Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak

[Azeem]

4 hours ago, Azeem said:

Hearing news that the two infected people here have recovered

It's confirmed now, both recovered with no one from their family found positive for corona.

[Carnivore Chris]

More seem to be popping up in Spain now, especially in Valencia.

Hopefully there isn't an outbreak on the level of Italy(which you'd see as being more probable in Spain) and it fucks up my travel plans next week. 

 

[The Artful Dodger]

Worth noting how this will possibly expose our fragile economy and the brink of poverty that a lot of people live on. Gig economy workers simply cannot afford to 'quarantine' themselves, I hope it doesn't get this far but people are going to risk working and infecting others because they cannot afford not to.

[Cicero]

Are there any laws that protect those people? Virus outbreak? I’m sure there are shitloads of people who can’t afford to stay home whilst quarantined. 

Edited February 28, 2020 by Cicero

[6666]

Thankfully it's not that much of an emergency in the UK and it's really only getting me in the mood to watch post apocalyptic movies.

Will you join one of the mad gangs of men that drive around doing crazy shit because they can or will you still try to live in a civilised manner with other people?

[UNORTHODOX]

A few people have caught the virus and they're being treated in the Liverpool royal hospital just down the road from me, Scary stuff.

[...Dan]

 

[The Artful Dodger]

12 minutes ago, ...Dan said:

 

Wonder who they voted for 

Edited February 28, 2020 by The Artful Dodger

[Cicero]

16 minutes ago, ...Dan said:

 

Of a sample size of 787 beer drinkers. 

CNN - 38% of Americans 

[Fairy In Boots]

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

@nudge found this site, looks fairly informative. What do you reckon? 

[nudge]

12 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

@nudge found this site, looks fairly informative. What do you reckon? 

Yes it's a good one; nice interface and also updated regularly.

[nudge]

14 hours ago, Harry said:

Interesting there's been no new cases for the USA when yesterday they had a case where they had no idea where they contracted the virus from.

Well it might have something to do with this: https://www.propublica.org/article/cdc-coronavirus-covid-19-test/amp

[Dr. Gonzo]

4 hours ago, Cicero said:

Of a sample size of 787 beer drinkers. 

CNN - 38% of Americans 

For the record, my post is assuming the survey was just a "yes/no" question but...

Yeah that's obviously not a big enough sample size to be able to claim it "speaks for all Americans" with any high confidence level (you'd need a sample size of 38,412 for a survey with a 95% confidence level & .5 confidence interval). But that's a ridiculous amount of people and I've never ever heard of any kind of survey polling that tests that many people. Granted, typically these surveys break people down more into particular groups.

But with a 95% confidence level & a confidence interval of 3.5 (the higher the confidence interval, the less certainty there is about the population size) you'd only need a sample size of 784 for the US proximation (which this goes beyond, so this survey better confidence interval than 3.5).

So small sample sizes don't necessarily mean the survey doesn't show anything useful. Otherwise surveys would probably never be conducted because they'd be prohibitively expensive.

[nudge]

Well the makers of Corona beer already reported a loss of $170 Million in the last 2 months so there you go...

[Dr. Gonzo]

Oh good it's fucking spreading in California  

[Cicero]

12 minutes ago, nudge said:

Well the makers of Corona beer already reported a loss of $170 Million in the last 2 months so there you go...

Shit beer anyway 

[Cicero]

44 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

For the record, my post is assuming the survey was just a "yes/no" question but...

Yeah that's obviously not a big enough sample size to be able to claim it "speaks for all Americans" with any high confidence level (you'd need a sample size of 38,412 for a survey with a 95% confidence level & .5 confidence interval). But that's a ridiculous amount of people and I've never ever heard of any kind of survey polling that tests that many people. Granted, typically these surveys break people down more into particular groups.

But with a 95% confidence level & a confidence interval of 3.5 (the higher the confidence interval, the less certainty there is about the population size) you'd only need a sample size of 784 for the US proximation (which this goes beyond, so this survey better confidence interval than 3.5).

So small sample sizes don't necessarily mean the survey doesn't show anything useful. Otherwise surveys would probably never be conducted because they'd be prohibitively expensive.

Nah I never take these surveys seriously, especially when they try and blatantly mislead. Surveying ‘beer drinkers’ and pulling it off as Americans. What about those that don’t drink? Or those that don’t drink beer?  Sample size also shows no characteristics regarding age, gender, IQ, etc. Just ‘beer drinkers’ and try to poorly represent it as 38% of all Americans. 

