[quote="brianatab”] This may have been avoided it the additional restrictions on that area had been brought in earlier.[/quote]
Or if the restrictions had been complied with.....
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@DJL, agreed, hence my comments about the exodus.
Hundreds, maybe thousands more people will have died as a result of these idiots spreading the new strain around the Country
The vast majority of people visiting/working would have had return tickets, and would normally have returned on fairly empty trains. Instead, they had to share with tens of thousands of lemmings packed in with them, completely ignoring social distancing.
The train/coach Companies ought to have stopped selling tickets above the numbers allowing for social distancing. Govt should have immediately forbidden the sale of any more once the restrictions were announced.
ANPR could have been used to track vehicles traveling away from the registered address, and fines issued.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
I've tried to stay away from this thread,
But here I am.
EasyJet have cancelled my flight to GVA for the End of Season Bash.
I suppose I'll have to face up to it. Nah! ... I'll stick my head in the sand.
My best friends wife told me there were riots in dublin over the wknd too
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Wrong thread!
After all it is free
After all it is free
chocksaway wrote:
Wrong thread!
48 pages and you come to that conclusion?
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
stanton wrote:
Drinking Partying Rule Breaking Brits Stigmatisation in Austria
errr...except that the main rule breakers in St Anton (ironically enough) were Swedish
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
robs1 wrote:
My best friends wife told me there were riots in dublin over the wknd too
yes there was, a group of q anon supporters mingled with people not happy with the lockdown, but the group that believe a) covid isn't real b) there are lizard men in goverment c) the earth is flat, are the group that are organising these riots, most people would just like to ease the lockdown and have a peaceful march,
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
biddpyat wrote:
robs1 wrote:
My best friends wife told me there were riots in dublin over the wknd too
yes there was, a group of q anon supporters mingled with people not happy with the lockdown, but the group that believe a) covid isn't real b) there are lizard men in goverment c) the earth is flat, are the group that are organising these riots, most people would just like to ease the lockdown and have a peaceful march,
Vaccinated today. Bill Gates sadly now owns the remote control....
It was amazing to experience. So well organised.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
thefatcontroller wrote:
biddpyat wrote:
robs1 wrote:
My best friends wife told me there were riots in dublin over the wknd too
yes there was, a group of q anon supporters mingled with people not happy with the lockdown, but the group that believe a) covid isn't real b) there are lizard men in goverment c) the earth is flat, are the group that are organising these riots, most people would just like to ease the lockdown and have a peaceful march,
Vaccinated today. Bill Gates sadly now owns the remote control....
It was amazing to experience. So well organised.
Having mine sat, amazing roll out at this pace whole country will done by may
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
robs1 wrote:
thefatcontroller wrote:
biddpyat wrote:
robs1 wrote:
My best friends wife told me there were riots in dublin over the wknd too
yes there was, a group of q anon supporters mingled with people not happy with the lockdown, but the group that believe a) covid isn't real b) there are lizard men in goverment c) the earth is flat, are the group that are organising these riots, most people would just like to ease the lockdown and have a peaceful march,
Vaccinated today. Bill Gates sadly now owns the remote control....
It was amazing to experience. So well organised.
Having mine sat, amazing roll out at this pace whole country will done by may
Its quite emotional when there as it’s just so well done. I’ve got family & friends all around the world and they are soooo far behind.
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Quote:
I’ve got family & friends all around the world and they are soooo far behind.
And on death rate too...
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
mountainaddict wrote:
Quote:
I’ve got family & friends all around the world and they are soooo far behind.
And on death rate too...
but 100k haven't died here....
They are just better at lying than us.
Ask about the massive increase in suicides among the young in Aus as they see no hope.
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Lots of differences between different countries about what is and is not a covid death...
I‘m not saying we’ve done well but I do think we’ve been gold plating then definition a bit compared to other countries.
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
thefatcontroller wrote:
but 100k haven't died here....
The definition of a 'covid death' does vary from country to country, so perhaps it's better if we are looking to make international comparisons to use excess deaths above a five year rolling average as a measure of the impact the pandemic has had on the country. This will include deaths directly related to Covid and those indirectly related. In the UK there have been around 110,000 excess deaths since the start of the pandemic.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
rob@rar wrote:
thefatcontroller wrote:
but 100k haven't died here....
