blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 19, 2021, 11:54:55 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2259860 Posts in 66602 Topics by 16869 Members
Latest Member: HughOlssen
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  COVID19
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 ... 275 Go Down Print
Author Topic: COVID19  (Read 166525 times)
neeko
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1761


View Profile WWW
« Reply #885 on: March 28, 2020, 09:01:34 AM »

The key thing is that this will be peak number 1, there will be more as we cycle through, relaxing restrictions, new cases and a peak, lockdown and repeat.

Can’t see this pattern changing until the vaccine is ready (many months away) or every person has had it with 10% of those hospitalised, again months to go.
Logged

There is no problem so bad that a politician cant make it worse.

http://www.dec.org.uk
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3878



View Profile
« Reply #886 on: March 28, 2020, 09:02:44 AM »

You should wait and see what happens with our new lockdown before easing it.   The effect of "our" social distancing is uncertain.   The virus may peak a couple of weeks after the new rules were implemented (which I assume is where this comes from), but it may keep on rising for longer, albeit at a slower rate.

There is absolutely no certainty.   As an example, Italy is still on an upward curve despite taking a lot of neasures.  When we see them start reducing we can probably be more hopeful, not now.

Agreed, mostly, we can probably learn more quickly from just looking at Lombardy numbers initially. There is a downward trend in new infections in Lombardy.

If you have the time, could you run this through the Doobs auditing process? Many thanks 🙏.

https://www.corriere.it/politica/20_marzo_26/the-real-death-toll-for-covid-19-is-at-least-4-times-the-official-numbers-b5af0edc-6eeb-11ea-925b-a0c3cdbe1130.shtml

Logged
StuartHopkin
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7937


Turny


View Profile
« Reply #887 on: March 28, 2020, 09:09:33 AM »

I think it's open knowledge isnt it that they expect it to peak 2 weeks after the lockdown was introduced. Even with people still out and about the social interaction has been suppressed massively.

Were not on the same trajectory as Italy, isnt that to do with the number of old people who still leave with their children and grandchildren.

Peaking in 2 weeks is great but that means our graph will be low and long. More lives saved but the lockdown will be in place for 3 maybe 4 months?



Logged

Only 23 days to go until the Berlin Marathon! Please sponsor me at www.virginmoneygiving.com/StuartHopkin
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15532


View Profile
« Reply #888 on: March 28, 2020, 09:17:56 AM »

You should wait and see what happens with our new lockdown before easing it.   The effect of "our" social distancing is uncertain.   The virus may peak a couple of weeks after the new rules were implemented (which I assume is where this comes from), but it may keep on rising for longer, albeit at a slower rate.

There is absolutely no certainty.   As an example, Italy is still on an upward curve despite taking a lot of neasures.  When we see them start reducing we can probably be more hopeful, not now.

Agreed, mostly, we can probably learn more quickly from just looking at Lombardy numbers initially. There is a downward trend in new infections in Lombardy.

If you have the time, could you run this through the Doobs auditing process? Many thanks 🙏.

https://www.corriere.it/politica/20_marzo_26/the-real-death-toll-for-covid-19-is-at-least-4-times-the-official-numbers-b5af0edc-6eeb-11ea-925b-a0c3cdbe1130.shtml



What I do know is that the recording of deaths has always been a bit subjevtive.  So the data we work with is never going to be perfect.  In some places the number of deaths from Covid19 will be overstated, in others it will be understated.  Given this was one of the first places affected, then it is more likely death causes were inaccurate. I think the conclusion is that the deaths ftom Covid19 are very likely to be understated in this place, but this is a small place in Italy, and not reflective of the whole of Italy never mind any other country.

I think you can possibly read something into the total deaths.  There are 12,000 people there and just over 1% have died.   I wouldn't read too much into it, as I don't know the demographics and only have the journalist's word on the expected deaths.  Also, the figures could be skewed by locations of hospitals etc.  
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3878



View Profile
« Reply #889 on: March 28, 2020, 09:22:36 AM »

I think it's open knowledge isnt it that they expect it to peak 2 weeks after the lockdown was introduced. Even with people still out and about the social interaction has been suppressed massively.

