Issue No. 1: Barnet Hospital isn't actually IN Hertfordshire. It's in Barnet, with an Enfield postcode.
Which is confusing, but wouldn't be counted in Hertfordshire's hospital admission data.
I came across this tweet from "Caroline Mansfield" about my local hospital being "empty".
So let's take a look:
First up, some warning signs:
1) A generic username, and another real Twitter account (I've emailed)
2) No registration with GCRN
3) Only recently joined Twitter
Issue No. 1: Barnet Hospital isn't actually IN Hertfordshire. It's in Barnet, with an Enfield postcode.
Which is confusing, but wouldn't be counted in Hertfordshire's hospital admission data.
Barnet is actually VERY busy with COVID cases, with 22% of our ENTIRE pandemic caseload in the LAST 7 DAYS ALONE
Source: https://t.co/IECfMo8FAK
Barnet Hospital is seeing incredible pressures, the trust (The Royal Free Trust) has cancelled most non-urgent and routine work,
and as of 23rd Dec had admitted 244 patients with COVID, roughly half the peak of March, and climbing v. fast.
Even busier is Intensive Care - the whole trust only has 57 beds (23 - Barnet & 34 at the Royal Free Hospital).
As of 23rd Dec, 40 of them were occupied by COVID patients. That's 70% of the ENTIRE CAPACITY used up by COVID ALONE.
Source: https://t.co/zGmMSuoywN
For every COVID patient in an ICU bed, another patient isn't - ICU takes routine complex operations, unwell ward patients, other emergencies and even transfers from other hospitals.
We can cancel operations, but can't stop the other unexpected patients.
This is why the mortality for COVID shoots up when resources locally are exceeded. Like in Lombardy in the Spring.
And if they are eating sandwiches in their cab, that's their break. In their vehicle. Think about that a little bit more.
More from Health
This is a limited point about availability of efficacy data for vaccines under development in the context of the approval for CovidShield and Covaxin in India.
There have been many so-called experts on the idiotbox opining about apparent availability of P III data which 1/n
2/n apparently the SEC had access to based on which it "supposedly" approved Covaxin. Another argument that is prevalent is other regulators (US FDA and MHRA) also approved vaccines based on P II data alone. Let me give you a few facts so that you can make your own decision.
3/n The protocols for both mRNA vaccines are publicly available. You can check. Both protocols *define* when the interim analysis will be done. This is not subjective. They clearly define how many infections need to be documented before the Data Safety Monitoring Board meets.
4/n Find the protocols for the bridging study for CovidShield and Covaxin and look for a similar milestone.
Here is one set of efficacy data post the interim analysis of a mRNA vaccine.
Source: https://t.co/BAPnP3PxEb
5/n This data was analyzed post the interim analysis where the blind was broken by the DSMB. Now ask yourself this question:
How does the SEC, or the sponsor of these studies, or the experts who are offering their opinion liberally on the idiotbox know what the efficacy is
There have been many so-called experts on the idiotbox opining about apparent availability of P III data which 1/n
2/n apparently the SEC had access to based on which it "supposedly" approved Covaxin. Another argument that is prevalent is other regulators (US FDA and MHRA) also approved vaccines based on P II data alone. Let me give you a few facts so that you can make your own decision.
3/n The protocols for both mRNA vaccines are publicly available. You can check. Both protocols *define* when the interim analysis will be done. This is not subjective. They clearly define how many infections need to be documented before the Data Safety Monitoring Board meets.
4/n Find the protocols for the bridging study for CovidShield and Covaxin and look for a similar milestone.
Here is one set of efficacy data post the interim analysis of a mRNA vaccine.
Source: https://t.co/BAPnP3PxEb
5/n This data was analyzed post the interim analysis where the blind was broken by the DSMB. Now ask yourself this question:
How does the SEC, or the sponsor of these studies, or the experts who are offering their opinion liberally on the idiotbox know what the efficacy is
You May Also Like
So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.
The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.
This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.
The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."
This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
If everyone was holding bitcoin on the old x86 in their parents basement, we would be finding a price bottom. The problem is the risk is all pooled at a few brokerages and a network of rotten exchanges with counter party risk that makes AIG circa 2008 look like a good credit.
— Greg Wester (@gwestr) November 25, 2018
The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.
This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.
The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."
This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