The definition of a 'covid death' does vary from country to country, so perhaps it's better if we are looking to make international comparisons to use excess deaths above a five year rolling average as a measure of the impact the pandemic has had on the country. This will include deaths directly related to Covid and those indirectly related. In the UK there have been around 110,000 excess deaths since the start of the pandemic.
Mmmm. Love all the caveats they had added on the last page as to the basis for their outputs...
One thing I have learned not to trust in the UK, data....
Mmmm. Love all the caveats they had added on the last page as to the basis for their outputs...
One thing I have learned not to trust in the UK, data....
Sure, there are always going to be caveats, the data are always going to be a bit ‘noisy’, you can’t rely on absolute precision, but do you believe that deaths from the pandemic are nowhere near that figure of 100,000 to 120,000 which different authorities have reported? If that’s not the correct number, what is?
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
rob@rar wrote:
thefatcontroller wrote:
Mmmm. Love all the caveats they had added on the last page as to the basis for their outputs...
One thing I have learned not to trust in the UK, data....
Sure, there are always going to be caveats, the data are always going to be a bit ‘noisy’, you can’t rely on absolute precision, but do you believe that deaths from the pandemic are nowhere near that figure of 100,000 to 120,000 which different authorities have reported? If that’s not the correct number, what is?
No idea but I believe an awful lot of deaths are being put in the COVID pile as it’s easier. The ‘anyone dying within 28 days of a positive covid test’ is an insane metric. Comparing countries death rates is stupid as no one using the same data. Does anyone believe the figures from China? We will never know as all those UK covid deaths now cremated or buried. Too late to try get a real figure.
No idea but I believe an awful lot of deaths are being put in the COVID pile as it’s easier. The ‘anyone dying within 28 days of a positive covid test’ is an insane metric. Comparing countries death rates is stupid as no one using the same data. Does anyone believe the figures from China? We will never know as all those UK covid deaths now cremated or buried. Too late to try get a real figure.
Its a bit tricky to know what to do if you don’t believe any of the data you have in front of you...
The 28 days since a positive test certainly has problems, but it is much more of an immediately available metric even if the error bars (undercounting and over counting) are higher than we might like. The ONS definition based on the death certificate is probably a more reliable indicator, not without problems, but uses the professional judgement of doctors. Even if you discount the proportion of deaths which have Covid as a secondary cause I think we’re still over 100,000 deaths due to the virus. Obviously you can quibble about individual cases, but I think they are pretty reliable indicators. For me excess deaths is the best metric as it looks more broadly at the impact of Covid, not just the direct deaths. But whichever method you think is most important, they are all in the same ballpark, significantly on the wrong side of 100,000 people dying before their time.
I’m interested in why people discount the fatality rate in the UK. Putting aside any uncertainty about the exact number, what implications do they make if they believe the death toll is ‘only’ 60,000, for example?
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@thefatcontroller, I agree the data are confusing, especially as we appear to have so many dying after hospital admission in a country with a very advanced healthcare system. Something appears to not add up. I don’t know how useful it is to compare death rates with other countries’ - will it lead to a change in policy?
I’m looking forward to getting my jab!
After all it is free
After all it is free
thefatcontroller wrote:
No idea but I believe an awful lot of deaths are being put in the COVID pile as it’s easier.
Let's consider that against the three commonly quoted figures.
1) Covid mentioned on death certificate. Yes, it is definitely possible people could be falsely putting covid on the death certificate because it's easier, or for many other reasons. We are trusting the professional completing the certificate to be honest. I've no reason to disbelieve them, but I can see the argument.
2) Deaths within 28 days of a test. There is no "easier" here. There are two sets of data: The dates and results of covid tests, and the dates of deaths. There is no opinion - either someone tested positive before they died, or they didn't. Yes, there will be cases of people testing positive one day and being run over by a bus the next. There will also be cases of people testing positive, being admitted to hospital for covid-related treatment and then dying 6 weeks later. Clearly the first of those is not a covid death so it would be good to exclude it from the figures. But how do you do that? You're back to opinion. OK, the person who was run over by a bus wasn't a covid death, but what about someone with an already weakened immune system who caught covid? Did they die of covid or of their pre-existing condition? If covid hadn't happened they would still be alive. 28 days has been picked as the point where the number of people over counted (e.g. run over by a bus) roughly cancels out the number under counted (who clearly died of covid, but it took a bit longer).
