COVID cases on the brink of breaking 100k a day (Zoe Covid Study)

Whitewavemark2

Alegrias1

The only time reference to authority is not valid is when that authority is not relevant.

Nope.

If the authority has got something wrong, you tell them.

^Nullius in verba.^

I don’t think that is what pippa meant, or at least it is not how I interpret it.

No, but it's what I meant.

If you see something questionable, question it. Doesn't matter who you're talking to. Doesn't matter if someone is a very good communicator and has been right in the past, if what they are saying now is questionable, question it. Nobody's infallible.

Alegrias1

^The only time reference to authority is not valid is when that authority is not relevant.^

Nope.

If the authority has got something wrong, you tell them.

^Nullius in verba.^

I don’t think that is what pippa meant, or at least it is not how I interpret it.

It does sound as if the reporting may well be an issue, Whitewave. Hopefully, if it gets talked about enough, someone will ask the government what they are going to do about it.

The only time reference to authority is not valid is when that authority is not relevant.

Nope.

If the authority has got something wrong, you tell them.

Nullius in verba.

So let’s look at the explanation as to why the government figures may be inaccurate.

An example 29/10 the government figures show the number of new daily infections as going down, whereas the tracker data shows them continuing on an upward trajectory.

So which is correct?

Zoe figures are based on data from around 750000 people weekly reporting and tends to be consistently about a week ahead of other reports. The data is based on “symptomatic users who have tested positive” regardless of the type of test producing the positive result.

The figure of 100000 is they argue going to be reached sooner than expected. But no plan B or C is being introduced.

The government figures are based on two different tests - the LFT and PCR.

The PCR is given to those who show symptoms based on the government guidelines. The guidelines are to get a PCR test if you have the classic symptoms of fever, continuous cough and loss of smell and taste.

However we know that the symptoms have changed and the top 5 are now
Headache
Runny nose
Sneezing
Sore throat
Cough
The other three symptoms are further down the list.

For whatever reason the government guidelines have never been updated, which of course would suggest that many people are failing to take PCR test because they do not show the symptoms on the government guidelines.

Many people will take the LFT to confirm covid, but there is no incentive to feed this information into the government figures.

Therefore because of the way the government figures are being compiled I think that there is an argument that they are inaccurate, and certainly less accurate than the Zoe figures.

Whitewavemark2

The government figures are in my opinion less accurate than either the ONS or the Zoe figures.

They certainly beg questions don't they Whitewave. Comparison and work on why they differ is the only way. I do wonder if the government is doing that.

I know that recourse to authority is not a valid way of proving anything. Alegrias1 [Sun 31-Oct-21 18:50:42]

There's nothing wrong with referring to appropriate experts to support your reasoning. It's how society builds knowledge. What about the poor little devils taking their first degrees. Very few will be carrying out new work to prove their thesis. They will rely on what they have learned from other sources - hopefully putting both sides of the argument and then drawing a conclusion. It's how you learn to learn. The only time reference to authority is not valid is when that authority is not relevant. I'm afraid the statement quoted has long since been proved to be falacious.

The government figures are in my opinion less accurate than either the ONS or the Zoe figures.

Or, to paraphrase,

the government figures are less accurate than the government figures.

Sorry, you have already - but I hope you can speak to a real person. Send in a complaint online.

MayBee70

I’m at breaking point because of my missing, possibly stolen passport and not being able to speak to anyone at the passport office having been on the phone three times for an hour and then being cut off! Two days running. Which is all down to the inefficiency of this pathetic government. And having to watch that scruffy scarecrow buffoon of a PM representing me on the world stage.Dr John is a beacon of sanity in my world at the moment. I feel that I have more control over covid ( thanks to said Dr) than my missing possibly stolen passport. And that’s saying something!

Maybee
The photo on my driving licence is not the same one as my passport one. I look like a thug in my passport but look quite pleasant on my driving licence.
I hope yours arrives soon - contact the Passport Office asap.

The government figures are in my opinion less accurate than either the ONS or the Zoe figures.

Or am I missing something here…?

Yes. Sorry Maybee70 but that's my point. Different ways of measuring the numbers. The 41,000 is the daily measure of reported positives. The ONS numbers are a historical revised measure. Spector's numbers are a modelled estimate. They are all valid. They are going to differ. Using one to say another is wrong, then to claim that the government are lying, is either naive or malicious.

twitter.com/theAliceRoberts/status/1454491028770246660?t=Zdx3agB58vIVtCEQz3dBWQ&s=19 well, who would have ever considered that this could be policy?

Reading a report from various USA universities on the research into vaccine efficacy over time. A sample of a total of 2% of the US population, so a good size.

