UK-Muscle.co.uk Forum banner
181 - 200 of 424 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,594 Posts
All this shows, is you clearly have no grasp of statistics. The blood clots are a 1 in 100000 chance, so you would need a sample size of 300000 to be sure to pick up this event. When you are talking about infection rates of between 1 in 100 and 1 in 4600 the smallest sample size you could use is just under 15000, so using well over 50000 like they do will give you the data you want.
Yes I agree, as we found out with the pitiful covid vaccine trials (if you could even call them that!) the larger the sample size the more reliable the results tend to be.

Why do you keep basically repeating what I'm telling you, then claiming it's me that can't grasp stats! lol

You were the moron that said a larger sample size will give you the same results as a smaller one. Not me!

I've worked out what you're on about with your ONS "infection rate" thing now. As lewdy said it's not a stat that the media/gov really mention very often.

It's just a survey, and again the results are highly dependent on the number of tests being conducted. There could be tons of people in the community with the virus, but if not many tests are being conducted at that time the survey will show the opposite, a low prevalence/infection rate.

Anyway what are you actually trying to claim? That there's 46 x as many people with covid now than there was this time last year? LOOL

And even if this is the case it's not exactly a resounding endorsement for the vaccines ability to reduce transmission now is it? Remember this is the reason why we're all being told we must have it, to protect the vulnerable even if the virus personally poses us a negligible risk.

And before you start harping on about "oh the low death rate is because of the new wonder potion, me and my batty boy friends have all had injected into us".

How do we know the lower death rate(if exists, highly debatable) may not just be down to the virus mutating and becoming less toxic as it increases it's ability to transmit...? This is a common trend in virus mutation.


OK, class dismissed for the day.
 

·
Gym Addict
Joined
·
4,233 Posts
That sounds lovely doesn't it? A nice mature discussion about this whole situation. Not going to happen on this forum though is it? Not with our 2+2=5 self proclaimed expert and lover of the immature insult. And to be realistic, we could discuss it till the cows come home - it wouldn't mean we figured out something the scientific community hadn't. There won't be any Nobel prizes for medicine being awarded to UKM that's for sure.
I was more alluding to
If you know where to look, isn't nearly all the data available. I'm fairly certain the ons publishes most of the info?

Plus the appointed experts as you call them, are the same teams who have been processing all the NHS and PHE statistics for years and they all follow tried and tested mathematical formulas, this isn't anything new that's been thought up for covid.
Whats new is the censorship of any interpretation of the data other than the one “they” want pushed.
If you know where to look, isn't nearly all the data available. I'm fairly certain the ons publishes most of the info?

Plus the appointed experts as you call them, are the same teams who have been processing all the NHS and PHE statistics for years and they all follow tried and tested mathematical formulas, this isn't anything new that's been thought up for covid.
The censorship of free thought and speech is new.

Through history are the guys who use censorship and segregation, use mainstream media to propagate propaganda, manipulate crisis(es) to expand their powers, and implement “no papers, no entry” to every day life, are they usually the good guys?
 

·
Newbie Trainer
Joined
·
2,537 Posts
Yes I agree, as we found out with the pitiful covid vaccine trials (if you could even call them that!) the larger the sample size the more reliable the results tend to be.

Why do you keep basically repeating what I'm telling you, then claiming it's me that can't grasp stats! lol

You were the moron that said a larger sample size will give you the same results as a smaller one. Not me!

I've worked out what you're on about with your ONS "infection rate" thing now. As lewdy said it's not a stat that the media/gov really mention very often.

It's just a survey, and again the results are highly dependent on the number of tests being conducted. There could be tons of people in the community with the virus if not many tests are being conducted at that time the survey will show the opposite, a low prevalence/infection rate.

Anyway what are you actually trying to claim? That there's 46 x as many people with covid now than there was this time last year? LOOL

And even if this is the case it's not exactly a resounding endorsement for the vaccines ability to reduce transmission now is it? Remember this is the reason why we're all being told we must have it, to protect the vulnerable even if the virus personally poses us a negligible risk.

And before you start harping on about "oh the low death rate is because of the new wonder potion, me and my batty boy friends have all had injected into us".

How do we know the lower death rate(if exists, highly debatable) may not just be down to the virus mutating and becoming less toxic as it increases it's ability to transmit...? This is a common trend in virus mutation.


