English Chess Forum

Nothing has changed with the Covid deniers. Their idiocy, egotism, dummy spitting, fake medicine, fake evidunce and anti-science diatribes continue in torrents of verbal diarrhoea beaten with as much statistical abuse as would make many blind. Bourbons.

Angus French wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 18, 2021 10:40 pm

Again - for the third time now - I refer you to Trisha Greenhalgh's Twitter thread.

Which boils down to "what the heck, why not, and in any case we're going to make you wear them for the rest of your miserable lives so get used to it.

Also, I note that the Telegraph piece refers to the Danish study on masks without any mention of criticisms of the study.

Which are?

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 18, 2021 11:01 pm

Angus French wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 18, 2021 10:40 pm

Again - for the third time now - I refer you to Trisha Greenhalgh's Twitter thread.

Which boils down to "what the heck, why not, and in any case we're going to make you wear them for the rest of your miserable lives so get used to it.

It's an up-to-date review of scientific thinking. If you want to challenge any specific point then please go ahead - but with creditable sources as back up please, rather than silly comments such as "in any case we're going to make you wear them for the rest of your miserable lives so get used to it".

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 18, 2021 11:01 pm

Also, I note that the Telegraph piece refers to the Danish study on masks without any mention of criticisms of the study.

Which are?

Well there was the response in the Spectator which pointed out what appear to be various fundamental flaws in the study (effectiveness of masks only considered from the perspective of the mask wearer; no apparent involvement of clinical trials expertise; no appreciation of the complex dynamics of virus spread; small sample size; masks not worn at home; short intervention period which could result in both false positives and false negatives; use of a delisted antibody test; positive swab test results glossed over) and there's this summary (tweet 33 in thread), both as already mentioned.

Paul McKeown wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 18, 2021 11:00 pm

Nothing has changed with the Covid deniers. Their idiocy, egotism, dummy spitting, fake medicine, fake evidunce and anti-science diatribes continue in torrents of verbal diarrhoea beaten with as much statistical abuse as would make many blind. Bourbons.

For your information this “Covid denier” has had both of his shots

Can it be anti science when it’s a scientist making the claims, or is the wrong sort of science for you? I would have though only blinkered people look at only one source of evidence

Unfortunately, most media coverage of science is pretty awful. You do need to read the original paper. (The classic example was a newspaper screaming that drinking instant coffee doubled your chance of getting some specific cancer. I found the paper, and sure enough, if you drank instant coffee, there was a 2 in a million chance you would get that cancer; if you didn't drink instant coffee, it was 1 in a million... This was put in a table without comment and the only bit the newspaper used out of a lengthy report.) The other problem is that it is not unusual for someone to publish a paper saying "We did X and Y happened", then someone else tries to repeat the work and Y didn't happen. Scientists say, "Oh, that's interesting" and more people repeat the work and eventually decide if Y happened or not and why the confusion arose. Sometimes, because people didn't actually do X..., or someone asked the wrong question.

And a problem with covid is that it keeps changing. (If you had boiling water to a tea bag, you always get a cup of tea, you don't suddenly get a cup of coffee.) Even if covid didn't change, different people would react differently to it.

As for masks, any sort of face covering helps protect you and other people. Some protect better than others.

Gary Cook wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:01 am

Paul McKeown wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 18, 2021 11:00 pm

Nothing has changed with the Covid deniers. Their idiocy, egotism, dummy spitting, fake medicine, fake evidunce and anti-science diatribes continue in torrents of verbal diarrhoea beaten with as much statistical abuse as would make many blind. Bourbons.

For your information this “Covid denier” has had both of his shots

Can it be anti science when it’s a scientist making the claims, or is the wrong sort of science for you? I would have though only blinkered people look at only one source of evidence

I have no intention of wrestling in a mire of shite; you would undoubtedly delight in the process.

