A simple diagram to explain govs latest advice

First topic message reminder :

the latest gov advice in terms simple enough for even a remainiac to understand
It's not rocket science
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

fatbob5 wrote:
Smells 
Check the chart that Dean posted recently. As far as deaths per 100,000 people Sweden and the  UK are quite close together.


Deaths per 100,000 people
Sweden 39.9
UK  54.2


Sweden is doing better than the UK but not brilliantly


There have been counties that have come out of a lockdown and then had to reimpose restrictions


Australia and New Zealand have come out of a lockdown and have not had a new surge in cases for a simple reason
They are not letting anyone in

if you want to play the numbers game, then yes, you have a point.

however four thousand dead is not forty thousand dead, and i dont really care how you manipulate the stats and numbers , the reality is that 4k is not 40k

these are people not numbers

******not sure how we have done a role reversal where i care about human lives and you only see acceptable collateral damage , normally im the cold hearted bastard, but its strange times we live in.*****


the logic of proportionality is sound in arguments that are hyporthetical scenario based arguments, and with sweden it makes sense :

swedens population is less than the the Uk's therefore 4k dead in sweden is porportionately the same as 40k dead in the UK, except of course it isnt

4000 is NOT 40000, these arent numbers these ARE people

the second part is this

even if the UK and sweden were neck and neck in stats, then the question is what was the point of lockdown??

if sweden proportionately has the same casualty rate as the UK but comparatively speaking has no lockdown, then what has lockdown achieved??

if the lockdown was designed to keep the casualty rate down then why is sweden who had no lockdown still more successful statistically speaking than the UK where we had full lockdown??

if lockdown was successful then the UK should from a statistical point of view being should doing better than sweden even though we physically have higher numbers (law of proportionalety applied)

sweden has relatively zero lockdown, it also has statistically and physically lower casualty rates, proving conclusively that lockdown failed to achieved its stated objective

Smells
In what way has the lockdown ruined your life?

smelly-bandit wrote:


if you want to play the numbers game, then yes, you have a point.

however four thousand dead is not forty thousand dead, and i dont really care how you manipulate the stats and numbers , the reality is that 4k is not 40k

these are people not numbers

******not sure how we have done a role reversal where i care about human lives and you only see acceptable collateral damage , normally im the cold hearted bastard, but its strange times we live in.*****


the logic of proportionality is sound in arguments that are hyporthetical scenario based arguments, and with sweden it makes sense :

swedens population is less than the the Uk's therefore 4k dead in sweden is porportionately the same as 40k dead in the UK, except of course it isnt

4000 is NOT 40000, these arent numbers these ARE people

the second part is this

even if the UK and sweden were neck and neck in stats, then the question is what was the point of lockdown??

if sweden proportionately has the same casualty rate as the UK but comparatively speaking has no lockdown, then what has lockdown achieved??

if the lockdown was designed to keep the casualty rate down then why is sweden who had no lockdown still more successful statistically speaking than the UK where we had full lockdown??

if lockdown was successful then the UK should from a statistical point of view being should doing better than sweden even though we physically have higher numbers (law of proportionalety applied)

sweden has relatively zero lockdown, it also has statistically and physically lower casualty rates, proving conclusively that lockdown failed to achieved its stated objective

Looking at the number of deaths in relation to the overall population size is hardly ' Manipulating the Stat's ' - a fatuous accusation. I got the numbers directly from the chart Dean posted, no smoke and mirrors involved at all.


We are having a conversation about the efficacy of the lockdown. Part and parcel of that does involve looking at the number of deaths in different countries.
Each time I do this I could give a little homily about the importance of each human life, and how each death leaves a grieving family and is a terrible tragedy. If I did this though you would rip into me accusing me of being patronising, insincere and / or over sentimental.


In relation to Sweden and the UK


Rather than seeing the situation as


Sweden - No Lockdown
UK -Lockdown
( Got the city on lockdown  as Antony Costa once sang)


Look at it this way


Sweden - Voluntary Lockdown
UK - Involuntary Lockdown

Smells imagine in a few weeks from now you find yourself having to travel by train. Some bloke starts coughing like a cat trying to get rid of a fur ball.
I bet you would move to another carriage.

smelly-bandit wrote:

fatbob5 wrote:
Smells 
Check the chart that Dean posted recently. As far as deaths per 100,000 people Sweden and the  UK are quite close together.