Were not on the same trajectory as Italy, isnt that to do with the number of old people who still leave with their children and grandchildren.

Peaking in 2 weeks is great but that means our graph will be low and long. More lives saved but the lockdown will be in place for 3 maybe 4 months?


The evidence from China says peak 32 days after full lockdown, it’s hard to envisage a scenario (with a less stringent lockdown) where we beat that. It does seem credible that Italy/Spain is disadvantaged by having multiple generations of families in the same house. It seems to be too early to say how we are doing relative to those countries though, as we are still so early on the exponential growth phase. I think the JBM chart is still the best I’ve seen, he has some serious bright people advising him on it as well. The next week is key for us and it’s clearly concerning that our epicentre is one of the most densely populated places in Europe, more similar to NYC and Madrid than Lombardy.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 09:29:15 AM by kukushkin88 » Logged
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3878



View Profile
« Reply #890 on: March 28, 2020, 09:26:33 AM »

You should wait and see what happens with our new lockdown before easing it.   The effect of "our" social distancing is uncertain.   The virus may peak a couple of weeks after the new rules were implemented (which I assume is where this comes from), but it may keep on rising for longer, albeit at a slower rate.

There is absolutely no certainty.   As an example, Italy is still on an upward curve despite taking a lot of neasures.  When we see them start reducing we can probably be more hopeful, not now.

Agreed, mostly, we can probably learn more quickly from just looking at Lombardy numbers initially. There is a downward trend in new infections in Lombardy.

If you have the time, could you run this through the Doobs auditing process? Many thanks 🙏.

https://www.corriere.it/politica/20_marzo_26/the-real-death-toll-for-covid-19-is-at-least-4-times-the-official-numbers-b5af0edc-6eeb-11ea-925b-a0c3cdbe1130.shtml



What I do know is that the recording of deaths has always been a bit subjevtive.  So the data we work with is never going to be perfect.  In some places the number of deaths from Covid19 will be overstated, in others it will be understated.  Given this was one of the first places affected, then it is more likely death causes were inaccurate. I think the conclusion is that the deaths ftom Covid19 are very likely to be understated in this place, but this is a small place in Italy, and not reflective of the whole of Italy never mind any other country.

I think you can possibly read something into the total deaths.  There are 12,000 people there and just over 1% have died.   I wouldn't read too much into it, as I don't know the demographics and only have the journalist's word on the expected deaths.  Also, the figures could be skewed by locations of hospitals etc.  


It has the hallmarks of something dressed up to be more rigorous than it is and even for a relative layman on the stats like me, the sample sizes all look really small. Many thanks for your input.
Logged
Jon MW
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6144



View Profile
« Reply #891 on: March 28, 2020, 09:36:26 AM »

...
It would assume our lockdown measures to be more effective than China’s (35 days from 10 deaths to peak). According to JBM’s graph China locked down on day 3 post 10 deaths. We don’t have an equivalent lockdown in place, we didn’t even have anything remotely resembling a lockdown until 23rd March. It can’t really be based on anything other than wishful thinking.

Your statement would be based on the assumption that the UK and China have the same population demographics, the same health care supply, the same ICU supply, the same infrastructure, the same administrative structure, the same viral spread and many, many other factors.

I have a maths degree, and I've been employed as a statistician - I like numbers and I value statistics. But I also know it's limitations.

Just like the modelling is never expected to exactly predict real life, trying to map different countries onto each other isn't entirely helpful.

All epidemics follow the same pattern, and the responses to them all follow the same pattern - so there is going to be a lot of similarity between different countries. But once you start comparing them it means you're adding more and more and more assumptions to your model and making it less and less helpful for being able to actually be helpfully useful.

In a few years all the data can be overlaid and useful information can be learned from it - but that's going to take a lot of data and a lot of context; it's not possible as it's happening because there are just too many differing factors between countries and too many unknowns.

EDIT: and that's just aside from the fact that it's looking more and more like that's stating the lower end of the modelling prediction rather than being from a reliable source; journalists going to journalist no matter who they are.
Logged

Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2011 blonde MTT League August Champion
2011 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain  - - runners up - -
5 Star HORSE Classic - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15532


View Profile
« Reply #892 on: March 28, 2020, 09:39:22 AM »

I think it's open knowledge isnt it that they expect it to peak 2 weeks after the lockdown was introduced. Even with people still out and about the social interaction has been suppressed massively.