I would point out that the opinion of one "scientist" doesn't make "science". That isn't how science works. Any fool, even one with a scad of doctorates hanging out of their arse can still talk shite from same said orifice. That applies particularly where controversial but marginal positions can temporarily sustain a vocal political or industrial lobby. (One might think of Dr. Andrew Wakefield for example.) What science requires is well-analysed and documented statistical data to support any given proposition. In your case, hanging onto your cherry-picked "scientist's" rambling has been comprehensively debunked by the posts of other commentators here, quoting from scientists who have picked apart a poorly constructed paper and showed it to have sufficient shortcomings to leave any conclusion it may have come to moot. Naturally, you have chosen to ignore the information and wisdom provided by these other posters: I expected no less.

Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:02 am

As for masks, any sort of face covering helps protect you and other people. Some protect better than others.

Especially when worn when cycling or alone in a car

The Independent is reporting;

‘Officials in the Covid-19 taskforce have been drawing up proposals that could see baseline measures, such as mask-wearing, social distancing and guidance on working from home, reintroduced in England by next month.

The taskforce is exploring the possibility of implementing the restrictions on a local, regional or national basis.’

It sounds a lot like we’ve not lasted any longer than the Netherlands did with no restrictions - 3 weeks! I shall await the deep joy of another Boris U-turn press conference in the next week or so.

Possibly wearing garments such as these

will allow more chess players to resume OTB chess.

Matt Bridgeman wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 1:43 pm

The Independent is reporting;

‘Officials in the Covid-19 taskforce have been drawing up proposals that could see baseline measures, such as mask-wearing, social distancing and guidance on working from home, reintroduced in England by next month.

The taskforce is exploring the possibility of implementing the restrictions on a local, regional or national basis.’

It sounds a lot like we’ve not lasted any longer than the Netherlands did with no restrictions - 3 weeks! I shall await the deep joy of another Boris U-turn press conference in the next week or so.

That would be ironic with cases trending downwards.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

It looks like it may have peaked well under predictions but a little too early to tell.

Stephen Westmoreland wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:23 pm

Matt Bridgeman wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 23, 2021 1:43 pm

The Independent is reporting;

‘Officials in the Covid-19 taskforce have been drawing up proposals that could see baseline measures, such as mask-wearing, social distancing and guidance on working from home, reintroduced in England by next month.

The taskforce is exploring the possibility of implementing the restrictions on a local, regional or national basis.’

It sounds a lot like we’ve not lasted any longer than the Netherlands did with no restrictions - 3 weeks! I shall await the deep joy of another Boris U-turn press conference in the next week or so.

That would be ironic with cases trending downwards.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

It looks like it may have peaked well under predictions but a little too early to tell.

Christina Pagel thinks it likely we haven't peaked. It seems the Euros contributed to high case numbers the week before last (tweet 5 of thread).

"That would be ironic with cases trending downwards.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

It looks like it may have peaked well under predictions but a little too early to tell."

Indeed, we have only been "open" a week, so I would expect any "extra" cases to show up soon, rather than already.

Angus French wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:50 pm

Christina Pagel thinks it likely we haven't peaked.

Ah, another academic who relies upon her funding from China. I realise that this will get me labelled here as some kind of a racist, but I am not convinced that the Chinese Communist Party has my best interests at heart.

NickFaulks wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 25, 2021 6:22 pm

Angus French wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 25, 2021 4:50 pm

Christina Pagel thinks it likely we haven't peaked.

Ah, another academic who relies upon her funding from China. I realise that this will get me labelled here as some kind of a racist, but I am not convinced that the Chinese Communist Party has my best interests at heart.

I am intrigued by your claim that Prof. Christina Pagel (UCL) "relies upon her funding from China".

I have looked very briefly for evidence of this and failed to find any. Please elucidate.

John,

I found this article which may be the sort of thing Nick has in mind given UCL is cited. https://unherd.com/2020/07/our-universi ... -on-china/. Nick's conclusions are of course his own.