Jump to content
Bit Of A Yarn

How long will we remain in Level Four in New Zealand?


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Brodie said:

Suicides due to Arderns actions is huge, you only have to speak to the people involved in MH,

That is complete bs disinformation. It happened last year too. Read what the coroner had to say about it when he released the suicide data following last year's lockdown which showed a significant DECLINE in suicide rates through June 2020. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/chief-coroner-takes-aim-at-unhelpful-commentary-as-latest-suicide-results-released/SKFQCHU5OAK6UT6ATHF4VDZBPY/#

I am a MH professional and have educated 100s of mental health professionals. Neither I nor any colleagues I have spoken to have seen any increase in suicides during this lock down either.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Well that is a mistake.  Shall we post a list of all the Health Sector SNAFU's?  BTW we didn't elect Ashley Bloomfield or ANY of his risk adverse advisors.

Do you mean risk averse? I'd hope health advisors would be. They are ethically if not legally bound to be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, curious said:

There has been some really good work done using age specific mortality data to assess infection rates and IFR due to Covid. However, that work is quite clear also that there are a number of complexities in the interpretation of excess death data that can inhibit their direct use in assessments of IFR (see e.g, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2918-0 ) Direct use of that sort of data is part of the disinformation band playing a tune that will somehow make a serious infectious disease go away.

Is Covid-19 THAT serious?  What's more where is the proof that ANY Government intervention other than complete isolation and border lockdown (which comes at considerable cost) has any effect on outcomes once the virus becomes endemic?

BTW the Nature Journal as an evidentiary source lacks credibility.  Equally I could post numerous research articles from reputable journals that have more substantive evidence supporting the opposite of what O'Driscoll contends.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Is Covid-19 THAT serious?  What's more where is the proof that ANY Government intervention other than complete isolation and border lockdown (which comes at considerable cost) has any effect on outcomes once the virus becomes endemic?

BTW the Nature Journal as an evidentiary source lacks credibility.  Equally I could post numerous research articles from reputable journals that have more substantive evidence supporting the opposite of what O'Driscoll contends.

Please post those citations then. I can't find them, at least in peer reviewed journals.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, curious said:

Please post those citations then. I can't find them, at least in peer reviewed journals.

 

And btw Nature has the highest impact factor of any journal publishing basic scientific research and is regarded by most as a very prestigious academic journal despite your opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, curious said:

That is complete bs disinformation. It happened last year too. Read what the coroner had to say about it when he released the suicide data following last year's lockdown which showed a significant DECLINE in suicide rates through June 2020. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/chief-coroner-takes-aim-at-unhelpful-commentary-as-latest-suicide-results-released/SKFQCHU5OAK6UT6ATHF4VDZBPY/#

I am a MH professional and have educated 100s of mental health professionals. Neither I nor any colleagues I have spoken to have seen any increase in suicides during this lock down either.

Curious, there have been many psychiatrists and mental health specialists that have come out and stated the suicide no.s have increased significantly since last hear lockdowns.

You would have to be a very poor mental health expert if  you have not heard about the increased suicides.

I have seen it on NZ TV, Ozzie TV and heard callers on NZ talkback!

And you say that lockdown is not going to cause suicide or mental health issues?

You must be kidding?????

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, curious said:

And btw Nature has the highest impact factor of any journal publishing basic scientific research and is regarded by most as a very prestigious academic journal despite your opinion.

"Highest Impact Factor" is measured how?  I realise you are a social scientist @curious but I expected more rigour from you.

As for your citation on age adjusted mortality the lead author is a Phd student with 3 publications who has jumped on the Covid-19 citation gravy train to climb the science rankings!  Hardly an esteemed scientist of long standing.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/megan-o-driscoll-4a429199?originalSubdomain=uk

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

"Highest Impact Factor" is measured how?  I realise you are a social scientist @curious but I expected more rigour from you.

As for your citation on age adjusted mortality the lead author is a Phd student with 3 publications who has jumped on the Covid-19 citation gravy train to climb the science rankings!  Hardly an esteemed scientist of long standing.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/megan-o-driscoll-4a429199?originalSubdomain=uk

Well that article has been cited 97 times since being published last November. That is the key measure of journal impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Brodie said:

Curious, there have been many psychiatrists and mental health specialists that have come out and stated the suicide no.s have increased significantly since last hear lockdowns.

You would have to be a very poor mental health expert if  you have not heard about the increased suicides.

I have seen it on NZ TV, Ozzie TV and heard callers on NZ talkback!

And you say that lockdown is not going to cause suicide or mental health issues?

You must be kidding?????

Try reading the data Brodie, not listening to ill-informed media reports and hear say.

  • Champ Post 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, curious said:

Well that article has been cited 97 times since being published last November. That is the key measure of journal impact.

Are you serious Curious?  You know as well as I do that the academic performance measures are well and truly stuffed.  Well I hope you know!  It all got fucked up when the funding models were screwed.