OK, class dismissed for the day.
You've missed the point again. I'm assuming you're doing it on purpose because then you'd have to admit you're wrong, which is usually when you start chucking insults rather than not replying or admitting you're at fault.

The rarity of the event you are looking at effects the sample size needed. So looking at a blood clots requires a massive sample, hence why they had injected millions of people before making the link. Looking for covid which has such a high prevalence you don't need such a high sample size to get an accurate result.

Rather than coming on here with you're daft theories because of your poor grasp of numbers, stats and ratios, spend some time understanding why you keep getting it wrong. All the data is there to show covid infections are far higher than last summer and the link between infections and deaths isn't as strong
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,594 Posts
I was more alluding to

Whats new is the censorship of any interpretation of the data other than the one “they” want pushed.


The censorship of free thought and speech is new.

Through history are the guys who use censorship and segregation, use mainstream media to propagate propaganda, manipulate crisis(es) to expand their powers, and implement “no papers, no entry” to every day life, are they usually the good guys?
You won't get any sense out of either of them fvkers. If they were turkeys they'd vote for christmas.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,594 Posts
You've missed the point again. I'm assuming you're doing it on purpose because then you'd have to admit you're wrong, which is usually when you start chucking insults rather than not replying or admitting you're at fault.

The rarity of the event you are looking at effects the sample size needed. So looking at a blood clots requires a massive sample, hence why they had injected millions of people before making the link. Looking for covid which has such a high prevalence you don't need such a high sample size to get an accurate result.

Rather than coming on here with you're daft theories because of your poor grasp of numbers, stats and ratios, spend some time understanding why you keep getting it wrong. All the data is there to show covid infections are far higher than last summer and the link between infections and deaths isn't as strong
Yes, that's why vaccines usually take between 10 and 15 years to be developed, trialed and approved for use. The first polio vaccine trials included 1.8 million participants...

How many participants were involved in the Covid vaccine before it was unleashed on the general public?

And yes the data is there and none of the real world data in the UK shows a shred of evidence that the vaccine is having any impact at all on transmission rates or deaths.

There may be some spurious voodoo modelling from "experts" that have a track record of never getting even remotely close to giving an accurate prediction on anything else covid related in umpteen attempts.

But yes I'm sure their modelling is accurate this time. I just prefer to focus on real world data when it's available rather than modelling data. I'm just crazy like that.
 

·
Newbie Trainer
Joined
·
2,537 Posts
I was more alluding to

Whats new is the censorship of any interpretation of the data other than the one “they” want pushed.


The censorship of free thought and speech is new.

Through history are the guys who use censorship and segregation, use mainstream media to propagate propaganda, manipulate crisis(es) to expand their powers, and implement “no papers, no entry” to every day life, are they usually the good guys?
Think in this particular case, when you say censorship, what you're referring to is the news dumbing it down for the masses to understand and obviously picking the biggest numbers they can find, which also happen to be the most convenient to understand.

This argument is just about whether the vaccines are reducing deaths and I can't see what more data you'd need to make this assumption? The crudest method would just be to compare cases to deaths and despite some claims on the forum, it's a fairly accurate one. In all countries you can see deaths rising inline with cases, regardless of the countries testing regime. You'll just have to wait a few weeks, for the delta variant to spread round Europe to see the link weakened there as well.

As mentioned the other method would be to work out what the current infection rate is and compare it to other periods with the same infection rate based on random samples.

What more data would you need to come up with a pretty confident conclusion?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
514 Posts
You won't get any sense out of either of them fvkers. If they were turkeys they'd vote for christmas.
They’re still waiting for Jim to fix it for them.

