Jump to content
simFox

Corona Virus

Message added by Mark

No political discussion in this topic. That is complaining about a country, a politician, a party and/or its voters, etc

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, fuchsntf said:

Not forgetting Italy,in January had an Influenza outtbreak( Not CVirus) of nearly Reported as being 3 million...

I think it's fair to suggest all 3 million weren't tested for covid19. 

Really makes me wonder how long this virus has been with us. 

The French are saying it caused a death in December there, push that back two weeks to infection. It's very conceivable that was picked up early December. 

 

How many deaths due to covid19 prior to the 'first Chinese case' is really a concern that should be looked at. The amount of deaths that could have been put down to seasonal influenza or just pneumonia before anyone was looking for a new virus could be huge. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Barrowblue said:

I think it's fair to suggest all 3 million weren't tested for covid19. 

Really makes me wonder how long this virus has been with us. 

The French are saying it caused a death in December there, push that back two weeks to infection. It's very conceivable that was picked up early December. 

 

How many deaths due to covid19 prior to the 'first Chinese case' is really a concern that should be looked at. The amount of deaths that could have been put down to seasonal influenza or just pneumonia before anyone was looking for a new virus could be huge. 

Nope

 

they have a case of a recovered respiratory illness patient whose sample from 27 dec has tested positive for covid. 
 

his wife works close to CDG airport which is the only lead they have as to how he may have become infected .......

 

the only explanation for the virus being around back then and not causing tens of thousands of deaths in jan/feb can possibly be explained by the virus being a much less virulent and contagious strain at that stage  - we know that there is some evidence that the current strain in the states and Europe became the main player in February ..... would antibodies to that strain be effective against the newer strain ???? 
 

 Could be even more complicated than we already think it is ...

Edited by st albans fox
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Nope

 

they have a case of a recovered respiratory illness patient whose sample from 27 dec has tested positive for covid. 
 

his wife works close to CDG airport which is the only lead they have as to how he may have become infected .......

Ok, no death, but still a positive case. 

 

Surely not just the only case in France at that time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Barrowblue said:

I think it's fair to suggest all 3 million weren't tested for covid19. 

Really makes me wonder how long this virus has been with us. 

The French are saying it caused a death in December there, push that back two weeks to infection. It's very conceivable that was picked up early December. 

 

How many deaths due to covid19 prior to the 'first Chinese case' is really a concern that should be looked at. The amount of deaths that could have been put down to seasonal influenza or just pneumonia before anyone was looking for a new virus could be huge. 

Our doctor told my mrs there was a nasty virus going round back in  January when she had something bad which he put down to a lung infection. So the doctors in the U.K. must have been aware of something unusual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me that even if today's total includes deaths from previous days, then what about the possibility that a number of deaths occurred today which didn't appear in the figure of 649? Even our PM said that the figures are appalling, and the WHO has repeatedly warned against relaxing lock-downs too soon. If we kid ourselves that this virus will go away by looking at one particularly encouraging graph, then why not look at some others, which might not paint such a rosy picture? The trend shown in this graph is downward, but only at a fairly slow rate.

Covid19.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me the figures of deaths and new cases still look too high to be relaxing measures to any great degree at this point, but the populist move is clearly to follow the lead of other countries, despite the UK being in a worse position. 

Edited by martyn
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, martyn said:

To me the figures of deaths and new cases still look too high to be relaxing measures to any great degree at this point, but the populist move is clearly to follow the lead of other countries, despite the UK being in a worse position. 

You're right. 

 

We would benefit from another three weeks but we won't get it. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A second wave in the next few weeks would be absolutely catastrophic medically, economically and politically given the countries which managed to lockdown and lift effectively haven’t seen that second wave. Another month and we should be good. I can’t see many restrictions being lifted this weekend. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

The general feeling is somewhere between 10 and 20%. unless we make significant super fast progress on a vaccine or find an effective treatment to relieve symptoms, I fear we are kicking the can down the road to autumn and a further big instalment of this. I assume that the scientists are hoping that a background level of infections after lockdown over the next 3 or 4 months will allow enough transmission through the community to take that percentage to 40/50% which will help enormously when that autumn wave arrives ......

It seems to me that if you're right then the r0 would have to be much higher than previously thought?  There is a study at The National Laboratory in New Mexico which puts the r0 at 5.7.

