poker news
blondepedia
card room
tournament schedule
uk results
galleries
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
March 29, 2024, 01:57:46 PM
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Search:
Advanced search
Order through Amazon and help blonde Poker
2272484
Posts in
66752
Topics by
16945
Members
Latest Member:
Zula
blonde poker forum
Community Forums
The Lounge
COVID19
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.
« previous
next »
Pages:
1
...
115
116
117
118
[
119
]
120
121
122
123
...
305
Author
Topic: COVID19 (Read 354163 times)
Woodsey
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 15846
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1770 on:
April 27, 2020, 12:09:34 PM »
Good to see the great leader back at the helm
Logged
jakally
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2009
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1771 on:
April 27, 2020, 12:27:23 PM »
Quote from: Doobs on April 27, 2020, 10:28:50 AM
Quote from: jakally on April 27, 2020, 07:26:26 AM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 26, 2020, 08:47:13 PM
Quote from: jakally on April 26, 2020, 08:37:38 PM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 26, 2020, 06:49:56 PM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 26, 2020, 06:40:43 PM
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1254462206403588096?s=21
The all cause mortality international comparisons.
Seems that the U.K. excess non Covid deaths, that came along by coincidence (according to some), nearly all came along in the Covid hotspots.
Interesting data - I do like Burn Murdoch.
Who is saying it is coincidence?
It was a contentious topic ITT thread after the first relevant ONS update. Without a better explainer, the graphs in the Tuesday briefings make an absolute assumption that the other excess deaths aren’t Covid. I think it’s fair to say that just in general (including most people I talk to) people think U.K. Coronavirus deaths are “around 20,000” .
Are you saying that the government briefing on Tuesday inferred that the excess deaths are not Covid related? Surprised if that is the case.
As for the general public, I don't think anyone who is taking a close interest would say that 20,000 is the number, or even close to it.
The people who watch the news once per day for an update would probably think different to that though, & they almost certainly are a bigger number of people.
There some quite active COVID deniers out there who are raising doubts that even 20,000 people have died of COVID.
I'm sure there are lots of them.
I was more concerned that politicians or journalists were amongst those trying to deny the excess deaths. Hopefully that is not the case.
Logged
Doobs
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 16570
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1772 on:
April 27, 2020, 01:19:32 PM »
Quote from: Woodsey on April 27, 2020, 12:09:34 PM
Good to see the great leader back at the helm
Kim Jong-Un is alive then?
Logged
Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
4KSuited
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 1147
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1773 on:
April 27, 2020, 01:21:53 PM »
Quote from: Doobs on April 27, 2020, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: Woodsey on April 27, 2020, 12:09:34 PM
Good to see the great leader back at the helm
Kim Jong-Un is alive then?
Very good
Logged
Woodsey
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 15846
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1774 on:
April 27, 2020, 01:28:28 PM »
Quote from: 4KSuited on April 27, 2020, 01:21:53 PM
Quote from: Doobs on April 27, 2020, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: Woodsey on April 27, 2020, 12:09:34 PM
Good to see the great leader back at the helm
Kim Jong-Un is alive then?
Very good
Might have been if he got the right Kim
Logged
Marky147
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 22796
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1775 on:
April 27, 2020, 03:00:23 PM »
Quote from: Woodsey on April 27, 2020, 01:28:28 PM
Quote from: 4KSuited on April 27, 2020, 01:21:53 PM
Quote from: Doobs on April 27, 2020, 01:19:32 PM
Quote from: Woodsey on April 27, 2020, 12:09:34 PM
Good to see the great leader back at the helm
Kim Jong-Un is alive then?
Very good
Might have been if he got the right Kim
Should have been Kim Wilde?
Logged
Burning $$$ in Vegas 2021
http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=68840.0
StuartHopkin
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 8163
Ocho cinco
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1776 on:
April 27, 2020, 04:21:52 PM »
Quick basic question...
Infection numbers staying static is good isn't it if the number of tests being done each day is increasing?
Don't seem to have seen this somewhat obvious point mentioned any where in the news, or have I got it wrong?
Logged
Only 23 days to go until the Berlin Marathon! Please sponsor me at
www.virginmoneygiving.com/StuartHopkin
kukushkin88
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3892
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1777 on:
April 27, 2020, 04:25:14 PM »
Quote from: StuartHopkin on April 27, 2020, 04:21:52 PM
Quick basic question...
Infection numbers staying static is good isn't it if the number of tests being done each day is increasing?
Don't seem to have seen this somewhat obvious point mentioned any where in the news, or have I got it wrong?
It definitely is a good sign. The slight qualifier on it is that as the % of tests on key workers goes up as a proportion of total tests, we’d expect a lower positivity rate. Even once this is accounted for, things are trending in the right direction.
Logged
kukushkin88
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3892
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1778 on:
April 27, 2020, 04:41:39 PM »
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 27, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
Quote from: StuartHopkin on April 27, 2020, 04:21:52 PM
Quick basic question...
Infection numbers staying static is good isn't it if the number of tests being done each day is increasing?