Through history are the guys who use censorship and segregation, use mainstream media to propagate propaganda, manipulate crisis(es) to expand their powers, and implement “no papers, no entry” to every day life, are they usually the good guys?
Err, no.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
This is a very real possibility the way things are going. We had talks about this yesterday at my gym, mine does cater for training with weights and cardio but most of my floor space is taken up by a cage a ring and floor mats. My membership isn’t massive so I’m hoping we will not be classed as a large venue and it won’t affect us. Having said that we are still looking into ow we will handle it if it does become an issue. My thoughts are that this will end up affecting the large commercial gyms and the issue then will be all the people who are not or choose not to be vaccinated are going to filter down into the smaller gyms that won’t be classed as large venues, and before you know it there numbers are up and it’s then required that everyone is vaccinated. Obviously it’s not come to this yet but I wouldn’t be surprised if it did.
It’s heading to a point where there will be no option if you want to live a normal life you will need to be vaccinated it will start with larger venues like it is with night clubs, gigs and sporting events then before you know it you won’t be able to go out for a meal or in a shopping centre. Where does it stop are we going to end up with a cult of red neck hillbillies unvaccinated living like outcasts 😂. I don’t think it’s Something that can be beat and people will just have to get vaccinated there slowly removing the option not to be. I am vaccinated and if it protects me and keeps me alive great and if it doesn’t then it’s caused me no issues and was no more trouble than having a jab of testosterone. I do think it’s each person’s own choice and should be optional but I just can’t see how in the current direction the government is taking people can have the choice and live a normal life.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
300 Posts
This is a very real possibility the way things are going. We had talks about this yesterday at my gym, mine does cater for training with weights and cardio but most of my floor space is taken up by a cage a ring and floor mats. My membership isn’t massive so I’m hoping we will not be classed as a large venue and it won’t affect us. Having said that we are still looking into ow we will handle it if it does become an issue. My thoughts are that this will end up affecting the large commercial gyms and the issue then will be all the people who are not or choose not to be vaccinated are going to filter down into the smaller gyms that won’t be classed as large venues, and before you know it there numbers are up and it’s then required that everyone is vaccinated. Obviously it’s not come to this yet but I wouldn’t be surprised if it did.
It’s heading to a point where there will be no option if you want to live a normal life you will need to be vaccinated it will start with larger venues like it is with night clubs, gigs and sporting events then before you know it you won’t be able to go out for a meal or in a shopping centre. Where does it stop are we going to end up with a cult of red neck hillbillies unvaccinated living like outcasts 😂. I don’t think it’s Something that can be beat and people will just have to get vaccinated there slowly removing the option not to be. I am vaccinated and if it protects me and keeps me alive great and if it doesn’t then it’s caused me no issues and was no more trouble than having a jab of testosterone. I do think it’s each person’s own choice and should be optional but I just can’t see how in the current direction the government is taking people can have the choice and live a normal life.
Ok Matt cheers😂
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
514 Posts
Think in this particular case, when you say censorship, what you're referring to is the news dumbing it down for the masses to understand and obviously picking the biggest numbers they can find, which also happen to be the most convenient to understand.

This argument is just about whether the vaccines are reducing deaths and I can't see what more data you'd need to make this assumption? The crudest method would just be to compare cases to deaths and despite some claims on the forum, it's a fairly accurate one. In all countries you can see deaths rising inline with cases, regardless of the countries testing regime. You'll just have to wait a few weeks, for the delta variant to spread round Europe to see the link weakened there as well.

As mentioned the other method would be to work out what the current infection rate is and compare it to other periods with the same infection rate based on random samples.

What more data would you need to come up with a pretty confident conclusion?
Seriously, if you care about cases, then surely that in turn means you’re a zero covid fanatic, otherwise, what do cases matter? Only deaths from covid itself should be the deterministic value we should concern ourselves with, like every other cause of death.

I know a social services manager and they told me how many people with learning disabilities they have lost to Covid.
Could this have been a contributing factor?

 

·
Newbie Trainer
Joined
·
2,537 Posts
Yes, that's why vaccines usually take between 10 and 15 years to be developed, trialed and approved for use. The first polio vaccine trials included 1.8 million participants...

How many participants were involved in the Covid vaccine before it was unleashed on the general public?

And yes the data is there and none of the real world data in the UK shows a shred of evidence that the vaccine is having any impact at all on transmission rates or deaths.

There may be some spurious voodoo modelling from "experts" that have a track record of never getting even remotely close to giving an accurate prediction on anything else covid related in umpteen attempts.

But yes I'm sure their modelling is accurate this time. I just prefer to focus on real world data when it's available rather than modelling data. I'm just crazy like that.
Working out how many people are infected compared to deaths is hardly complex modelling.

Rather than wasting everyone's time, Google "working out sample size and margin of error" then Google sample size needed compared to rarity of event" put your new found knowledge together and work out if 60,000 samples is enough samples and see if there is anyway the margin or error could be +-3000%
 

·
Newbie Trainer
Joined
·
2,537 Posts
Seriously, if you care about cases, then surely that in turn means you’re a zero covid fanatic, otherwise, what do cases matter? Only deaths from covid itself should be the deterministic value we should concern ourselves with, like every other cause of death.