One thing I think would be very useful for those that are wondering about whether to have the booster or not is to make clear how the vaccine efficacy wanes over time. The % of course depends on the original vaccine given, but all certainly do wane. Now whether this translates into greater hospitalisation and death does not yet appear to clear, but there is evidence that the level of symptomatic disease and a-symptomatic PCR tests increases.

Alegrias1

You do know ONS is a government department, right?

So why don’t the government agree with their own figures then? Or am I missing something here…?

You do know ONS is a government department, right?

It said in one paper that the government are saying people don’t want them to implement PlanB but that most people do. You wait, when COP 26 is over Johnson will change his mind.

My goodness on this thread Professor Spector has been trashed and now Dr. Campbell.

Quite extraordinary.

I have been looking at the official government figures and those provided by both the ONS and Zoe and frankly I am minded to agree that the government figures are inaccurate.

The argument over their inaccuracy is convincing imo.

I don't watch John Campbell's videos very often, but my understanding of "we" is "us, here in the UK", as I understand he has an audience in many different countries. I don't have the impression that he pretends to have anything to do with research or data.

Sounds like a good idea MayBee. I see the problem. Try to get some sleep (easier said than done sometimes) and hopefully you can get through to them soon.

I know. I was just hoping that someone might knock on my door today and say it had been pushed through their letter box. And I can’t speak to the courier company till tomorrow. The thing is, can I lose it if I never had it in the first place. And, if I report it lost do I then have to pay to replace it? And how can I give them the details of it (number etc) if I don’t know it! There is nothing on the government website about lost passport due to not fit for purpose Home Office using not fit for purpose courier service for several years and not doing anything about it. Methinks I’m going further and further down the rabbit hole. It’s like a Dickens circumlocution office. I just need Zebedee to tell me it’s ‘time for bed’. Which, as I didn’t sleep much last night, it probably is…..night night everyone….

PippaZ

^Before you go, maybe you can explain to everyone else on here how the nurse educator is really good at using other people's data and pretending he has something to do with it, has an obsession about aspiration and has suddenly become very defensive about the BBC questioning his veracity.^ Alegrias1 [Sun 31-Oct-21 16:11:26]

It seems odd that someone intent on convincing us of her academic qualifications - but not telling us what they are - thinks it strange for an educator the extrapolate from verifiable data. Isn't it an academics and lecturers job to be able to interpret other people's data and present it in a way that aids the understanding of others? That he does it in such an accessible way is to his credit and is probably why he has done as well as he has. Sadly, none of us on here have his level of background knowledge and ability in this subject, as far as I can see, so it is useful that he, and all the others we refer to, have chosen to share with others at this time.

I have no idea of your education or your career Alegrais but you seem to expect everyone to believe what you say. This man's education and career are out there for all to see. I admire the inquisitive mind and the continual acquisition of knowledge he has shown. I think it's appalling that you suggest he makes out "he has something to do with it". Like all good academics, he refers to his source. That comment must edge on libel. And after the "nurse-educator" put-down, let's have your qualifications and academic background to see how it compares when we are talking fact not tasteless attempts to denigrate.

I don't expect anyone to believe me about anything PippaZ. Like all academics worth their salt, I know that recourse to authority is not a valid way of proving anything. Irrespective of anyone's qualifications or reputation, it there are obvious logical flaws in their arguments, it's incumbent on the people who see them to point them out.

Dr Campbell consistently says "We're doing this" or "We think that." There's no "We" about it, but by expressing himself that way, he implies that he is complicit in the creation and analysis of the data. Maybe he doesn't mean to, but it enhances his reputation amongst his followers.

He is a nurse educator, and I suspect he's a very good one. However he is not an arbiter of public health information, no matter how personable he is.. Its interesting that you comment that none of us have his level of knowledge and ability in this subject. If you look up his background, you'll see he has no background whatsoever in epidemiology or data science.

MayBee You've probably done this already, but you can report a lost passport online:
www.gov.uk/report-a-lost-or-stolen-passport

MerylStreep

MayBee70
I believe you said some time ago that you wanted to live a normal life. And yet from your posts it indicates that your life revolves around covid which looks like it is controlling you.

MayBee's posts don't indicate that at all! However, anybody who think they can just ignore Covid or fight it like they would an invading army really should have their bumps felt. People are fond of saying we should "live with it". That means recognising it's still there and taking precautions. That's not being controlled.

MerylStreep

MayBee70
I believe you said some time ago that you wanted to live a normal life. And yet from your posts it indicates that your life revolves around covid which looks like it is controlling you.

I said I had more control over covid than my missing, possibly stolen passport. Which isn’t saying much!