WHO Poll
Q: 2020/2021 Where will we finish up this season?
a. Top Four, Champions League here we come
7%
  
b. 5th-7th Europa League is well within our grasp
1%
  
c. 8th to 14th anywhere in mid table is about right
12%
  
d. We're in a dog fight before a ball has been kicked and we'll do well to finish 17th or just above
38%
  
e. GSB have derailed our season before a ball has been kicked, the Championship beckons
41%
  



goose 12:23 Wed Jan 22
This coronavirus in China
anyone else worried? 9 dead so far.

CNY soon so the virus will spread very quickly if they cannot control it. It'll be in Europe by the end of CNY if not earlier.

is this the end of humanity?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51202216

Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

gph 10:13 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
There are competing definitions of "false positive rate".

Either
(number of negative cases tested as positive)/(total number of negative cases)
or
(number of negative cases tested as positive)/(total number of cases tested as positive).

Maybe, in a 100 years the definitions will settle down. In the meantime, it's considered good practice* to state which definition you are using when you communicate your results.

*Something I've failed to do on at least one occasion. I won't do it again, even though I haven't been rebuked for it

twoleftfeet 10:13 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
3 cases per 100,000 were I live.

What pandemic?

Stubbo 10:01 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
What I don't get is this:

We're for arguments sake concerned if the rate of infection in the population is 50 per 100,000. That's 0.05%!

If you test 100,000 people with specificity of 99.8% even if none of them have it, the test will tell you that 200 of them have it.

So the testing inaccuracy is four times more prevalent than the threshold for us dropping a bollock and going to defcon 4!

Bungo 9:44 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
Decent link below giving a reasonably simple explanation of sensitity, specificity as well as PPV and NPVs.

As far as I know no tests for anything are 100%, so there will always be some errors.

https://uk.cochrane.org/news/sensitivity-and-specificity-explained-cochrane-uk-trainees-blog

Stubbo 9:40 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
So if you test 200k people today who dont have the virus, 1600 will get told they have it at Specificity of 99.2%

Stubbo 9:38 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
Speficity less than 100% = false positives (99% would mean for every 100 people tested who don't have the virus one would be missed)

Sensitivity less than 100% = false negatives (99% would mean for every 100 people tested who have the virus one would be missed)

The old c wing 9:35 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
YEs stubbo. So if 4,000 test positive as today, then 32 were falsely positive.

Rio - yes, same time next week?

Stubbo 9:30 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
C Wing

Specificity is about the rate of accurately identifying those who do not have something.

So of 1000 negative people are tested, 8 will not be identifed as being negative at 0.8% (or rather 99.2% Specificity).

ak37 9:21 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
mashed in maryland 8:59 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China

“Its over. The daily deaths are in single figures”


Errr, except today where there have been 27 recorded deaths.

riosleftsock 9:19 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
c wing, I checked and I am more or less right.

If you have a single test and it is returned positive, there is only a 29% chance of that result being correct.

Want to buy a bridge?

The old c wing 9:10 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
Your including the negatives in your calculations.

A false positive rate is the percentage of positive tests that are false.

Today 4,000 people tested positive.
Of those, an estimated 32 would be false positives.

But if you post toir maths up on butchute I am fairly positive a few million yanks might buy into it.

Stubbo 9:01 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
Rio's is right actually:

1000 tests with a false positive rate of 0.8% means 8 false positives being returned.

Extrapolate up - 250k tests means 2000 false positives. How many total positives being returned? Rolling average of something like 4000 per day isnt it? So we're approaching half of those that test positive not actually having it (unless someone can tell me my Maths is wrong).

Although 0.8% is actually the lower bound, skinny end of the equation, so false positives are actually likely higher than that even.

mashed in maryland 8:59 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
Does anyone actually believe this "second wave" bollocks?

More people are being tested so obviously there will be more confirmed cases.

Almost like Boris deliberately postponed rolling out testing so he could use all these new "confirmed cases" as an excuse for another lockdown. Don't think so? You ain't been paying attention.

Its over. The daily deaths are in single figures. We pretty much know the cure. Random cunts on the Internet were 100% right about vitamin D back in February. Everyone with an Internet connection knows the side effects of the lockdown have been catastrophic. No one will ever take the authorities at their word ever again. And that's gonna be the best thing to come out of all this.

riosleftsock 8:47 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
c wing

I realised as I typed it I may have made a "small" error, then thought 'fuck it' and posted it anyway.

I could get a job with PHE (I actually used to work for them - haha)

Mike Oxsaw 8:38 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
If there's another lockdown and a sizeable proportion of the public simply tell the government to fuck the fuck off, they only have themselves to blame for their complete lack of management or plan in this.

Can't blame the science, can't blame the testing system, can't blame the NHS, can't blame the media (social and main stream), can't blame the conspiracy theorists.

The blame will lie 100% at the door of those entrusted with governing the country. Elected politicians

Get Brexit over the line then stand up and be counted.

The old c wing 8:29 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
rio.

That has to be the end of this thread. You have entirely redefined modern mathematics.

riosleftsock 8:26 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
Hancock admitted the false positive rate is 0.8. Its not, its a range with 0.8 being the lowest. Doesn't sound a lot, does it?

The number of positive tests per people tested is approx 1 in 1,000.

That would mean that for every 9 people who test positive, 8 of them probably do not have covid (almost certainly do not).

We had over 4,000 positive tests yesterday apparently, that means over 3,500 people have been locked up at home for 14 days for no reason under threat of a fine by our government.

If it saves one life.....

It is a far, far better thing to die of untreated cancer or suicide than to die of COVID. If I catch COVID (again) I think I will gargle with Novichok to get rid of it.

ak37 8:21 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
Short video on people still suffering the effects of Covid. 6 months after.

https://youtu.be/lkOkKbJ_wgQ

Mike Oxsaw 7:17 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
This time next week you'll all be playing staring roles in Boris & Matt's "Lockdown:II - This time it's serious".

Best prepare your Bafta acceptance speeches and don't forget to include a line about it not being your fault along with a few references to the more popular conspiracy theories.

The old c wing 5:41 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
Fair play goose 👏

goose 5:12 Fri Sep 18
Re: This coronavirus in China
" one day I will catch up with you and we see how big you are without your keyboard."

pervert.

Page 1 - Next




Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: