Coronavirus - A pale horse,4 men and ....beer

[greenmark]

I think I know where you're coming from. Covid is just taking people that would have been taken by the winter cull anyway.

Yes, maybe a bit sooner. And my dad is 82 and in supported housing - don't think I don't care or don't want him to live to 90.

The argument against that is - until we social distance we still have seriously above average levels of death.
And it seems the stats support lockdown as the most effective control measure.

Above average levels of death are to be expected in a pandemic.
The question is whether the response is appropriate.

And what is the argument for the Govt trashing the economy if they didn't need to?

A possible overreaction, because SAGE have the ear of govt. and opposing voices are being drowned out (SAGE and govt. employees get paid full whack whatever happens).

Ok, I think SAGE are ok. They don't have power and govt has relecuntally followed SAGE's advice. i'll leave it there. I've put my questions and you have responded with respect. That's what i lke about this forum. Take care, maybe tomorrow we will cross swords .

[alexmr2]

Suggestion

Create 2 spreadsheets
1 for vaccinated not died

2. Im or my mates wont get vaccinated died

Im sure first group will update always

Create spreadsheet for people who survive Covid under 60

And people who die Covid under 60

First update 12,886 times

Second update 1 times

Compare to base rate of die from other year

[alexmr2]

And maybe give the poor kid a break, the pattern that I've seen is that a lot of younger people share his views, they only make a u-turn if their family members end up on respirators etc.

Plenty of people still live in their bubbles and that's what their perceptions and opinions are based on.

This is a problem. If a person knows someone who dies labelled Covid, then this lines up with Government propaganda and triggers strong emotions and sentiment to blame Covid.

But around 1% or 500-600k people die every year in the UK, so there's every chance someone you know will die under any circumstances, except in 2020/2021 the blame often goes to Covid. When this happens the person develops a strong confirmation bias and will attack non-believers.

Show that person statistics of 2020 deaths vs average from other years and you will only be met with a strong emotional reaction and backlash.

For example my aunt (smoked 50+ years) has been to hospital needing oxygen before, if she goes to ICU then the typical person in my situation may now believe there's a deadly virus healthcare crisis which needs attentiom. But step back and think logically, this might not be that unusual under any circumstances

[Derek27]

Suggestion

Create 2 spreadsheets
1 for vaccinated not died

2. Im or my mates wont get vaccinated died

Im sure first group will update always

Create spreadsheet for people who survive Covid under 60

And people who die Covid under 60

First update 12,886 times

Second update 1 times

Compare to base rate of die from other year

I'm glad somebody on the forum speaks StellaBot's language.

[alexmr2]

Would you accept that without lockdown ie reducing human interaction we would be facing a death rate way above the 5 year average for the time of year? (we already are by the way, 2 weeks into lockdown).

I'll mention it again, 40+ scientific papers showing weak correlation between lockdowns and deaths:
https://thefatemperor.com/published-pap ... uge-harms/

Remember when Peter talks about being fooled by randomness, not neccesarily a correlation?

You only need to look at every country in the world (since not all have restrictions) for one with significantly higher deaths than normal, I doubt you will find it. Sweden is a great example with minimal restrictions for many months and relatively normal death totals with minor variance.

The charts show that Covid kills quicker in short sharp spikes and then levels off, compared to the flu with a longer more rounded profile. The totals aren't that different, and Covid tests are inaccurate with false positives overinflating the figures anyway.

Plus the reason I don't class the UK as a true lockdown is;

100 people walk past 100 people in a supermarket in 10 minutes: 10,000
10 mins x 48 for the whole day = 480,000
480,000 x 10,000 shops across the UK = 4,800,000,000
4.8 billion x 300 days since first lockdown = 1.44 trillion social interactions in shops alone
Add in times when pubs were open, protests, schools, workplaces, essential workers, police, family gatherings and you have more social interactions

[Derek27]

And maybe give the poor kid a break, the pattern that I've seen is that a lot of younger people share his views, they only make a u-turn if their family members end up on respirators etc.

Plenty of people still live in their bubbles and that's what their perceptions and opinions are based on.

This is a problem. If a person knows someone who dies labelled Covid, then this lines up with Government propaganda and triggers strong emotions and sentiment to blame Covid.

But around 1% or 500-600k people die every year in the UK, so there's every chance someone you know will die under any circumstances, except in 2020/2021 the blame often goes to Covid. When this happens the person develops a strong confirmation bias and will attack non-believers.