Could this have been a contributing factor?

I don't care about the covid case numbers all I'm saying is, if you randomly infected X amount of people with covid last year, you'd get X deaths and X amount of people in hospital. Repeat the exact same experiment this year, you'd get 90% less deaths and people in hospital. What's the logical conclusion for this?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
300 Posts
I don't care about the covid case numbers all I'm saying is, if you randomly infected X amount of people with covid last year, you'd get X deaths and X amount of people in hospital. Repeat the exact same experiment this year, you'd get 90% less deaths and people in hospital. What's the logical conclusion for this?
Errrm….bum love?
 

·
Getting HUGE!
Joined
·
9,337 Posts
could this have been a contributing factor?

Potentially on national figures although I don't think it was considered to be a significant issue locally. That said, whilst it's not acceptable to apply DNR's in a blanket fashion, we don't know how many would have actually survived the procedure or indeed survived overall if a first resuscitation was successful but significant lung and organ damage remained. The only way to know for sure would either be to compare them against a control group who did receive resuscitation or an expert medical review of each case.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
300 Posts
Seriously, if you care about cases, then surely that in turn means you’re a zero covid fanatic, otherwise, what do cases matter? Only deaths from covid itself should be the deterministic value we should concern ourselves with, like every other cause of death.



Could this have been a contributing factor?

I think @AnimalLifter shouldn’t be resuscitated if he was dying from Covid because he’s a hell of a burden on the tax payer…ya know those who work!
 

·
Gym Addict
Joined
·
4,233 Posts
Think in this particular case, when you say censorship, what you're referring to is the news dumbing it down for the masses to understand and obviously picking the biggest numbers they can find, which also happen to be the most convenient to understand.

This argument is just about whether the vaccines are reducing deaths and I can't see what more data you'd need to make this assumption? The crudest method would just be to compare cases to deaths and despite some claims on the forum, it's a fairly accurate one. In all countries you can see deaths rising inline with cases, regardless of the countries testing regime. You'll just have to wait a few weeks, for the delta variant to spread round Europe to see the link weakened there as well.

As mentioned the other method would be to work out what the current infection rate is and compare it to other periods with the same infection rate based on random samples.

What more data would you need to come up with a pretty confident conclusion?
I don’t want more data.

I want to be free to make and discuss my own conclusions from the data and hear other people’s point of view. I want to make my own decisions freely, and I don’t need to be told what is or what is not for my own good.

Now we are talking about it where did the last Covid thread go?
 

·
Some Boy for One Boy
10 reps x 3 sets, each workout... 2 days rest and repeat
Joined
·
1,991 Posts
I think @AnimalLifter shouldn’t be resuscitated if he was dying from Covid because he’s a hell of a burden on the tax payer…ya know those who work!
i pay tax on Tabaco

i never got Compensated for the accident.. so

** Gets Calculator Out** .... ** Starts smashing Numbers with a mean face >=[ **

i get £5520 a year... =/ ... yay =( ... Multiply that by Rest of my Life... about 50 years... is about £250,000 ... Quarter of a million Compensation spread out
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
300 Posts
i pay tax on Tabaco

i never got Compensated for the accident.. so

** Gets Calculator Out** .... ** Starts smashing Numbers with a mean face >=[ **

i get £5520 a year... =/ ... yay =( ... Multiply that by Rest of my Life... about 50 years... is about £250,000 ... Quarter of a million Compensation spread out
Get a job then you bum! I’m telling you you could be a YouTube sensation!!
 

·
Some Boy for One Boy
10 reps x 3 sets, each workout... 2 days rest and repeat
Joined
·
1,991 Posts
Get a job then you bum! I’m telling you you could be a YouTube sensation!!
im too Mentally Ill bro... i cant explain it... in my reality everyone is just some bag of meat to me - it dont matter if i k*ll them, just as long as Po Po dont know ..... iv got a complex anger problem, and as long as its 'Self Defense' i can do as i please with the 'Bags of Meat' bro... I constantly hold back the urges to punch people in the face, even now, i hold the urge back... from the age of 30 - 40 i will have urges to kill, mentally ill kill in their 30s, its our dangerous time.... when will it stop? .. with meds? ... 40 year old ill just wake up and Hug everyone?
 
181 - 200 of 424 Posts
Top