Deaths per 100,000 people
Sweden 39.9
UK  54.2


Sweden is doing better than the UK but not brilliantly


There have been counties that have come out of a lockdown and then had to reimpose restrictions


Australia and New Zealand have come out of a lockdown and have not had a new surge in cases for a simple reason
They are not letting anyone in

if you want to play the numbers game, then yes, you have a point.

however four thousand dead is not forty thousand dead, and i dont really care how you manipulate the stats and numbers , the reality is that 4k is not 40k

these are people not numbers

******not sure how we have done a role reversal where i care about human lives and you only see acceptable collateral damage , normally im the cold hearted bastard, but its strange times we live in.*****


the logic of proportionality is sound in arguments that are hyporthetical scenario based arguments, and with sweden it makes sense :

swedens population is less than the the Uk's therefore 4k dead in sweden is porportionately the same as 40k dead in the UK, except of course it isnt

4000 is NOT 40000, these arent numbers these ARE people

the second part is this

even if the UK and sweden were neck and neck in stats, then the question is what was the point of lockdown??

if sweden proportionately has the same casualty rate as the UK but comparatively speaking has no lockdown, then what has lockdown achieved??

if the lockdown was designed to keep the casualty rate down then why is sweden who had no lockdown still more successful statistically speaking than the UK where we had full lockdown??

if lockdown was successful then the UK should from a statistical point of view being should doing better than sweden even though we physically have higher numbers (law of proportionalety applied)

sweden has relatively zero lockdown, it also has statistically and physically lower casualty rates, proving conclusively that lockdown failed to achieved its stated objective

the population of swedenis 1 seventh the size of ours

fatbob5 wrote:Smells imagine in a few weeks from now you find yourself having to travel by train. Some bloke starts coughing like a cat trying to get rid of a fur ball.
I bet you would move to another carriage.

unless he is a backpack wearing muslim then no

muslims are deadly to everyone, covid 19 is deadly only to some.

Flap Zappa wrote:
the population of swedenis 1 seventh the size of ours

so??

the argument is useful only in analytics and understanding of specific events in specific context, it doesnt really mean anything in real life.

that argument doesnt account for anything other than deaths per capita worked out by people in white coats in sterile labs, it doesnt take into account things like carnage khans waging C19 jihad on london via his restritcions on the tube, or age or dermographics or ethnicity or cultural practices and behaviours.

it doesnt  take into account ordinary human behaviour, the give a fuck attitudes and the lack of general hygiene. cramming more people into less tubes is going to result in higher infection and ultimately higher death rates.

all these things contribute to the deaths per capita, that why i said to bob its using figures to manipulate the narrative and control the argument, most people hear that we have the highest death rates in the world and react in a fearful way,calling for longer more restrictive lockdown, but the reality is that its not the lethality or transmissibility of the virus but rather the multiple fuck ups of the useless authorities that is accounting for the deatsh per capita

Smells
If you just want to look at raw numbers, then that means that the country that has handled the crisis worst is America.
Trump's America

Sao Paulo digs mass graves as virus death toll soars in Brazil


......This was against the advice of President Jair Bolsonaro who likes to model himself on Donald Trump and has consistently played down the virus as “a little cold”.


He wanted the economy to remain open, insisting that gyms and hairdressers should go back to work despite the fact that Brazil was now losing more people per day to the virus than any other country. ........


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

fatbob5 wrote:Smells imagine in a few weeks from now you find yourself having to travel by train. Some bloke starts coughing like a cat trying to get rid of a fur ball.
I bet you would move to another carriage.

is he  a muslim wearing a backpack??

because the islamic virus is the most lethal thing known to man, so if he he is a backpack wearing muslim then yes i will get off at the next stop

C19 is just the flu and ultimately survivable

smelly-bandit wrote:
is he  a muslim wearing a backpack??

because the islamic virus is the most lethal thing known to man, so if he he is a backpack wearing muslim then yes i will get off at the next stop

C19 is just the flu and ultimately survivable

Smells
This thread is not about muslins it's about Covid 19

fatbob5 wrote:
Smells
This thread is not about muslins it's about Covid 19

tell mme if youve heard this one

covid 19 virus and the islamic virus walk into a bar, the islamic virus turns to the covid19 virus and cuts off its head before screaming ALLHU AKBAR and detonating his suicide vest killing everyone in the bar

moral of the story : islam is significantly more deadly than covid 19

smelly-bandit wrote:

Flap Zappa wrote:
the population of swedenis 1 seventh the size of ours

so??

the argument is useful only in analytics and understanding of specific events in specific context, it doesnt really mean anything in real life.

that argument doesnt account for anything other than deaths per capita worked out by people in white coats in sterile labs, it doesnt take into account things like carnage khans waging C19 jihad on london via his restritcions on the tube, or age or dermographics or ethnicity or cultural practices and behaviours.

it doesnt  take into account ordinary human behaviour, the give a fuck attitudes and the lack of general hygiene. cramming more people into less tubes is going to result in higher infection and ultimately higher death rates.

all these things contribute to the deaths per capita, that why i said to bob its using figures to manipulate the narrative and control the argument, most people hear that we have the highest death rates in the world and react in a fearful way,calling for longer more restrictive lockdown, but the reality is that its not the lethality or transmissibility of the virus but rather the multiple fuck ups of the useless authorities that is accounting for the deatsh per capita

well you cant compare 2 different sized countries even at the most basic level without taking population into account. Also population density may well have a lot of bearing on it.

Flap Zappa wrote:
well you cant compare 2 different sized countries even at the most basic level without taking population into account. Also population density may well have a lot of bearing on it.

i understand that and  am not  discounting the arguement, im saying its not a REALISTIC argument

let me put it like this

if the UK sent 100,000 troops into iran and killed 1 million of the citizens for the loss of 10,000 soldiers, using the argument of proportionality , the UK will have suffered greater losses than iran because we would have lost more formm a proportionality point of view

is that a realistic argument to make??

the problem is that there is no disctintion between statistical deaths and actual deaths, so when the BBC says "the uk has the highest death rate in the world" mongaloid mong fuck lefties dont understand the statement and all they see is "UK has the most deaths in the world"

smelly-bandit wrote:


i understand that and  am not  discounting the arguement, im saying its not a REALISTIC argument

let me put it like this

if the UK sent 100,000 troops into iran and killed 1 million of the citizens for the loss of 10,000 soldiers, using the argument of proportionality , the UK will have suffered greater losses than iran because we would have lost more formm a proportionality point of view

is that a realistic argument to make??

the problem is that there is no disctintion between statistical deaths and actual deaths, so when the BBC says "the uk has the highest death rate in the world" mongaloid mong fuck lefties dont understand the statement and all they see is "UK has the most deaths in the world"

38, 000 road deaths per year in USA

1870 road deaths year ending June 2019 in UK

Therefore UK roads are substantially safer than American roads

A ridiculous assertion, of course it is, but you are essentially arguing something similar

Ps I totally understand the idea of a pyrrhic victory, but I have no idea how your military analogy has any bearing on a discussion about C19 and the lockdown

fatbob5 wrote:Ps I totally understand the idea of a pyrrhic victory, but I have no idea how your military analogy has any bearing on a discussion about C19 and the lockdown

ive think youve lost track of what im saying bob

never mind, the whole C19 project has bored me close to death, ive stopped listening to anything the govt says about this and have disregarded lockdown and social distancing.

now i do what i want to do.

smelly-bandit wrote:
ive think youve lost track of what im saying bob

never mind, the whole C19 project has bored me close to death, ive stopped listening to anything the govt says about this and have disregarded lockdown and social distancing.

now i do what i want to do.

You are not unique, hardly anyone wears a face mask in Tesco now. Also there's a lot more groups of people out and about. Some getting shitfaced.

Come Christmas / New Year people are going to go mental, the shops and shopping centres are going to be full. the pubs will be full, the restaurants will be full.

And then by February / March
The morgues will be full

Merry Christmas One and All

Ho Ho Ho

fatbob5 wrote:Come Christmas / New Year people are going to go mental, the shops and shopping centres are going to be full. the pubs will be full, the restaurants will be full.

And then by February / March
The morgues will be full

thats what they said in march and the morgues were empty as were the hospitals even the 5000 bed nightingale one that never got used....................wait thats  insensitive, the hospitals were full........of doctors and nurses so bored they fill their hours with tik tok dancing down the aisle to sign the death warrants for all those cancer patients they abandoned

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

One thing we can agree on Smells
If the government decides at some point in the future that it needs to reintroduce lockdown measures, then they will be ignored by a lot of people.