They aren’t as dense as a large chunk of the brits though.
2 Likes
Therein lies the problem. Because we’d share similar views on somethings, and differing views on other things you can’t quite bring me into the lefty fold. It seems to be all or nothing with the left. My political leanings would be pro-civil liberties and pro-economic freedom.
We’ve seen on TFK throughout the coronavirus outbreak that a number of ideas are beyond the pale of discussion. If you don’t support the lockdown, you’re a murderer. If you don’t vilify Cummings, you’re a BoJo-Trump fanatic. It’s ok to have different views. There was one insufferable little cunt that used to post here until he got banned for 1,000 years. If you said something he disagreed with, you were immediately labeled a racist/homophobic/islamophobic/rapist. A right dangerous little bastard. The basic concept of ‘to each his own’ is lost on some.
4 Likes
According to this lady the only reliable stats when discusing Covid 19 are deaths and hospitalisations. Anything else is just guess work and she highlights the R rate as being impossible to verify.
@Tim_Riggins is no lady.
So, if I’ve got this right you’re putting your faith in death numbers for a disease where medical practitioners only have to suspect it was a cause of death. Hospital patients dying of heart disease had Covid-19 listed as cause of death, FFS. If highly subjective numbers are your idea of “reliable stats”, I can see we’re going nowhere with this discussion.
“Had he shortness of breath after his massive heart-attack? Yes? Must have been Covid-19.” 
3 Likes
I hope no racist on here is thinking of questioning China’s handling of this whole thing
yep - you cant beat a fella blocking his ears roaring racist on repeat when presented with a few facts
2 Likes
You have to be of a particular group mindset, or shut up. One of the finest examples of this was Ben Afleck on Bill Maher’s show 5 or 6 years ago. Funny, but frightening.
This is what this professor is saying. She leans towards herd immunity as an approach but as she admits herself she doesn’t have all the data. The only reliable data she has are fatalities and hospitalisations. But you carry on thinking you know more than a professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at the University of Oxford.
Death is binary data. You’re either dead, or you’re not. I’d agree that the presence of a pulse is a reliable stat when it comes to death. However, if you’re trying to pass off a subjective assessment of cause of death as “reliable stats”, you’re barking up the wrong tree. Are you barking up the wrong tree?
2 Likes
Maybe mention that to Professor Gupta. I’m sure she’d value the input of a graduate of the Institute of Sally Longs on what counts as reliable data.
1 Like
Less of the projecting. I’m evidently more competent to comment on statistical matters than you.
I cannot believe I’m having to say this to you again, but counting the number of Covid-19 deaths relies on the subjective opinion of doctors and their best guesses. That is not made-up. It is a fact. Subjectivity does not equate to reliability.
Highly unlikely but either way, you think you know more than a professor on the subject.
Where’s Ireland on that list?
So your guess is as good as theirs? They’re not guessing btw, they have a test now. You must have missed the memo.
I’m not correcting the good Prof. I’m correcting you. Unless, you are claiming to be a professor of statistical methods. I call BS, because if you had any statistical inclination you would know that once a researcher adopts a subjective approach on a study, the level of reliability is immediately compromised. You picked a nice sound-bite from the article and dug in.
Anyway, we’ll leave it there. As an aside, are you now in favour of ending the lockdown?
Cool. So the PCR test is 100% accurate?
So you’re saying the decision on whether someone has died from Covid 19 is subjective? Wow. Just wow.