Edited February 28, 2020 by Cicero

[Tommy]

26 minutes ago, nudge said:

Well the makers of Corona beer already reported a loss of $170 Million in the last 2 months so there you go...

lol it's suddenly on offer everywhere here. 

[nudge]

2 minutes ago, Tommy said:

lol it's suddenly on offer everywhere here. 

Same here. Bought a crate last week; it's shitty as beer but goes great with spicy food hehe.

[Dr. Gonzo]

22 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Nah I never take these surveys seriously, especially when they try and blatantly mislead. Sample size shows no characteristics regarding age, gender, IQ, etc. Just ‘beer drinkers’ and try to poorly represent it as 38% of all Americans. Poor attempt. 

I don't think there's anything misleading about it, other than the fact they don't mention the survey's confidence level, confidence intervals, or standard deviation. But I suspect most people aren't going to give a shit about statistics terms, let alone understand them.

Here they took a sample of "beer drinking Americans" - which is the target demographic for Corona beer, as that article indicates that Corona is heavily dependent on the US market. There's a lot of different characteristics that are encompassed in Americans who drink beer - so there's no reason to really ask the respondents their age, gender, IQ, etc... because they don't really care about these sub-demographics. They're looking to take a sample of beer drinking Americans, it's done by a PR firm that's probably been hired by Corona to ask this question to see if the virus has anything to do with their drop-off in sales.

I don't think it's a poor attempt, it's just how you conduct a survey. Obviously a higher sample size would make things better. They probably should mention the confidence levels and all of that stuff that lets you really interpret the data from these surveys in the news - and more people should probably learn about what these things are and what they mean.

[Cicero]

14 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I don't think there's anything misleading about it, other than the fact they don't mention the survey's confidence level, confidence intervals, or standard deviation. But I suspect most people aren't going to give a shit about statistics terms, let alone understand them.

Here they took a sample of "beer drinking Americans" - which is the target demographic for Corona beer, as that article indicates that Corona is heavily dependent on the US market. There's a lot of different characteristics that are encompassed in Americans who drink beer - so there's no reason to really ask the respondents their age, gender, IQ, etc... because they don't really care about these sub-demographics. They're looking to take a sample of beer drinking Americans, it's done by a PR firm that's probably been hired by Corona to ask this question to see if the virus has anything to do with their drop-off in sales.

I don't think it's a poor attempt, it's just how you conduct a survey. Obviously a higher sample size would make things better. They probably should mention the confidence levels and all of that stuff that lets you really interpret the data from these surveys in the news - and more people should probably learn about what these things are and what they mean.

They surveyed beer drinkers and beer drinkers only, and in classic CNN fashion they misled the audience by representing it as all Americans. 

Again, a poor attempt. 

Edited February 28, 2020 by Cicero

[Dr. Gonzo]

2 minutes ago, Cicero said:

They surveyed beer drinkers and beer drinkers only, and in classic CNN fashion they misled the audience by representing it as all Americans. 

Again, a poor attempt. 

Around 2/3 of Americans drink, 41% of them say they primarily drink beer; a sample size of only beer drinkers doesn't mean that it doesn't reflect a sample size of all Americans. It might indicate flawed sampling, but it can still be used to say "38% of Americans. But there's flaws in literally every sort of sampling like this.

It's more inaccurate to dismiss it as just false statistics you can't take seriously. Considering some of the crazy shit that so many people out there believe, it's not that outlandish that over 1/3 of Americans think coronavirus is caused by a Mexican beer.

[Tommy]

49 minutes ago, nudge said:

Same here. Bought a crate last week; it's shitty as beer but goes great with spicy food hehe.

And it's a great "dad joke" to take a picture of it and telling your friends "huheuheu, I've got Corona." 

[Cicero]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Around 2/3 of Americans drink, 41% of them say they primarily drink beer; a sample size of only beer drinkers doesn't mean that it doesn't reflect a sample size of all Americans. It might indicate flawed sampling, but it can still be used to say "38% of Americans. But there's flaws in literally every sort of sampling like this.

It's more inaccurate to dismiss it as just false statistics you can't take seriously. Considering some of the crazy shit that so many people out there believe, it's not that outlandish that over 1/3 of Americans think coronavirus is caused by a Mexican beer.

No. It can't . The survey is for beer drinkers. You can't take a sample size this small and try and pull it off as an entire nation, without even showing the statistical analysis. That is why I said demographics are important in all this.  For example, what was the average IQ of this sample size of beer drinkers?  For all we know they could've sampled 700 idiots who haven't a high school diploma. 

Again, I accept the flaws and inconsistencies small survey samples potentially have, but to completely mislead a viewing audience without considering the context of the survey, is unethical. That is the main issue. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I just want a beer now