SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

And quite obviously this isn't simply "more lockdown" = "less deaths". If lockdowns are reactive, no matter how strong they are, deaths will still be immense. Another country can make a lockdown with exactly the same "intensity" and duration, but if it starts one week earlier it will lead to dramatically different results.

As @Wibble points out, Italy and Spain initial lockdowns were too late, as was Portugal's january 2021 lockdown.

In fact, that's probably the most meaningful difference between Asia and Europe when it came to the first wave results. They acted sooner because they took the threat seriously. Likely because of bigger cultural/geographical proximity to China, whilst most of the West was engaged in sinophobic propaganda instead of handling the issue.
 
We are hugely dependant on imports and imports. The biggest difference is that all our imports and exports are by sea or air which have continued with little interuption. The pain point in Europe is you rely much on road transport. Not a trivial thing to change but not impossible.

Australia has a 41% trade to GDP ratio, one of the lowest in the world. That means you import and export very little as a percentage of your overall economy. China and the US are even lower still.

EU countries are amongst the highest. Countries that were hardest hit with cases and deaths like Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg are all right at the top of the trade lists.
 
I have no idea why anyone would interact with the special one in this thread.
 
What hardline restrictions? The Portuguese have been incredibly unruly, December was a nightmare that brought us 5200 Covid deaths in January, nearly half our total.


Excess deaths says your numbers were all over the shop by the end of the Summer.

I’d say “I told you so” but you’d have to be a real ass to do that over a pandemic.
 
Isn’t Norway’s economy fairly heavily reliant on Oil exports? So no matter how well they coped with the pandemic internally, they would never have been able to shield themselves from the economic impact of a global pandemic.

That’s the point.

And Thailand’s economy is hugely dependent on tourism.

Each country has it’s unique set of circumstances, but clealry not everyone could “do an Australia” and have low deaths and good GDP.
 
Excess deaths says your numbers were all over the shop by the end of the Summer.

I’d say “I told you so” but you’d have to be a real ass to do that over a pandemic.

You are saying it. You are saying it over a pandemic, and you are claiming false magnanimity.

You argue like a fecking 12 year old. Is this an X-Box/PS5 debate for you?

Portugal has had no proper strategy against Covid ever. It was simply an interesting case study because we locked down very early in March last year and that lead to some of the best results in Europe in the first cpuple of months. Since we first deconfined we were just randomly reacting to events so there was nothing we were doing that serves this debate.

Where will you shift the goalposts next?
 
Last edited:
@Regulus Arcturus Black

You are completely dismissing the chance that your experts are completely wrong in interpreting things, which is probably why your points can come across as a bit strange.

You don't need to be defensive about your opinion, even if you're just conveying someone else's opinion. I'm sure the vast majority in here want to have a serious discussion, and I would question the morals of anyone looking for an "I told you so" angle in something as tragic as this.

The reason I post so much about this is due to concern and utter incomprehension.

Quite ironic that I wrote that specifically adressed to you, and also to convince myself I wouldn't have the guts to bring the issue up when reality became more obvious.

And exactly one year later you are doing the opposite. With the aggravating factor that you aren't even right, Portugal hasn't been hardline, or when it has been it was always to ammend previous mistakes.

I thought you were merely misinformed, but apparently you are millitant.
 
Big verdict in Belgium. The judge ordered the state to lift all COVID measures within 30 days otherwise they have to pay a ‘dwangsom’ (penalty, fine I don’t know the best way to word it in English)

edit: Dutch link: https://www.nu.nl/coronavirus/61251...namaatregelen-binnen-dertig-dagen-opheft.html

edit 2. Fine is 5000 a day apparently. Don’t know if it increases. Full details not known yet. The *** in the link is d a t.
 
Last edited:
The trend line isn't lying. And the best performing countries all had the most restrictions. Some of those that were close economically came at the cost of a huge death toll (500+ per million of pop) and likely would have done better still economically if they hadn't unnecessarily sacrificed their citizens in the name of the economy. And none of the countries who locked down really hard had mass death or bad economic damage (by comparison).

