Covid-19 the second wave.

[Chippy_Tea]

Britain's richest 10% own 90% of its wealth.
Britain's dumbest 10% own 90% of its toilet paper.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I've ordered six beer kits. Should I order more or is that selfish?

Beer kits don't count fill yer boots.

 

[An Ankoù]

Beer kits don't count fill yer boots.

A single like isn't enough!
... and you can always wipe your bum on the can when you've emptied it.

 

[DavieC]

you can always wipe your bum on the can when you've emptied it.

Watch out for the sharp edge!

 

[Saisonator]

Lol

 

[Brew_DD2]

All this talk of lockdown. We didn't even have a proper one last time. We were still completely free to go to the shops to buy food. People are mental.

 

[VW911]

Bog rolls are not essential. You can't eat them

My youngest dog eats every single tube from the bog roll she can get her paws on.
You can't have a dump in peace, especially if you're getting near the end of the roll...

 

[marshbrewer]

People are mental

They are, aren't they? There were no actual *proper* shortages last time, just temporary interruptions to local supply caused by horders. If people just acted like friggin adults, there wouldn't be a problem.

 

[Rodcx500z]

Not much one can say to that, there may be more cheap freezers going in the new year in the meantime have another beer

 

[Chippy_Tea]

 

[Northern_Brewer]

What's the obsession with bogrolls?

Supposedly it all started in Australia. Some huge percentage of their bogroll is made in China, and the rumour went round that it was made in the same factories as facemasks and the Chinese government were going to force the factories to concentrate all their production on making facemasks for domestic use rather than "non-essential" stuff for export. So the implication was there was going to be a huge bogroll shortage in Oz. So then people panicked and cleaned out the supermarkets in Australia, then people in other countries saw the pictures on social media and assumed that the same dynamic was going to happen there as well, so they started hoarding, and then the shortages became real.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

So then people panicked and cleaned out the supermarkets in Australia, then people in other countries saw the pictures on social media and assumed that the same dynamic was going to happen there as well, so they started hoarding, and then the shortages became real.

This is the problem people see other panic buying or empty shelves then panic and buy more than they need which keeps the vicious circle going.

 

[trueblue]

I always thought there must be reason the likes of the sun and daily mail were still produced. The down side is newsprint on the backside.

 

[jof]

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to manage stock levels and use by dates on both the Covid Hoard and the Brexit stockpile?

Its a logistical nightmare

 

[trueblue]

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to manage stock levels and use by dates on both the Covid Hoard and the Brexit stockpile?

Its a logistical nightmare

Is there a sell buy date on toilet roll?

 

[Saisonator]

This was on an article I was reading earlier.
A scientist has modified the charts show how he believes it would look like if we had community testing from the beginning of the pandemic. He worked it out with how many hospitalisations and deaths there are out of every thousand people.

 

[bazzac]

Very interesting information, i do agree that community testing would have inevitably provided more control over this pandemic. undoubtedly there were many constraints during the political decision making process.

It's easy to sit back and make assuptions but we must always remember that typical forecasts are made on assumptions largely. what we know and estimations based on what we think we know, as well as knowing that there are unknowns. i am sure that my sentiment has been put accross better in the past but you get my drift.

i just wonder what model he had in mind where he was assuming community testing.




This was on an article I was reading earlier.
A scientist has modified the charts show how he believes it would look like if we had community testing from the beginning of the pandemic. He worked it out with how many hospitalisations and deaths there are out of every thousand people.

Attachments

• 
  B54CBA80-AEAA-47E8-AFED-F44CA04B613B.jpeg
  38.3 KBViews: 2

 

[Saisonator]

This is not a prediction of how things might have been different, it is how the actual data we have already would look with today’s level of testing being carried out from the start. The more people you test the more positives you find, which the original graph does not take into account. Unfortunately a lot of people don’t know this and just see a graph which makes it look like we are going into a second wave, when it might just be an inevitable rise due to children going back to school.

Very interesting information, i do agree that community testing would have inevitably provided more control over this pandemic. undoubtedly there were many constraints during the political decision making process.

It's easy to sit back and make assuptions but we must always remember that typical forecasts are made on assumptions largely. what we know and estimations based on what we think we know, as well as knowing that there are unknowns. i am sure that my sentiment has been put accross better in the past but you get my drift.

i just wonder what model he had in mind where he was assuming community testing.




This was on an article I was reading earlier.
A scientist has modified the charts show how he believes it would look like if we had community testing from the beginning of the pandemic. He worked it out with how many hospitalisations and deaths there are out of every thousand people.

Attachments

• 
  B54CBA80-AEAA-47E8-AFED-F44CA04B613B.jpeg
  38.3 KBViews: 2

 

[Northern_Brewer]

a graph which makes it look like we are going into a second wave, when it might just be an inevitable rise due to children going back to school.

The reasons don't matter. What matters is R - if it's <1 then it will fizzle out, if it's >1 then we're in a second wave because it will continue growing. Right now, that's where we are, so we need to take action to get R back under 1.

 

[Saisonator]

The reasons don't matter. What matters is R - if it's <1 then it will fizzle out, if it's >1 then we're in a second wave because it will continue growing. Right now, that's where we are, so we need to take action to get R back under 1.

It’s a bit more complicated than that.
Plenty of scientist do not support the theory that a second wave is inevitable.
Tests are not as accurate as they should be, and are showing many false positives. Virus may be getting weaker, people may have some immunity given from other Coronavirus’s they have been previously exposed to and immunity is more complex than just a person having antibodies. So I think the R rate is not an accurate measure, because the data it uses is not accurate.
There is no guarantee of an effective vaccine, which will mean the virus will have to run it’s course anyway.
Due to public hysteria, ramped up by the main stream media, we stayed locked down way longer than the purpose the lockdown was meant for, which was the NHS to not be overwhelmed.
I believe we lost our chance of gaining a good degree of herd immunity during the summer months when the hospitals sat half empty Even the words ‘herd immunity’ triggered the short term thinking of the safety first brigade. A lot of people were not receiving treatment for other serious illnesses.
We have wrecked our economy, we will have mass unemployment and the whole thing will probably cost more lives than the virus.
Not to mention creeping infringement of our civil liberties.
Now we go into winter in a very bad position in every aspect.