Were not on the same trajectory as Italy, isnt that to do with the number of old people who still leave with their children and grandchildren.

Peaking in 2 weeks is great but that means our graph will be low and long. More lives saved but the lockdown will be in place for 3 maybe 4 months?


The evidence from China says peak 32 days after full lockdown, it’s hard to envisage a scenario (with a less stringent lockdown) where we beat that. It does seem credible that Italy/Spain is disadvantaged by having multiple generations of families in the same house. It seems to be too early to say how we are doing relative to those countries though, as we are still so early on the exponential growth phase. I think the JBM chart is still the best I’ve seen, he has some serious bright people advising him on it as well. The next week is key for us and it’s clearly concerning that our epicentre is one of the most densely populated places in Europe, more similar to NY and Madrid than Lombardy.

How many people here know what the JBM chart is?  I don't know, and have followed it fairly closely.  I guess it is likely I have seen it, but please just use the full name.

I don't think anyone, even thos advising the Government at Imperial, really knows the effect of social distancing here, and in London.  So I think we, and the Government, only "hope" it peaks in 2 weeks.  "Expecting" it to peak is too strong, it suggests the average peak is in 2 weeks.  It is clearly possible that it keeps increasing even after this "lockdown".


Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
Chompy
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 11766


Expert


View Profile
« Reply #893 on: March 28, 2020, 09:46:06 AM »

The key thing is that this will be peak number 1, there will be more as we cycle through, relaxing restrictions, new cases and a peak, lockdown and repeat.

Can’t see this pattern changing until the vaccine is ready (many months away) or every person has had it with 10% of those hospitalised, again months to go.

'May be peak number 1' rather than 'will be' I fancy. Nobody knows.

Won't the first big game changer be the test to show who's had it already? And recovered and maybe devloped immunity. No country has that test as yet.

So I had my Covid 1.5m club special letter on Monday and have had a text every day, sometimes two. WALOFS. It's just the usual stuff about washing hands, getting someone to pick up prescriptions and directing you to NHS websites.

This morning's was: "NHS Coronavirus Service: How will you make the most of your time each day? Try reading, watching films, learning something new or sudoku. Make a plan each day in the morning and each week on a Monday. To opt out reply STOP."
« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 09:49:53 AM by Chompy » Logged

"I know we must all worship at the Church of Chomps, but statements like this are just plain ridic. He says he can't get a bet on, but we all know he can."
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15532


View Profile
« Reply #894 on: March 28, 2020, 09:53:21 AM »

You should wait and see what happens with our new lockdown before easing it.   The effect of "our" social distancing is uncertain.   The virus may peak a couple of weeks after the new rules were implemented (which I assume is where this comes from), but it may keep on rising for longer, albeit at a slower rate.

There is absolutely no certainty.   As an example, Italy is still on an upward curve despite taking a lot of neasures.  When we see them start reducing we can probably be more hopeful, not now.

Agreed, mostly, we can probably learn more quickly from just looking at Lombardy numbers initially. There is a downward trend in new infections in Lombardy.

If you have the time, could you run this through the Doobs auditing process? Many thanks 🙏.

https://www.corriere.it/politica/20_marzo_26/the-real-death-toll-for-covid-19-is-at-least-4-times-the-official-numbers-b5af0edc-6eeb-11ea-925b-a0c3cdbe1130.shtml



What I do know is that the recording of deaths has always been a bit subjevtive.  So the data we work with is never going to be perfect.  In some places the number of deaths from Covid19 will be overstated, in others it will be understated.  Given this was one of the first places affected, then it is more likely death causes were inaccurate. I think the conclusion is that the deaths ftom Covid19 are very likely to be understated in this place, but this is a small place in Italy, and not reflective of the whole of Italy never mind any other country.

I think you can possibly read something into the total deaths.  There are 12,000 people there and just over 1% have died.   I wouldn't read too much into it, as I don't know the demographics and only have the journalist's word on the expected deaths.  Also, the figures could be skewed by locations of hospitals etc.  