The trend line has no axis or comment for how hard restrictions have been which was your entire point. Seeing how well Sweden faired in comparison to UK, Italy and Spain illustrates that this comment was nonsense.

Likewise there's no nuance for the interconnectivity of economies, nothing factoring in reliance of by road trade, nothing for the "type" of economy (service economies would always be worst hit), countries are cherry picked to fit the trend, some of the countries on the graph don't show accurate excess deaths (how would the graph change with simply Mexico showing well over 2500 excess deaths per 100,000, let alone anything else), plus countries that have been effected badly solely because other countries they heavily export to have been effected badly.

Don't worry though to save embarrassment I'll make your graph the second most disingenuous graph posted on this thread:

Pirate_Global_Warming_Graph.gif
 
Big verdict in Belgium. The judge ordered the state to lift all COVID measures within 30 days otherwise they have to pay a ‘dwangsom’ (penalty, fine I don’t know the best way to word it in English)

edit: Dutch link: https://www.nu.nl/coronavirus/61251...namaatregelen-binnen-dertig-dagen-opheft.html

edit 2. Fine is 5000 a day apparently. Don’t know if it increases. Full details not known yet. The *** in the link is d a t.
Amazing how judges can have the ultimate power during a pandemic. Has he/she consulted with health panels before making this decision?
 
The trend line has no axis or comment for how hard restrictions have been which was your entire point. Seeing how well Sweden faired in comparison to UK, Italy and Spain illustrates that this comment was nonsense.

Likewise there's no nuance for the interconnectivity of economies, nothing factoring in reliance of by road trade, nothing for the "type" of economy (service economies would always be worst hit), countries are cherry picked to fit the trend, some of the countries on the graph don't show accurate excess deaths (how would the graph change with simply Mexico showing well over 2500 excess deaths per 100,000, let alone anything else), plus countries that have been effected badly solely because other countries they heavily export to have been effected badly.

Don't worry though to save embarrassment I'll make your graph the second most disingenuous graph posted on this thread:

Pirate_Global_Warming_Graph.gif

So what I am understanding of this is, I need to commandeer a ship and sail the seas while stealing stuff? Sweet.
 
Except they aren't fake or being manipulated.

Examine each country (assuming comparable data exists) using multivariate statistics and border closures, lock downs, mask wearing etc will be statistically significantly correlated with good economic outcomes.

It is technically possible to produce very different and even opposite projections, forecasts and conclusions based on the same assumptions.

I am not convinced the authors have (1) employed an appropriate methodology that uses meaningful indicators incorporating all the key drivers/variables (2) and used a consistent and accurate set of assumptions/data inputs

Figures are generally manipulated, readjusted, presented in a certain way by statisticians, modellers or politicians in order to convey a specific message.

Also, a sophisticated and complex research paper is not necessarily guarantee of quality and intellectual integrity.
 
Last edited:
Agghh am I reading these groupings right @Pogue Mahone?
People with cardiac issues, aged 40s, and controlled diabetes now moved to group 7.
GP told me i was group 5 before.

only slight possibility is that my cardiac issues are genetic, hereditary?
 
Agghh am I reading these groupings right @Pogue Mahone?
People with cardiac issues, aged 40s, and controlled diabetes now moved to group 7.
GP told me i was group 5 before.

only slight possibility is that my cardiac issues are genetic, hereditary?

Yeah, looks like you’re group 7.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think there will be a huge gap between 5 and 7. By then we should be rattling through huge numbers each week and the vast majority of the population is in group 9. Should only be two or three weeks difference.
 
Honestly seeing people my age with no pre existing conditions in america get the vaccine is annoying af while I'm having to wait until August probably here. I have enough air miles to fly there for free and back so I could do that to get it quicker
 
Yeah, looks like you’re group 7.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think there will be a huge gap between 5 and 7. By then we should be rattling through huge numbers each week and the vast majority of the population is in group 9. Should only be two or three weeks difference.
Thanks fella, just as I thought
 
If it makes you feel any better these changes have bumped me from category 4 (HCWs with no patient contact) all the way to category 9. FML.
feck sake

I don’t understand how they’re gonna do them all before they bring the ‘book your own vaccine’ website online which is scheduled for april
 
feck sake

I don’t understand how they’re gonna do them all before they bring the ‘book your own vaccine’ website online which is scheduled for april

They’re getting through them at a fair lick now. The website will be most handy when we hit category 9, where the vast majority of the people belong. Some of whom might not have engaged with the healthcare services before. Until then they can keep working off GP databases.
 