Show that person statistics of 2020 deaths vs average from other years and you will only be met with a strong emotional reaction and backlash.

For example my aunt (smoked 50+ years) has been to hospital needing oxygen before, if she goes to ICU then the typical person in my situation may now believe there's a deadly virus which is real. But step back and think logically, this might not be that unusual under any circumstances

You are grossly underestimating the intelligence of the average person. Nobody blames covid for a driver crashing his car and dying. We blame covid for somebody who's tested positive for covid and dies from covid-related illnesses. The only person incapable of thinking logically is you. It is unusual for over a thousand excess deaths a day. Believe it or not, most people would rather take medical advice from medically qualified professionals than you. Every doctor in the world can't be involved in your conspiracy theory - it would only take one to blow the whistle.

How flu kills

How Covid-19 kills

[Derek27]

Remember when Peter talks about being fooled by randomness, not neccesarily a correlation?

Remember what Peter said here, which is the mistake you're making.

I'm constantly fascinated by way people feel there is a need to be right or wrong. It's probably the biggest mistake I see in the markets. People make a decision then try and find facts to fit that view.

I sit back look at the facts and try and make a decision.

Plus the reason I don't class the UK as a true lockdown is;

100 people walk past 100 people in a supermarket in 10 minutes: 10,000
10 mins x 48 for the whole day = 480,000
480,000 x 10,000 shops across the UK = 4,800,000,000
4.8 billion x 300 days since first lockdown = 1.44 trillion social interactions in shops alone
Add in times when pubs were open, protests, schools, workplaces, essential workers, police, family gatherings and you have more social interactions

I wouldn't like to shop at your supermarket. Walking past a 100 people in 10 minutes is one person every 6 seconds. Try counting next time. If you're keeping 2 metres away you're not really walking past but avoiding them. Furthermore, walking past somebody isn't that risky. The risk is standing in close proximity for several minutes.

[alexmr2]

Believe it or not, most people would rather take medical advice from medically qualified professionals than you. Every doctor in the world can't be involved in your conspiracy theory - it would only take one to blow the whistle.

Usually those making the statements are just spokespersons. If you were a doctor would you give away everything to publicly voice that you are leaning on the opinion that this is an economic crisis not a healthcare crisis?

After 9 years of training to be a doctor and aquiring student debts would you give up the mortgage, Mercedes and the kids private education?

[alexmr2]

Remember what Peter said here, which is the mistake you're making.

I'm constantly fascinated by way people feel there is a need to be right or wrong. It's probably the biggest mistake I see in the markets. People make a decision then try and find facts to fit that view.

I sit back look at the facts and try and make a decision.

I wouldn't like to shop at your supermarket. Walking past a 100 people in 10 minutes is one person every 6 seconds. If you're keeping 2 metres away you're not really walking past but avoiding them. Furthermore, walking past somebody isn't that risky. The risk is standing in close proximity for several minutes.

I agree that risks and rewards need to be weighed up rather than a binary decision, that's why I'm always looking at the numbers and thinking hmmmm only 0.01% of under 60s with no health issues have died 10 months later so maybe let society get on with it whilst the vulnerable shield and that will minimise the overall deaths/destruction compared to all the bad knock-on suffering to the vast majority + kids through lockdowns.

In the supermarkets what about all the people sharing touch screens, debit card reader pin pads, shopping basket/trolley handles? That's a lot of potential for spreading viruses

[Derek27]

Believe it or not, most people would rather take medical advice from medically qualified professionals than you. Every doctor in the world can't be involved in your conspiracy theory - it would only take one to blow the whistle.

Usually those making the statements are just spokespersons. If you were a doctor would you give away everything to publicly voice that you are leaning on the opinion that this is an economic crisis not a healthcare crisis?

After 9 years of training to be a doctor and aquiring student debts would you give up the mortgage, Mercedes and the kids private education?

You're again underestimating everybody's intelligence by assuming people listen no further than spokespersons making statements! Doctor's aren't required to give opinions about the economy, but they all agree that Covid-19 exists. There isn't a doctor in the world that doesn't think it's a healthcare crisis. You're making the mistake, like Peter's quote I've just alluded to, that it has to be one or the other - it's obviously both. If a doctor was of the opinion that the lockdown would do more damage to people's health than the virus they would be free to say so, they're not likely to lose their job.

[Derek27]

Remember what Peter said here, which is the mistake you're making.