It has the hallmarks of something dressed up to be more rigorous than it is and even for a relative layman on the stats like me, the sample sizes all look really small. Many thanks for your input.

The sample size is big enough to make a conclusion for Nembro,  there have clearly been a statistically significant number of excess deaths there if the numbers quoted are correct.  There is no way you can take those numbers and conclude for anywhere else what is written in the headline.
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3878



View Profile
« Reply #895 on: March 28, 2020, 09:57:54 AM »

You should wait and see what happens with our new lockdown before easing it.   The effect of "our" social distancing is uncertain.   The virus may peak a couple of weeks after the new rules were implemented (which I assume is where this comes from), but it may keep on rising for longer, albeit at a slower rate.

There is absolutely no certainty.   As an example, Italy is still on an upward curve despite taking a lot of neasures.  When we see them start reducing we can probably be more hopeful, not now.

Agreed, mostly, we can probably learn more quickly from just looking at Lombardy numbers initially. There is a downward trend in new infections in Lombardy.

If you have the time, could you run this through the Doobs auditing process? Many thanks 🙏.

https://www.corriere.it/politica/20_marzo_26/the-real-death-toll-for-covid-19-is-at-least-4-times-the-official-numbers-b5af0edc-6eeb-11ea-925b-a0c3cdbe1130.shtml



What I do know is that the recording of deaths has always been a bit subjevtive.  So the data we work with is never going to be perfect.  In some places the number of deaths from Covid19 will be overstated, in others it will be understated.  Given this was one of the first places affected, then it is more likely death causes were inaccurate. I think the conclusion is that the deaths ftom Covid19 are very likely to be understated in this place, but this is a small place in Italy, and not reflective of the whole of Italy never mind any other country.

I think you can possibly read something into the total deaths.  There are 12,000 people there and just over 1% have died.   I wouldn't read too much into it, as I don't know the demographics and only have the journalist's word on the expected deaths.  Also, the figures could be skewed by locations of hospitals etc.  


It has the hallmarks of something dressed up to be more rigorous than it is and even for a relative layman on the stats like me, the sample sizes all look really small. Many thanks for your input.

The sample size is big enough to make a conclusion for Nembro,  there have clearly been a statistically significant number of excess deaths there if the numbers quoted are correct.  There is no way you can take those numbers and conclude for anywhere else what is written in the headline.

OK thanks 👍. I wasn’t trying to make it applicable to anywhere else. I am interested, in this instance, only in their situation.
Logged
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3878



View Profile
« Reply #896 on: March 28, 2020, 10:01:02 AM »

I think it's open knowledge isnt it that they expect it to peak 2 weeks after the lockdown was introduced. Even with people still out and about the social interaction has been suppressed massively.

Were not on the same trajectory as Italy, isnt that to do with the number of old people who still leave with their children and grandchildren.

Peaking in 2 weeks is great but that means our graph will be low and long. More lives saved but the lockdown will be in place for 3 maybe 4 months?


The evidence from China says peak 32 days after full lockdown, it’s hard to envisage a scenario (with a less stringent lockdown) where we beat that. It does seem credible that Italy/Spain is disadvantaged by having multiple generations of families in the same house. It seems to be too early to say how we are doing relative to those countries though, as we are still so early on the exponential growth phase. I think the JBM chart is still the best I’ve seen, he has some serious bright people advising him on it as well. The next week is key for us and it’s clearly concerning that our epicentre is one of the most densely populated places in Europe, more similar to NY and Madrid than Lombardy.

How many people here know what the JBM chart is?  I don't know, and have followed it fairly closely.  I guess it is likely I have seen it, but please just use the full name.

I don't think anyone, even thos advising the Government at Imperial, really knows the effect of social distancing here, and in London.  So I think we, and the Government, only "hope" it peaks in 2 weeks.  "Expecting" it to peak is too strong, it suggests the average peak is in 2 weeks.  It is clearly possible that it keeps increasing even after this "lockdown".



It’s a long read to get through all his charts and all his methodology/motivations but I think worth the time.

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1243637539350679554?s=21
Logged
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 15532


View Profile
« Reply #897 on: March 28, 2020, 10:11:42 AM »

I think it's open knowledge isnt it that they expect it to peak 2 weeks after the lockdown was introduced. Even with people still out and about the social interaction has been suppressed massively.