Don't seem to have seen this somewhat obvious point mentioned any where in the news, or have I got it wrong?
It definitely is a good sign. The slight qualifier on it is that as the % of tests on key workers goes up as a proportion of total tests, we’d expect a lower positivity rate. Even once this is accounted for, things are trending in the right direction.
and any enthusiasm should be tempered by the fact that scientists, actually independent ones, say that in our situation, you’d want new infections to be in the low hundreds before you’d have any hope of managing the loosening of the lockdown.
Logged
RickBFA
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2001
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1779 on:
April 27, 2020, 05:33:55 PM »
Generally don’t watch the daily press conference as it borders on pointless.
Put it on today, just confirmed my view that Peston is a dickhead.
Loved the one word response on his stupid follow up question by Hancock.
Logged
Chompy
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 11852
Expert
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1780 on:
April 27, 2020, 05:41:22 PM »
Public questions are the future. Make it more like Jim'll Fix It.
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."
jakally
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2009
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1781 on:
April 27, 2020, 06:50:45 PM »
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 27, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
Quote from: StuartHopkin on April 27, 2020, 04:21:52 PM
Quick basic question...
Infection numbers staying static is good isn't it if the number of tests being done each day is increasing?
Don't seem to have seen this somewhat obvious point mentioned any where in the news, or have I got it wrong?
It definitely is a good sign. The slight qualifier on it is that as the % of tests on key workers goes up as a proportion of total tests, we’d expect a lower positivity rate. Even once this is accounted for, things are trending in the right direction.
Why would key workers affect the positive test rate?
Logged
Pokerpops
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 1423
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1782 on:
April 27, 2020, 06:59:58 PM »
Quote from: jakally on April 27, 2020, 06:50:45 PM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 27, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
Quote from: StuartHopkin on April 27, 2020, 04:21:52 PM
Quick basic question...
Infection numbers staying static is good isn't it if the number of tests being done each day is increasing?
Don't seem to have seen this somewhat obvious point mentioned any where in the news, or have I got it wrong?
It definitely is a good sign. The slight qualifier on it is that as the % of tests on key workers goes up as a proportion of total tests, we’d expect a lower positivity rate. Even once this is accounted for, things are trending in the right direction.
Why would key workers affect the positive test rate?
I was wondering that.
Logged
"More than at any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly."
kukushkin88
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3892
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1783 on:
April 27, 2020, 07:00:37 PM »
Quote from: jakally on April 27, 2020, 06:50:45 PM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 27, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
Quote from: StuartHopkin on April 27, 2020, 04:21:52 PM
Quick basic question...
Infection numbers staying static is good isn't it if the number of tests being done each day is increasing?
Don't seem to have seen this somewhat obvious point mentioned any where in the news, or have I got it wrong?
It definitely is a good sign. The slight qualifier on it is that as the % of tests on key workers goes up as a proportion of total tests, we’d expect a lower positivity rate. Even once this is accounted for, things are trending in the right direction.
Why would key workers affect the positive test rate?
The previous testing was limited to those who were hospitalised displaying Covid symptoms, this group would be the people optimally likely to return a + result. Key workers would be (by an amount that’s hard to quantity) less likely to return a positive result. The criteria for them to be tested are quite wide and don’t involve them needing to be displaying Covid symptoms.
Logged
kukushkin88
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 3892
Re: COVID19
«
Reply #1784 on:
April 27, 2020, 07:07:23 PM »
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 27, 2020, 07:00:37 PM
Quote from: jakally on April 27, 2020, 06:50:45 PM
Quote from: kukushkin88 on April 27, 2020, 04:25:14 PM
Quote from: StuartHopkin on April 27, 2020, 04:21:52 PM
Quick basic question...
Infection numbers staying static is good isn't it if the number of tests being done each day is increasing?
Don't seem to have seen this somewhat obvious point mentioned any where in the news, or have I got it wrong?
It definitely is a good sign. The slight qualifier on it is that as the % of tests on key workers goes up as a proportion of total tests, we’d expect a lower positivity rate. Even once this is accounted for, things are trending in the right direction.
Why would key workers affect the positive test rate?
The previous testing was limited to those who were hospitalised displaying Covid symptoms, this group would be the people optimally likely to return a + result. Key workers would be (by an amount that’s hard to quantity) less likely to return a positive result. The criteria for them to be tested are quite wide and don’t involve them needing to be displaying Covid symptoms.
I guess my explanation also needs the qualifier that when I say ‘positivity rate’, I mean a percentage.
Logged
Pages:
1
...
115
116
117
118
[
119
]
120
121
122
123
...
305
« previous
next »
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
Poker Forums
-----------------------------
=> The Rail
===> past blonde Bashes
===> Best of blonde
=> Diaries and Blogs
=> Live Tournament Updates
=> Live poker
===> Live Tournament Staking
=> Internet Poker
===> Online Tournament Staking
=> Poker Hand Analysis
===> Learning Centre
-----------------------------
Community Forums
-----------------------------
=> The Lounge
=> Betting Tips and Sport Discussion
Loading...