Coronavirus (2021) thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Goodness me. If you think natural immunity is inferior to that given by the injections, that's fine. I am not 'qualified' at all. I just read plenty of stuff, but it's up to you what you believe or think.
So, how long does natural immunity last, and what is its effect on the new variant as a comparison to recent booster vaccination. Or like me do you not really know so think best get boosted to go with any immunity I have left from covid. Seems daft not to.
 
I no nothing and just a thought.

Could the virus mutate more in people who are not vaccinated? And why every country in the world are pushing people to keep getting vaccinated the more people who get vaccinated the more the virus will die the more the virus will if you get it will become milder?
 
Word to the wise, I’d give the Match Day Thread a miss if I were you…
How weird is that thread? Posters we never hear off can’t wait to offer their critique (mostly negative) whilst a match is taking place. I only do home games now but when we are on TV or the dodgy box I’m watching the football not arguing with some other weird fuckers.
 
ahhh "fetish", throwing around words to try and demean me and therefore my argument. Weak.

Simply answer this question if you like.
Do you have any qualifications in Virology or Epidemiology?
I have a BA in maths (specialising in statistics) and an MSc in Computer Science and Operational Research. I have worked for the ONS on population and health statistics in two spells for a total of 15 years.
Sufficient to effectively comment on any modelling that comes out of Imperial, Warwick LSHTM and Oxford that are used by SAGE.
Oh and ALL of those who I used to work with and am still in touch with think as I do that the models only produce an absolute worst case higher than the upper quartile of whichever statistical distribution you care to base your model on.
 
Last edited:
Absolute bollocks. You are a science denier. Quoting Newton doesn't change that.

Sorry but its not bollocks at all. the whole point of a lot of science it trying to disprove scientific discoveries. those that cannot be disproven become enshrined, its the whole definition of Peer reviewing.

there are still thousands of physicists out there there trying to disprove Einstein's theory's every day as the one that does instantly becomes world renowend.
 
I have a BA in maths and statistics and an MSc in Computer Science and Operational Research. I have worked for the ONS on population and health statistics in two spells for a total of 15 years.
Sufficient to effectively comment on any modelling that comes out of Imperial, Warwick LSHTM and Oxford that are used by SAGE.
Oh and ALL of those who I used to work with and am still in touch with think as I do that the models only produce an absolute worst case higher than the upper quartile of whichever statistical distribution you care to base your model on.

Very impressive.

Is it better to have a worse case scenario or near enough the right one? Especially when Covid is very serious..
 
I no nothing and just a thought.

Could the virus mutate more in people who are not vaccinated? And why every country in the world are pushing people to keep getting vaccinated the more people who get vaccinated the more the virus will die the more the virus will if you get it will become milder?
If the Scientists say get vaccinated that’s good enough for me, like you I’m not following all amateur theories on numbers, risks, future predictions. It’s not in my hands, no amount of worrying will make any difference so I’ll let it ride and take what’s coming.
 
Very impressive.

Is it better to have a worse case scenario or near enough the right one? Especially when Covid is very serious..
Clearly SAGE doesn't think so.
But human nature tells me that if you cry wolf all the time at some point people stop believing you and that will be more costly if the worst case should ecentually happen.
Better lay out all the stats and let people make their own mind up.
 
If the Scientists say get vaccinated that’s good enough for me, like you I’m not following all amateur theories on numbers, risks, future predictions. It’s not in my hands, no amount of worrying will make any difference so I’ll let it ride and take what’s coming.
The rush to get people tripple jabbed is the best strategy. The higher we get the base immunity the lower the actual numbers will be.
 
Clearly SAGE doesn't think so.
But human nature tells me that if you cry wolf all the time at some point people stop believing you and that will be more costly if the worst case should ecentually happen.
Better lay out all the stats and let people make their own mind up.

Maybe I think people who have been getting jabbed 99% of those will keep getting vaccinated those who have not bothered getting any will continue to not bother think it’s around 5m.
 
I have a BA in maths and statistics and an MSc in Computer Science and Operational Research. I have worked for the ONS on population and health statistics in two spells for a total of 15 years.
Sufficient to effectively comment on any modelling that comes out of Imperial, Warwick LSHTM and Oxford that are used by SAGE.
Oh and ALL of those who I used to work with and am still in touch with think as I do that the models only produce an absolute worst case higher than the upper quartile of whichever statistical distribution you care to base your model on.

Yeah……but……. ;-)
 
Experts give it to none expert statisticians and analysts to compile. They are good with numbers. They are however completely unqualified to make judgements on new infectious deceases. You do know that some statisticians and data analysts work on numbers for sofa's, condiments, football crowds, marketing etc?

Condiments, sofas? Your heads gone mate log off for a bit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top