Were not on the same trajectory as Italy, isnt that to do with the number of old people who still leave with their children and grandchildren.

Peaking in 2 weeks is great but that means our graph will be low and long. More lives saved but the lockdown will be in place for 3 maybe 4 months?


The evidence from China says peak 32 days after full lockdown, it’s hard to envisage a scenario (with a less stringent lockdown) where we beat that. It does seem credible that Italy/Spain is disadvantaged by having multiple generations of families in the same house. It seems to be too early to say how we are doing relative to those countries though, as we are still so early on the exponential growth phase. I think the JBM chart is still the best I’ve seen, he has some serious bright people advising him on it as well. The next week is key for us and it’s clearly concerning that our epicentre is one of the most densely populated places in Europe, more similar to NY and Madrid than Lombardy.

How many people here know what the JBM chart is?  I don't know, and have followed it fairly closely.  I guess it is likely I have seen it, but please just use the full name.

I don't think anyone, even thos advising the Government at Imperial, really knows the effect of social distancing here, and in London.  So I think we, and the Government, only "hope" it peaks in 2 weeks.  "Expecting" it to peak is too strong, it suggests the average peak is in 2 weeks.  It is clearly possible that it keeps increasing even after this "lockdown".



It’s a long read to get through all his charts and all his methodology/motivations but I think worth the time.

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1243637539350679554?s=21


There are several people who have produced projections.  I just wanted to know which one you were referring to. 
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3878



View Profile
« Reply #898 on: March 28, 2020, 10:14:24 AM »

...
It would assume our lockdown measures to be more effective than China’s (35 days from 10 deaths to peak). According to JBM’s graph China locked down on day 3 post 10 deaths. We don’t have an equivalent lockdown in place, we didn’t even have anything remotely resembling a lockdown until 23rd March. It can’t really be based on anything other than wishful thinking.

Your statement would be based on the assumption that the UK and China have the same population demographics, the same health care supply, the same ICU supply, the same infrastructure, the same administrative structure, the same viral spread and many, many other factors.

I have a maths degree, and I've been employed as a statistician - I like numbers and I value statistics. But I also know it's limitations.

Just like the modelling is never expected to exactly predict real life, trying to map different countries onto each other isn't entirely helpful.

All epidemics follow the same pattern, and the responses to them all follow the same pattern - so there is going to be a lot of similarity between different countries. But once you start comparing them it means you're adding more and more and more assumptions to your model and making it less and less helpful for being able to actually be helpfully useful.

In a few years all the data can be overlaid and useful information can be learned from it - but that's going to take a lot of data and a lot of context; it's not possible as it's happening because there are just too many differing factors between countries and too many unknowns.

EDIT: and that's just aside from the fact that it's looking more and more like that's stating the lower end of the modelling prediction rather than being from a reliable source; journalists going to journalist no matter who they are.

I had been working to various assumptions. Firstly, that you had me overmatched in the maths department, no longer any doubt on that front 😊. Secondly, that an authoritarian super power would be bringing more resource in all the areas you listed than we will be able to, outside of the demography of course, as no one can control that. We do know that we are way behind all the big European nations on respirator/ICU capacity. This second one is a crude assumption but in a binary choice of will we do better or worse than China, I know which side I’m taking. I have also assumed a highish probability that China haven’t been completely honest with their numbers, I should of mentioned this assumption earlier. Another crude assumption (on a binary choice).... they would be more likely to understate than overstate the situation, if I am right, the peak was higher and probably later. Not good news for anyone.

Thanks again for helping me/us to better understand all of this.

Logged
Jon MW
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6144



View Profile
« Reply #899 on: March 28, 2020, 10:20:23 AM »

The demographics, how the virus spread and the not entirely reliable numbers are the big ones.

But in relation to the original tweet, without a source its hard to avoid this looking like an Easter peak was referring to the modelling and the statement from a couple of days ago.
Logged

Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2011 blonde MTT League August Champion
2011 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain  - - runners up - -
5 Star HORSE Classic - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 ... 275 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.386 seconds with 20 queries.