I'm constantly fascinated by way people feel there is a need to be right or wrong. It's probably the biggest mistake I see in the markets. People make a decision then try and find facts to fit that view.

I sit back look at the facts and try and make a decision.

I wouldn't like to shop at your supermarket. Walking past a 100 people in 10 minutes is one person every 6 seconds. If you're keeping 2 metres away you're not really walking past but avoiding them. Furthermore, walking past somebody isn't that risky. The risk is standing in close proximity for several minutes.

I agree that risks and rewards need to be weighed up rather than a binary decision, that's why I'm always looking at the numbers and thinking hmmmm only 0.01% of under 60s with no health issues have died 10 months later so maybe let society get on with it whilst the vulnerable shield and that will minimise the overall deaths/destruction compared to all the bad knock-on suffering to the vast majority + kids through lockdowns.

Whilst the vulnerable shield. That could be 99.99% of the population! You said it yourself, that's the percentage of vulnerable people dying. You're overlooking the fact that it's not normal for people with minor health problems to suddenly drop dead. I have high blood pressure but I don't expect to be dying any time soon. I think you're also overlooking how common health problems are. For people over the age of 40 minor health problems will be quite common.

You're also selfish enough to not care about all the elderly people who have to go to the shops to get food, while healthy people would be happily spreading the virus that may kill that elderly person. Not everybody has someone to do their shopping.

In the supermarkets what about all the people sharing touch screens, debit card reader pin pads, shopping basket/trolley handles? That's a lot of potential for spreading viruses

WTF are you talking about?? You said the virus doesn't exist!!

[alexmr2]

Remember what Peter said here, which is the mistake you're making.


I wouldn't like to shop at your supermarket. Walking past a 100 people in 10 minutes is one person every 6 seconds. If you're keeping 2 metres away you're not really walking past but avoiding them. Furthermore, walking past somebody isn't that risky. The risk is standing in close proximity for several minutes.

I agree that risks and rewards need to be weighed up rather than a binary decision, that's why I'm always looking at the numbers and thinking hmmmm only 0.01% of under 60s with no health issues have died 10 months later so maybe let society get on with it whilst the vulnerable shield and that will minimise the overall deaths/destruction compared to all the bad knock-on suffering to the vast majority + kids through lockdowns.

Whilst the vulnerable shield. That could be 99.99% of the population! You said it yourself, that's the percentage of vulnerable people dying. You're overlooking the fact that it's not normal for people with minor health problems to suddenly drop dead. I have high blood pressure but I don't expect to be dying any time soon. I think you're also overlooking how common health problems are. For people over the age of 40 minor health problems will be quite common.

In the supermarkets what about all the people sharing touch screens, debit card reader pin pads, shopping basket/trolley handles? That's a lot of potential for spreading viruses

WTF are you talking about?? You said the virus doesn't exist!!

I never said it doesn't exist I had symptoms, but if it wasn't on the news I would just think a slightly bad flu is to be expected every now and then. The overreaction is an availability cascade which is so extreme that there has to be something more to it, like power and money

[Derek27]

I never said it doesn't exist I had symptoms, but if it wasn't on the news I would just think a slightly bad flu is to be expected every now and then. The overreaction is an availability cascade which is so unbalanced and extreme that there has to be something more to it, like power and money

You did!

I think that most traders on here are pretending that the virus is real...

I've noticed on another post you said the virus is real. Perhaps you're confused about what you think or change your mind to suit yourself?

If you accept that the virus is real and exists you can't argue that all these mysterious deaths don't have the virus as they've tested positive for it. People who have suffered badly from it generally say it's far worse than the flu. Then you have long covid symptoms, apparently permanent loss of taste and smell, people unable to walk far, does the flu do that?

[alexmr2]

Unfortunately it seems any rational discussion isn't possible, it's just a circular argument of emotions, sentimental hearsay and opinions from one extreme or the other. In reality the answer is probably somewhere in the middle and DOES revolve around money/power more than saving lives.

Traders more than anyone else should know that solid numbers should be the biggest factor when deciding an opinion. You don't have to look far to see that historically excess deaths aren't anything unusual in any country regardless of whether they adopted restrictions or not.

swedennew.png

swedenn.jpg

[TraderFred]

I fear you have your work cut out here, Derek!

Just wish Alex would put all his data and research skills to some good use and study the betfair markets instead.

Come on Alex, if you want to be a trader, do some proper research. You can’t live on £8 per month.