3) Excess mortality. This has no opinion at all. Its big drawback is that it mixes up deaths caused by lockdown, non-covid deaths avoided by lockdown (e.g. if you're staying at home you don't walk in front of that bus) and people who have died in hospital of a serious covid infection.
My point being that these are very different ways of calculating the number of people killed by covid. They've all got flaws, but the flaws are different. The fact that all three methodologies come to pretty much the same figure suggests that the figure is about right.
If you think 100,000 is way off, presumably you have at least a gut feeling of what the correct number is? Otherwise how do you know that 100,000 is wrong.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
A really nice summary @thelem.
The other question is: what number of Covid deaths is "acceptable"? If all hospitalised patients continue to be tested, there will surely be some in the future who die with Covid, particularly since some elderly have weak immune systems so that vaccination protection is imperfect. They would be recorded in your first two categories. But since there are quite a few in the older ages who are highly vulnerable to any respiratory disease which comes along, that may not mean any excess deaths.
That is the dilemma. A baseline circulation of Covid which causes no excess deaths would be acceptable to me, but it is impossible to define in advance when we reach that level in terms of the shorter term measures of deaths with a positive test or on death certificate.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
@j b, If Covid becomes endemic but less lethal and, combined with flu, cause a similar number of deaths to that of flu in recent years, then we may even stop testing for it.
In the vast majority of flu cases, the cause of death is most often reported as the complications (pneumonia etc) Flu is hardly ever mentioned, making it impossible to calculate the actual numbers with any accuracy. It is always only an estimate.
The winter of 19/20 had lower than average deaths throughout Europe due to a very light flu season. Many of those who might have succumbed to flu may have died of Covid in the following months. Flu cases were also much lower last winter, but more probably due to the lockdown and lack of social contact.
Total excess deaths are a more reliable comparison of the general health of the Nation, which I think is more important.
Under normal circumstances, we should expect the number of deaths next year, and the following few years to be correspondingly lower (based on the same 5 year average).
The next 5 yearly averages will be distorted by this year's figure, so we should always expect to be below the average for such a period.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
brianatab wrote:
If Covid becomes endemic but less lethal and, combined with flu, cause a similar number of deaths to that of flu in recent years, then we may even stop testing for it.
That would make sense - if it happens. How often are conditions removed from the notifiable diseases list?
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
@j_b On purely pragmatic terms, the number of covid deaths that would be acceptable will be related to the consumption of general/acute hospital beds and ICU resources (not just beds but more importantly ICU Teams): as long as covid-related hospitalisations can be absorbed by the NHS wards and ICU capacity, then the level of infections, illness and deaths is manageable and by this measure 'acceptable'.
The UK's problem is that it has far less ICU capacity per capita than many of the G7 countries (7.3 beds/100K in the UK versus 33.8/100K in Germany, 34.3 in the USA). I can see a decade of demands for reinstating ICU capacity finally being addressed: justified on the basis that while ICU staff can usefully be deployed around other departments when things are quiet, it's much harder to conjure-up ICU staffing from non-ICU-trained staff in other departments in a crisis. And general and acute hospital beds have also declined by 34% since 1988 meaning that in the winter of 2018-19 occupancy hit 95% at times - which was considered too close for comfort given the possibility and example of recent epidemics abroad (but how likely was that to happen here?).
Of course, what will happen is that over a decade, if there are no more major epidemics, then generous ICU staffing levels will be seen as a luxury we can't afford, compared to demands in other more pressing healthcare areas, and they'll be reduced (pretty much the story of the last decade). Just in time for the next pandemic around 2030-2035, which will probably be related to antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections. I'm sometimes glad I'm not a politician, as this is just one of many policy and budgeting conundrums with no ideal answers.
________________________________
And just to keep on topic - no. Really, the odds of anything happening to enable Brits to travel out at Easter must surely be pretty slim?
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
@LaForet, If I read correctly, the roadmap out of lockdown as 17th May as the earliest date at which international travel will be allowed.
So no chance of Easter ski
You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Covid on death certificate: not sure if it's done because it's easier. It possibly gets counted a bit like dementia.
