chrisd
Major Champion
Graphs on display tonight are so disingenuous. Constantly changing the age groups between each slide.
Can you point out the specific disingenuousness of each slide for us please and the effect caused?
Graphs on display tonight are so disingenuous. Constantly changing the age groups between each slide.
I thought they were quite clear and designed to illustrate specific points that were then clearly explained. The one that perhaps couldn’t be taken at face value as presented was that which showed the % of under 65s who develop Covid-19 that go into hospital as that figure was surprisingly high and not that far short of the figure for over 65s. But the point is that the chart showed %s and not actual numbers.Can you point out the specific disingenuousness of each slide for us please and the effect caused?
Bars and restaurants opened at the weekend, and bowls opens tomorrow. Only 4 people per table, and the same for bowls. Numbers weren't good enough to allow movement beyond the town boundaries but that number was hit today and, fingers crossed, will be included in the weekly review on Thursday. Most towns south of us are showing similar numbers but everything north looks to be a few weeks behind. As of next week we should be able to travel down to Almeria and across to Malaga if we want to.
I thought they were quite clear and designed to illustrate specific points that were then clearly explained. The one that perhaps couldn’t be taken at face value as presented was that which showed the % of under 65s who develop Covid-19 that go into hospital as that figure was surprisingly high and not that far short of the figure for over 65s. But the point is that the chart showed %s and not actual numbers.
If my understanding of it is correct then it’s not saying similar numbers of under and over 65s get hospitalised - as that is not the case - very many more of the latter. Well I think that that is what it showed - to demonstrate that we can’t be complacent about letting loads of under 65s contract the virus as that would risk potentially large numbers getting ill and the analysis suggests almost half would be requiring hospitalisation. And therein lies risk to the NHS coping.
Hairdresser just booked me in for 14th April - fingers crossed!! Golf for a couple of weeks looking tricky...
View attachment 35220
Well your explanation is what I thought at first, but I then thought I must have missed part of the explanation as the % of under 65s was surprisingly high cf the over 65s. And my understanding was that the majority of hospitalisations were the elderly and I hadn’t considered such as 60-65 elderly and particularly vulnerable...but apparently they are. With your clarification it to me becomes an even more important chart.I think you were understanding incorrectly. The bar chart was showing that of the people who got hospitalised, 58% were over 65, and 42% were under. Thats not the same as saying that 42% of the under 65s who contract the disease go to hospital. It was to show that a fairly high proportion of current admissions come from groups that are not yet being vaccinated - hence we still need to be cautious. The only issue I had with it was that it only showed data for a weeks' worth of admissions.
Well your explanation is what I thought at first, but I then thought I must have missed part of the explanation as the % of under 65s was surprisingly high cf the over 65s. And my understanding was that the majority of hospitalisations were the elderly and I hadn’t considered such as 60-65 elderly and particularly vulnerable...but apparently they are. With your clarification it to me becomes an even more important chart.
Maybe it’s just that a large number of over 65s who have died were in care homes and never got to hospital...that would go to explain the split.
Daughter Lydia delivered a lockdown baby this morning. Very proud...View attachment 35235
Yep. She's back and fightingGood too hear mate, she's looking well after you where worried after she caught COVID!
Yep. She's back and fighting
Love her to bits and can't wait to give her a big hug
Can you point out the specific disingenuousness of each slide for us please and the effect caused?
...I'm seeing things...because - jings, crivvens...it looks like Oor Wullie has inveigled his way into the House of Commons...must keep my eyes open to see if Fat Bob, Wee Eck and Soapy Soutar have snuck in as well (kiddin' honest - I'm keeping right side of the pence)
What probably distorts our perception a bit, is that is doesnt take account of the respective proportions of the the population. Eg , there are a lot more more under 65 than there are over 65 (let's say 2:1 - don't know if that's correct but it will do for now). So, 58% of hospital admissions come from a group of say 15 million, the other 42% come from a group of say 30 million. (Am using simple numbers just for illustration)
I guess the point is that we know there are a hell of a lot of hospital admissions, and 42% of them is also a hell of a lot of people - from a group as yet unprotected.
Lord Snooty or Bash Street School teacherMust admit I thought the same, but Oor Willie isnae goin bald.
Lord Snooty is an easy spot.
I think that this is the very important message to us as we go through the steps of opening up. That large number of people as yet unprotected could generate a large number of hospitalisations if the opening up goes wrong - with associated impact on the NHS. And that will be why in the later briefing Johnson did a bit of clarifying of his description of the approach as being 'irreversible' to the objective of not having to reverse anything. And I am glad that he did that - as that's the truth of it.
It is therefore for me a pity that such as the Sun; Telegraph and DM are having a go at him and the approach he has outlined as being too slow and cautious - that he has been listening too much to the 'gloomsters' and 'doomsters' of the science community. I for one am very glad that he has moved to that position. Because goodness me - we owe it to everyone in the NHS that we do everything to minimise risk of further increases in hospitalisations as things are opened-up, that by our actions and behaviours we take the pressure off the NHS and allow NHS workers to take holidays and other time off to recover.
I do worry though that we are gambling the house on people's behaviour - and the downside is new mutations if it goes wrong.
Yes, quite so. But what annoyed me in this journalistic analysis and predictions game that they indulge in, is the number of times that they said that the PM promised that we would not reverse.
I didn't hear him say that, only that he wanted not to have to reverse.
Which is, of course, why we have the five weeks gap.
Let's hope that most will have seen what happens if we go gung-ho on the easement dates, and that common sense prevails, and that all goes a according to plan