CV and mad panic behaviour

[capcom]

The mass state of confusion with changing policy on the run is one reason I'd never allow Andrews that level of control.  Or anyone else.  Enough of the stuff ups

[Baggers]

Wrong in one critical aspect Thry. And I'll try and post the chart (a jpg)! Any hints?

Saying the numbers were 'out of control' is simply emotional rhetoric.

The actual (and modelled) effective reproduction rate (DHHS data) had already peaked and was heading south before even Stage 3 restrictions were reintroduced.

And, in fact, that number was comfortably below the 'magic' 1.0 mark (around 27 July) WELL BEFORE Stage 4 restrictions. Let alone allowing any lag time for 'effect'.

Fact. And essentially confirmed by third party modelling.

So, the only reason for doing it was political.

As to the efficacy of lockdowns and other NPIs - the latest study certainly makes one's eyebrows rise!

https://www.aier.org/article/lockdowns-a...-suggests/

No offense, FB77, but the AIER is not as unbiased or as objective as it proports... just another Libertarian organisation and very guilty of cherry picking data to fit/promote its agendas and advocacies. I believe that sticking to data and opinion from medical experts remains the path to take.

[Baggers]

I would have thought that now isn't the time to go doing an investigation into what went wrong.

Identify the shortfalls.  Fix them, and then worry about who stuffed up once there is no pandemic to worry about.

I actually believe we can do both - and should. The information garnered during an investigation can have a huge and beneficial impact on what is being done at present. If we got another outbreak in a particular location, due to learning about certain security organisations through investigations, we would choose the location to be 'guarded' by those better qualified... and so on.

My question remains from weeks ago... why didn't Dan leap on the 2nd outbreak well before he did, like he did on the 1st outbreak?

[flyboy77]

No offense, FB77, but the AIER is not as unbiased or as objective as it proports... just another Libertarian organisation and very guilty of cherry picking data to fit/promote its agendas and advocacies. I believe that sticking to data and opinion from medical experts remains the path to take.

All good, I'm well aware of the heritage of AIER Baggers!

If you have some scientific evidence that supports lockdowns etc, feel free.

You want more on the anti lock down side?

https://t.co/vSPLOWSeKO?amp=1

ps who can tell me how to upload an image?

[Wet Willie]

It's a shame that after the virus is sorted, we can't turn our attention to the ICE industry that causes daily damage to our society...

[Gointocarlton]

All good, I'm well aware of the heritage of AIER Baggers!

If you have some scientific evidence that supports lockdowns etc, feel free.

You want more on the anti lock down side?

https://t.co/vSPLOWSeKO?amp=1

ps who can tell me how to upload an image?

Go to preview mode and you can drag  an image in the panel below where you type

[flyboy77]

A picture tells 1000 words ()if the upload has worked!)

[Gointocarlton]

A picture tells 1000 words ()if the upload has worked!)

So does that say that the daily cases spike lags the Reff spike by a month or so? Its weird because the first Reff spike didnt correlate to daily cases spikes but I guess testing wasnt occuring so it hard to deduce what that says. Daily tests would be good overlayed on that.

[LP]

So does that say that the daily cases spike lags the Reff spike by a month or so? Its weird because the first Reff spike didnt correlate to daily cases spikes but I guess testing wasnt occuring so it hard to deduce what that says. Daily tests would be good overlayed on that.

That's the right train of thought, yes there is a lag and it's also function of testing because when you test someone you do not really know what stage of infection or contagiousness that they are at.

You will recall that the government recalled a bunch of dodgy ineffective tests around May June and banned them from import, which saw a shortage of tests kits which was rectified by the end of June early July.

Also, the R[sub]e[/sub] effective reproduction rate is a measure of the rate of infection with respect to transmission, immunity, vaccination and all other mitigation measures like masks, quarantine and isolation.

The main raw measure is R[sub]0[/sub] which is the basic infection rate, that has barely changed in many months now. Readers have to be careful about it's reporting because in reality the virus has mutated and there are now many strains with varying levels of transmission, averages can be from a wide spread of contagious levels.

Another word of warning about language, all contagious diseases are infectious, but not all infectious diseases are contagious. Technically this difference is often manipulated by some segments of social media and political spectrum to make things look how they want them to look.

It's typical for the R[sub]0[/sub] to drop through the coarse of an infection, and it can mean very little about how contagious something is and more about the number of tests and other factors like natural immunity levels which are always higher than zero!

The real concern in the linked DHHS model would be the rising green bars, and why that was happening while R[sub]e[/sub] dropped!

[kruddler]

It's typical for the R[sub]0[/sub] to drop through the coarse of an infection, and it can mean very little about how contagious something is and more about the number of tests.

Isn't that a factor of herd immunity?

Less people who can get it means less people will get it.