An estimate of the number of people who died from dementia would include a relative of mine who died a few years ago. Actually she died from a chest infection following a severe stroke and ongoing cardiovascular problems. Additionally the certificate listed dementia, which obviously wasn't the immediate cause of death but was certainly the main reason she had been in the care home for years.
It seems to be policy to capture the data on dementia in this way, for understandable reasons.
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Quote:
A baseline circulation of Covid which causes no excess deaths would be acceptable to me
If, as seems likely, Covid becomes endemic, it will cause "excess deaths", won't it, unless it displaces some other cause of death? In other words, a nasty new circulating disease will make life more dangerous. But once the death rate settles down, they'll be everyday, common-or-garden deaths, not "excess"?
Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
@pam w, Those at significant risk from COVID are also largely those at risk from most other infections going around-notably pneumonia, flu etc. It will therefore be interesting from a scientific point of view to see how much an endemic covid virus might increase excess deaths-i.e. some of those who would have died of flu, die from covid instead-reducing the increase in the total number.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Thu 4-03-21 14:11; edited 1 time in total
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
LaForet wrote:
I'm sometimes glad I'm not a politician, as this is just one of many policy and budgeting conundrums with no ideal answers.
Although you pretty much gave the answer higher up.
I think Sunak missed a huge opportunity in the budget. He had a window of opportunity when the public of all political colours recognise there has been a lot of government expenditure that will probably need recovering in tax, and that the country needs strong public services to rely on in times of need. He could have altered the tax system to be fairer and more progressive without too many squeals from the wealthy who would end up paying more, and he could have established a strong funding structure for the NHS etc in the future. Pity.
peerless ploughman, i think in cases such as your relative a lot of doctors think that the dementia did quite likely contribute, in that their inability to explain well what they are feeling, when it started, etc, makes any illnesses more difficult for carers and medical staff to help with.
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
@j b, you reckon he should have put up taxes even more?
@Gordyjh, err ... he didn't really put up taxes, at least for now. He froze the income tax thresholds which has no immediate effect but ends up affecting the lower paid most. He has proposed a corporation tax increase well in the future, but also a loophole ("super-deduction") and the time for corporate accountants to work out how to exploit it.
Just to take one example of what he could have done without too many complaints: a lot of recent analysis has pointed out the discrepancy between income tax and CGT rates which is used by the wealthy to lower their overall tax rates. Given that has been widely discussed in the context of there being a likely need for higher tax take, I don't think aiming for closer parity would have created too many squeals.
@Gordyjh, yes, but not until next year, and then only a minimal amount. - 20% of whatever increase there might have been in the allowance. - £1 per week per £250 increase.
To most people, less than the price of a coffee every month.
Forget any promises leading up to the last election, the reality is that everybody is going to have to pay a bit more tax for the next 20-30 years, such was the financial impact of the Pandemic.
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
@Gordyjh, Please explain.
As a standard tax payer, how am I impacted?
Genuine Q.
After all it is free
After all it is free
@NickYoung, by freezing your tax free allowance. @j b, thinks it will affect the lower paid most when it will affect everyone who pays tax. Given that the highest rate taxpayers as a whole have apparently seen their incomes rise despite the pandemic, they will be the ones most affected by this measure. As I haven’t earned enough to pay income tax for years, I’m all right Jack!
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
@Gordyjh, but if you are at the bottom of the income scale then you are less likely to get a pay at increase and you spend all of your income. Take £1 a week away from them and that's less to spend on food and heating. High earners won't miss a few pounds a week as they probably don't spend it, more likely to save it or spend it on overseas holidays. So yes from a simple tax perspective the high earner is hit hardest but the low paid are impacted the most. If you give a low earner an extra £1 then that will be spent thus going into the economy, much less likely with the high earner.
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
There will no doubt be changes to the tax system over the next few years. Taxation rates/ allowances will all change. £400Bn has to be recovered somehow.
Many of those at the bottom of the income scale don't pay income tax (or very little), but they will have to pay a little bit towards the bill, as they did gain benefit from the Govt assistance.
The point that the Chancellor made was that he wanted to delay any increases to enable the economy to recover over the next 18 months. He was in no financial position to give anything away (nor will any chancellor in the next 20 years) to stimulate the economy, so could only opt for a status quo.
FAQ
Poster: A snowHead
