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

A place to discuss anything.
Post Reply
SweetLyrics
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:57 pm

'The most restrictive non‐pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) for controlling the spread of COVID‐19 are mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closures. Given the consequences of these policies, it is important to assess their effects. We evaluate the effects on epidemic case growth of more restrictive NPIs (mrNPIs), above and beyond those of less restrictive NPIs (lrNPIs).

We find no clear, significant beneficial effect of mrNPIs on case growth in any country.

While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less restrictive interventions.'

Stamford University research paper - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13484

But you carry on making sarcastic, pointless remarks about David Icke, Fred. You really enhance the forum with your wit, charm and erudition.

Jeff
SweetLyrics
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:57 pm

Speaking with a handful of people who happen to believe the same things you believe don't make you well informed, with greatest respect.
Derek27 wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 2:38 am
I've spoken to carers at my mother's care home about the crisis and how they're struggling in their other care homes so I know what's going on, and I've heard from a nurse about the situation at my local hospital. You seem to think that our only interaction with society is though mainstream and social media - we all have friends who are real people! :roll:
TraderFred
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:55 am

I would argue with you Jeff, though I fear that I will be on the receiving end of yet another expletive-laden angry private message. I am only just getting over yesterday’s.

I will instead concede defeat. You have read a paper, so you must be right. Lockdown should clearly be ended and crowds and normality resumed. I’m sure the hospitals will cope just fine. They’re only pretending to be busy anyway.
SweetLyrics
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:57 pm

Top tip: If you call someone a 'serial loser' (whether in real life or online), it's likely to provoke a reaction.

If you don't like the reaction, don't be a d***. Simples! :D
TraderFred wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 8:25 am
I would argue with you Jeff, though I fear that I will be on the receiving end of yet another expletive-laden angry private message. I am only just getting over yesterday’s.
User avatar
Derek27
Posts: 10399
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 am
Location: UK

SweetLyrics wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 7:43 am
'The most restrictive non‐pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) for controlling the spread of COVID‐19 are mandatory stay‐at‐home and business closures. Given the consequences of these policies, it is important to assess their effects. We evaluate the effects on epidemic case growth of more restrictive NPIs (mrNPIs), above and beyond those of less restrictive NPIs (lrNPIs).

We find no clear, significant beneficial effect of mrNPIs on case growth in any country.

While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less restrictive interventions.'

Stamford University research paper - https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13484

But you carry on making sarcastic, pointless remarks about David Icke, Fred. You really enhance the forum with your wit, charm and erudition.

Jeff
Quite a meaningless statement unless they define what more restrictive means!
SweetLyrics
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:57 pm

So you've read the paper, and they don't define their terms anywhere?

Wow! That's not what I would have expected from one of the world's top universities.
Derek27 wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 10:15 am
Quite a meaningless statement unless they define what more restrictive means!
User avatar
Derek27
Posts: 10399
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 am
Location: UK

SweetLyrics wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 7:55 am
Speaking with a handful of people who happen to believe the same things you believe don't make you well informed, with greatest respect.
Derek27 wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 2:38 am
I've spoken to carers at my mother's care home about the crisis and how they're struggling in their other care homes so I know what's going on, and I've heard from a nurse about the situation at my local hospital. You seem to think that our only interaction with society is though mainstream and social media - we all have friends who are real people! :roll:
I'm not talking about people who believe what I believe but people who actually work in care and NHS and see first hand what's going on, as opposed to living in fantasy land and guessing that everything's a conspiracy!

You have the same attitude as Alex in that it's all about what you believe rather than what you see or have evidence/reason to believe.
SweetLyrics
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:57 pm

Straw man argument.

I have been very clear that I believe that Covid is real.

But if painting people who disagree with you as being crazy conspiracy theorists who believe in the lizard people and who think that we are living in the Matrix, hey, whatever makes you feel good. :)
Derek27 wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 10:19 am
I'm not talking about people who believe what I believe but people who actually work in care and NHS and see first hand what's going on, as opposed to living in fantasy land and guessing that everything's a conspiracy!

You have the same attitude as Alex in that it's all about what you believe rather than what you see or have evidence/reason to believe.
User avatar
Derek27
Posts: 10399
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 11:44 am
Location: UK

SweetLyrics wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 10:17 am
So you've read the paper, and they don't define their terms anywhere?

Wow! That's not what I would have expected from one of the world's top universities.
Derek27 wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 10:15 am
Quite a meaningless statement unless they define what more restrictive means!
I was referring to your post, not the paper. Do you seriously expect me to read every scientific report posted to this forum? I shouldn't even be on this forum, I should be trading. But if that's a summary of the report it's quite a poor one.
SweetLyrics
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2018 7:57 pm

I will defer to your superior academic expertise on the quality of the abstract (although when I did my MSc, I'm pretty sure that I was told that I didn't need to get bogged down in definitions in my abstract).

It's a shame the professors didn't consult you before publishing their paper. :)
Derek27 wrote:
Fri Jan 15, 2021 10:23 am
I was referring to your post, not the paper. Do you seriously expect me to read every scientific report posted to this forum? I shouldn't even be on this forum, I should be trading. But if that's a summary of the report it's quite a poor one.
Post Reply

Return to “General discussion”