 

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-0282_article

 

Presumably this would be good news as it would mean that the mortality rate is less than was thought.  The bad news is that it increases the percentage of the population that would need to get infected for immunity from 60% to 87%.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Nope

 

they have a case of a recovered respiratory illness patient whose sample from 27 dec has tested positive for covid. 
 

his wife works close to CDG airport which is the only lead they have as to how he may have become infected .......

 

the only explanation for the virus being around back then and not causing tens of thousands of deaths in jan/feb can possibly be explained by the virus being a much less virulent and contagious strain at that stage  - we know that there is some evidence that the current strain in the states and Europe became the main player in February ..... would antibodies to that strain be effective against the newer strain ???? 
 

 Could be even more complicated than we already think it is ...

Another option is that the sample was contaminated, or the test gave a false positive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, String fellow said:

It seems to me that even if today's total includes deaths from previous days, then what about the possibility that a number of deaths occurred today which didn't appear in the figure of 649? Even our PM said that the figures are appalling, and the WHO has repeatedly warned against relaxing lock-downs too soon. If we kid ourselves that this virus will go away by looking at one particularly encouraging graph, then why not look at some others, which might not paint such a rosy picture? The trend shown in this graph is downward, but only at a fairly slow rate.

Covid19.jpg

You can graph anything up. It's understanding and context which allows us to decipher which deserves more weight.

 

Look at my graph again. Yes there will be deaths for today reported for tomorrow, the next day and the day after that. However the pattern is clear as day, and it's dramatically a downward trend. 

 

The quality of the graph you've uploaded is shoddy. There are huge gaps in data input and therefore it is not a good fit for trend analysis. 

 

Also we have to take in to account the fact that we know more now than we did early April. Also ironically as things are becoming more manageable, jobs like reporting are easier to catch up on than they were at the height of the peak, when the health service was overrun.

 

To make this easier for you, look at my graph again and only look at deaths reported up to 3 days afterwards. (Up to the grey bar) This way we can look at recent data for comparison without making any assumptions about what data may be added to recent days in a few weeks' time.

 

08/04 - c. 650

03/05 - c. 200

 

The raw data can't be argued with, you're just not interpreting it correctly.

Screenshot_20200506-201710~2.png

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, foxile5 said:

You're right. 

 

We would benefit from another three weeks but we won't get it. 

 

No, we wouldn't benefit.

 

We're not going to get rid of the thing so we've got to ease things sooner or later. It's too invisible and too contagious for it to simply disappear. Any strategy geared towards that hope is a pipedream, and any further time with our heads in the sand puts more lives in danger from the side effects of lockdown. It's a false economy. Pain for the sanctimony of 'saving lives' of the more tangible flavour - the death number to come from Corona.

 

Let's not add insult to injury with this.

 

We got to 800+ deaths at the peak by sleepwalking in to this, continuing life as normal. Any easing of lockdown is going to be nothing like life as normal. Even if there is a second wave it will be nothing like the scale of what we've seen.

 

Do it your way and we may even put more stress on the NHS! Those that inevitably will struggle with the virus may be backlogged and released in to the grips of the virus all at once without a partial lockdown easing.

 

Sick to bloody death of people thinking a cautious approach is automatically the correct one. Caution can cause more harm than good, you know?

Edited by Nod.E
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I'll use it when its available, anyone else think the tracking app is rather pointless at this stage of the game in the larger cities? There must be quite a lot of people who will come across others who have had coronavirus/ currently have coronavirus on public transport etc. Would have been much more effective months ago. Guess the only advantage might be giving us an idea of the amount of people who have had it?

 

Also, I see some stubborn / selfish folk in the Isle of Wight are refusing to download it anyway to help the greater good.

 

The implementation of the tracking app has been overall disaster really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Barrowblue said:

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52543692

 

Nice to see a refreshing and balanced view. 

I'm glad the articles mentioned the risk associated with driving, and ended up wisely saying:

"Putting risk in perspective is going to be essential for individuals and decision-makers,"

 

Since we have been gathering stats since 1926, there have been nearly 500,000 deaths on the road.   And probably 10 times that number seriously injured.

 

Deaths on the roads have dropped dramatically from its peace-time peak of about 8,000 in the mid 60's, to about 1,800 a year now.    But even with our roads as super safe as they've ever been, we still "accept" 1800 deaths a year, every year ... as a risk worth taking to ensure we live our lives, as we'd like to

 

We don't avoid cars or crossing the road, though.   We take care, and manage the risk.

 

That's ultimately what we have to do with this virus ... take care, and manage the risk.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...