How do you know? I've done the same and I have absolutely no idea whether I have been infected asymptomatically during the last 20 months. That's precisely the point, you can be unwittingly passing it on, which is why it's so dangerous. Incidentally, your caps lock appears to be intermittently malfunctioning. 

 

This "common sense" that you refer to. It hasn't been in evidence in the majority of your previous posts on this thread. Would you like me to provide some recent examples?

 

Jeez, I'd be here all night listing absurd rules. 

 

1. How about having to isolate (snap decision from.uk govt)  when coming back from the canaries last year, whose infection rate was 4x lower than the UK?  That was spite to 'punish' those who went on holiday, nothing to do with safety.

 

2. How about the old fella who sat behind me v Newcastle who leant over towards the gap next to my seat and sneezed on me? And then at the end of the game, popped his mask on? Thanks old fella! 

 

I cba to list literally hundreds of other absurdities in the last 18 months.

 

 

[Lcfc82]

3 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Jeez, I'd be here all night listing absurd rules. 

 

1. How about having to isolate (snap decision from.uk govt)  when coming back from the canaries last year, whose infection rate was 4x lower than the UK?  That was spite to 'punish' those who went on holiday, nothing to do with safety.

 

2. How about the old fella who sat behind me v Newcastle who leant over towards the gap next to my seat and sneezed on me? And then at the end of the game, popped his mask on? Thanks old fella! 

 

I cba to list literally hundreds of other absurdities in the last 18 months.

 

 

Pretty much every rule they have come out with to be honest 

[Farrington fox]

3 hours ago, Robo61 said:

Its really worrying that you continue to quite figures from those espousing conspriracy theories without checking the legistamacy of the facts.  You need help!

Lol. You need help with spelling by the look of it. Should be ‘quote’ ‘legitimacy’ and from your previous post. ‘Eaten’. You’re welcome 😉 

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

65 hospitalisations with the new variant and thankfully still only 1 death 

[Parafox]

3 hours ago, Phil Bowman said:

 

 

Science is all about opinions, you know. It’s a lot like football in that way.

I don't know if your being obtuse here but surely, science is based on facts and research, not opinions

[Buce]

9 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Lol. You need help with spelling by the look of it. Should be ‘quote’ ‘legitimacy’ and from your previous post. ‘Eaten’. You’re welcome 😉 

 

It really should tell you something when your only response is to criticise his spelling.

[Buce]

1 minute ago, Parafox said:

I don't know if your being obtuse here but surely, science is based on facts and research, not opinions

 

He was being ironic.