France shutting schools for 3 weeks

Bit misleading, they're closed for four days next week for primary schools and 11-18s after the Easter Monday holiday then it's the two week spring holiday which was happening anyway. Primary schools back after the holidays and 11-18 yo have another week working from home after the holidays.

The curfew is/was at 7pm (not 6pm), changed a while ago unknown to @stu_1992 :)
 
Last edited:
Bit misleading, they're closed for four days next week for primary schools and 11-18s after the Easter Monday holiday then it's the two week spring holiday which was happening anyway. Primary schools back after the holidays and 11-18 yo have another week working from home after the holidays.

The curfew is/was at 7pm (not 6pm), changed a while ago unknown to @stu_1992 :)
This is genuinely news to me. :lol: I was under the impression that the 7pm for for the regions under the new lockdown rules only, and the rest of us were still to adhere to 6pm. :rolleyes:

Strange thing is, a lot of places still seem to be closing at or just before 6 near me so I guess I didn't even notice.
 
Sorry if this has been discussed previously but what are people's view on reinfections. Everything I have read on the internet is extremely vague with hardly any concrete data on reinfections. Some people around me have told me they know of people who have been reinfected but I have always thought that it might be down to false positives, mix up of samples, or probably some other error. But my Uncle who lives next door has now tested positive for the second time in four months. His first was a definite case since he also lost smell and taste, but this time it's a mild fever with no chest infection detected in an HRCT.
 
Sorry if this has been discussed previously but what are people's view on reinfections. Everything I have read on the internet is extremely vague with hardly any concrete data on reinfections. Some people around me have told me they know of people who have been reinfected but I have always thought that it might be down to false positives, mix up of samples, or probably some other error. But my Uncle who lives next door has now tested positive for the second time in four months. His first was a definite case since he also lost smell and taste, but this time it's a mild fever with no chest infection detected in an HRCT.

It's now known that there can be reinfections. Exceedingly rare in the first months after infection and still not common even after that, but it can happen.
 
It's now known that there can be reinfections. Exceedingly rare in the first months after infection and still not common even after that, but it can happen.

Protection from prior infection gets lower as you get older too. Big observational study in Denmark showed only 47% protection in the over 65s (80% overall, all ages combined).
 
Weird, probably unexpected?



Suicides can be counter-intuitive. Hence they decline during wars/recessions and peak during periods of peace/prosperity. Presumably when everyone is stressed/miserable - and there’s an obvious reason for it - individuals might find their personal circumstances less uniquely wretched. It’s harder being unhappy if you’re surrounded by people who are loving life.

I remember making this point a year ago when lockdown sceptics were saying we’d lose more lives to suicide from lockdown than we would from the virus.
 
Suicides can be counter-intuitive. Hence they decline during wars/recessions and peak during periods of peace/prosperity. Presumably when everyone is stressed/miserable - and there’s an obvious reason for it - individuals might find their personal circumstances less uniquely wretched. It’s harder being unhappy if you’re surrounded by people who are loving life.

I remember making this point a year ago when lockdown sceptics were saying we’d lose more lives to suicide from lockdown than we would from the virus.
It is a bit mad but in fairness isn't there also an argument that we'll lose more lives to suicide from the massive recession that this will bring? I'm pretty sure the great recession of 08 brought massively increased suicide rates, right?
 
It is a bit mad but in fairness isn't there also an argument that we'll lose more lives to suicide from the massive recession that this will bring? I'm pretty sure the great recession of 08 brought massively increased suicide rates, right?

Historically, the really deep recessions/depressions didn’t cause an increase in suicides. But yeah, the most recent recession did. Small numbers of excess deaths overall though. Certainly compared to what we’re looking at from covid.