How many of the 97 citations were:

  1. Legit and cited by legit publications;
  2. Cited in critiques of the O'Driscoll's research;
  3. Cited on social media;
  4. Cited on news media;
  5. and so on and so on.

Hand on heart you know that academic citations are a rort and have no correlation to the veracity or quality of the research.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curious, you are a mental health expert, that doesnt think that lockdown doesnt  affect mental health?

Hope I am wrong, but the Pfizer vaccine will not eradicate any virus.

Just watching on Newshub Nation and fellah talking about the huge mental health issues due to lockdown.

The Health Experts are still getting their pay and doesnt affect them financially.

We are not a team of 5 million at all, Ardern is out of her league!She needs to look outside of  the eradication as it will not work!

No cases at all in South Island and still basically locked up with limited business dealings?

This control freak and Bloomfield are shocking for out economic wellbeing.

You say we should follow what the medical experts say?

Didnt they say that Alpha was going to kill tens of thousands in NZ and yet not a single death to anyone that was not already compromised or geriatric!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, curious said:

Try reading the data Brodie, not listening to ill-informed media reports and hear say.

So why on that basis are we required to take advice from Baker and Wiles etc??

We will wait and see who is right, and hopefully you are for the sake  of the country!

More than happy not to be on the money this time.

 

 

the country

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said:

Are you serious Curious?  You know as well as I do that the academic performance measures are well and truly stuffed.  Well I hope you know!  It all got fucked up when the funding models were screwed.

How many of the 97 citations were:

  1. Legit and cited by legit publications;
  2. Cited in critiques of the O'Driscoll's research;
  3. Cited on social media;
  4. Cited on news media;
  5. and so on and so on.

Hand on heart you know that academic citations are a rort and have no correlation to the veracity or quality of the research.

I believe those are the peer reviewed citations acceptable to Nature. Total citations according to google scholar are 290

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why don't you peruse the research of an accomplished and respected scientist - Professor John Ioannidis - one of the most cited in the history of science.  As of mid-2020 - John P.A. Ioannidis, of California’s Stanford University, has an h-index of 196 and was cited 267,437 times, ranking in 87th place.

Perhaps this research for WHO:

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

Or perhaps this research - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7327471/

Or this where his IFR estimate is 0.15% or 99.85% of Covid-19 cases DON'T die!!

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13554

Or his essay on the Under and Over Estimation of Covid-19 deaths - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00787-9

Or in your favourite "highest impact magazine" Nature this research about the number of self-citations (how many of O'Driscolls citations were SELF citations?) - https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02479-7

But then perhaps when reviewing objectively O'Driscolll's research you might want to consider Ioannidis's seminal work which is one of the highest single most cited pieces of research: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

Ironically the title of that last research was:  Why Most Published Research Is False!

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know you are a busy man @curious in your retirement but if you do have a spare hour do some research on the impartiality of some of the science journals particularly Springer and Nature.  This is a good place to start:  https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/10/03/book-publishers-part-ways-springer-nature-over-concerns-about-censorship-china

It is bloody hard and time consuming to verify the veracity of research now - perhaps Professor Ioannidis's paper needs to be retitled - Why 75% of Published Research is False!

We are only have to review the path over the last 20 months of the theory that Covid-19 originated as a Wuhan Lab escape!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, curious said:

Now 25. 2 in ICU I see

Ffs. There are always plenty of Polynesian people in Auckland hospital due to too much KFC and lack of exercise.

None in the South Island and yet level 4, is she serious?

Just Stating fact and the fact only 2 in ICU is telling u that it is a nothing virus compared to previous flus .

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Chief Stipe said:

Why don't you peruse the research of an accomplished and respected scientist - Professor John Ioannidis - one of the most cited in the history of science.  As of mid-2020 - John P.A. Ioannidis, of California’s Stanford University, has an h-index of 196 and was cited 267,437 times, ranking in 87th place.

Perhaps this research for WHO:

https://www.who.int/bulletin/online_first/BLT.20.265892.pdf

Just had a quick read of this Chief. Isit saying that the mortality rate is about 3.5% of lab confirmed cases?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, curious said:

Just had a quick read of this Chief. Isit saying that the mortality rate is about 3.5% of lab confirmed cases?

IFR = 0.15%

Are you referring to CFR?

I see a 70 year old fully vaccinated woman with underlying health conditions in NSW died of (with) Covid-19.

Did she die of:

- Covid-19;

- vaccination;

- underlying health conditions; or 

- did she score the trifecta?

Regardless her death will be notched up as a Covid-19 death.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, curious said:

No point. Just checking if I was understanding that correctly from a quick read. Seems consistent with other studies despite the complexities of trying to assess across countries.

Ioannidis is probably the world leader on meta-analysis.  So far he seems to be accepted by ALL sides of research.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...