Jump to content

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, zorro en españa said:

Two states, Florida and Georgia, are about to announce their biggest daily rise in deaths with Alabama its second highest daily rise.

 

I am enjoying your arguments simFox and your desire to move the debate forward but you lose credibility with comments like this. 

I was talking about the USA,

April 14: 73,171 cases - 7,450 deaths

Aug 7: 283,515 cases - 6,470 deaths

 

So the cases are up and the deaths are down. It's not rocket science. Why aren't hundreds of thousands of people dieing by now with the massive increase in cases. And if large number of cases don't affect the deathrate w what do you think 50 cases in Preston would do?

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, simFox said:

I was talking about the USA,

April 14: 73,171 cases - 7,450 deaths

Aug 7: 283,515 cases - 6,470 deaths

 

So the cases are up and the deaths are down. It's not rocket science. Why aren't hundreds of thousands of people dieing by now with the massive increase in cases. And if large number of cases don't affect the deathrate w what do you think 50 cases in Preston would do?

 

 

 

Test more and there’s more cases because it’s a massive variable but the deaths will always remain the same because it’s fixed and you can’t alter it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, simFox said:

I was talking about the USA,

April 14: 73,171 cases - 7,450 deaths

Aug 7: 283,515 cases - 6,470 deaths

 

So the cases are up and the deaths are down. It's not rocket science. Why aren't hundreds of thousands of people dieing by now with the massive increase in cases. And if large number of cases don't affect the deathrate w what do you think 50 cases in Preston would do?

 

 

 

I am unsure about your statistics on the chosen dates.  Could you clarify what you mean.

 

If you mean on the days in question there has never been a day with more than 3,000 deaths or a day with more than 80,000 cases and whilst I recognise cases could be cumulative in your example this does not apply to deaths. I use worldometers as my source

32 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Test more and there’s more cases because it’s a massive variable but the deaths will always remain the same because it’s fixed and you can’t alter it.

Spot on.

Edited by zorro en españa
My source
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's bemusing that the people that think local lockdowns are pointless are the same that argue the national lockdown caused deaths by stopping other medical treatments for things like cancer. The whole point of the local lockdowns is to contain the virus so that we don't have to convert wards to treat covid again, and keep cases in the community low so that can reasonably give people chemo (which destroys your immune response) without fear that they're likely to catch covid.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/08/2020 at 22:15, Md9 said:

Are the cases going down in Leicester at all at the minute? 

Started creeping up, we have probably bottomed out unless testing is reduced.

 

We will be in lockdown for the forseeable future, cannot see any other future for the city, its conditions are ripe for virus spread, has an idiot mayor, and has little economic value for the government.  Finally schools reopen soon.

 

A biscuit factory has also had its 2nd outbreak now.

 

For whatever reason the lines I think wont get redrawn in the city like they did in the county.

Edited by Chrysalis
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Fktf said:

I see the covid deniers are out in force. Remember, the reason we didn't break NHS capacity is because of the lockdown. Whatever you want to argue on the stats, if we got to the point of having to choose who to treat due to a lack of equipment, we would have been much worse off.

It was more so that people were refused trips to the hospital unless they were close to death, heavy triage was done on 111/999.  This is why our death rate was so high for our case count, due to this approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fktf said:

It's bemusing that the people that think local lockdowns are pointless are the same that argue the national lockdown caused deaths by stopping other medical treatments for things like cancer. The whole point of the local lockdowns is to contain the virus so that we don't have to convert wards to treat covid again, and keep cases in the community low so that can reasonably give people chemo (which destroys your immune response) without fear that they're likely to catch covid.

My issue is that the lockdown's are not done in a logical way, telling people you cannot meet up with family in their home, but are free to go to a pub.  Also things like opening non essential shops, but non essential traffic is not allowed.  Also the reopening of schools.

 

When my freedom is taken away from me, I have no problem if its the same for everyone in the country, but I have an issue when its just my area, and in addition I have an issue if my freedom is taken whilst they opening up business.

 

I took the national lockdown extremely seriously. but since then I think it stinks.

 

For reference my ward has lower cases per 100k than glenfield which has been out of lockdown for 3-4 weeks now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

It was more so that people were refused trips to the hospital unless they were close to death, heavy triage was done on 111/999.  This is why our death rate was so high for our case count, due to this approach.

So you could say that we've already been making choices of who and who not to treat, just this decision has been made outside of hospitals? Begs the question why we didn't use the nightingales more - were they not fit for purpose?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fktf said:

So you could say that we've already been making choices of who and who not to treat, just this decision has been made outside of hospitals? Begs the question why we didn't use the nightingales more - were they not fit for purpose?

The triage was effectively moved from entrance to ICU to the ambulance service and caller operators.  Thats my belief based on statements from UK NHS staff, my own experience, and experience of other people.  When I rang 111 back in march/april (cannot remember exact date) I could barely stand up and was barely conscious, I was told by a operator isolate for 14 days no ambulance.  I almost fainted numerous times that day.  I wasnt even passed onto a medical nurse on the phone, it was just a call centre jockey.

 

It was probably the only thing they could do to be fair, as the NHS was massively incapable when the outbreak started, so if we accepted all covid cases, the hospitals would have collapsed.

Edited by Chrysalis
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

My issue is that the lockdown's are not done in a logical way, telling people you cannot meet up with family in their home, but are free to go to a pub.  Also things like opening non essential shops, but non essential traffic is not allowed.  Also the reopening of schools.

 

When my freedom is taken away from me, I have no problem if its the same for everyone in the country, but I have an issue when its just my area, and in addition I have an issue if my freedom is taken whilst they opening up business.

 

I took the national lockdown extremely seriously. but since then I think it stinks.

 

For reference my ward has lower cases per 100k than glenfield which has been out of lockdown for 3-4 weeks now.

We'll agree here. I think there's much improvement to be done on how they implement local lockdown, what the rules are, etc. 

 

But I do think we have to accept local measures as being a part if managing this until we find effective treatment or vaccine. We can't shut down the whole country because Leicester, Oldham, and Blackburn show signs of a flair up. Ideally we wouldn't want to be shutting down entire cities because of a few wards in trouble 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

The triage was effectively moved from entrance to ICU to the ambulance service and caller operators.  Thats my belief based on statements from UK NHS staff, my own experience, and experience of other people.  When I rang 111 back in march/april (cannot remember exact date) I could barely stand up and was barely conscious, I was told by a operator isolate for 14 days no ambulance.  I almost fainted numerous times that day.  I wasnt even passed onto a medical nurse on the phone, it was just a call centre jockey.

 

It was probably the only thing they could do to be fair, as the NHS was massively incapable when the outbreak started, so if we accepted all covid cases, the hospitals would have collapsed.

I can truly believe this. Some people seem to think it hasn't been all that bad. Actually, we'd converted and filled wards used for non essential treatments, refused seriously ill people admission to hospital, and even then we were still worried about breaching capacity (hence the field hospitals).

 

All that aside for a moment, I hope you're back to well now?

Edited by Fktf
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

Test more and there’s more cases because it’s a massive variable but the deaths will always remain the same because it’s fixed and you can’t alter it.

This, plus I think doctors have become much better at treating the condition. This is another good reason for early measures to contain the infection when little was known about what treatments might work. I believe they use ventilators in different way now for example, and drugs like Dexamethasone help to reduce inflammation in late stage patients. I’m sure there are dozens of other things they’ve learned.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, The People's Hero said:

He's re-recorded it and its a bonus on some versions of his new album; obviously tailored it for this virus situation. Or something.

 

Well spotted. (Is that you, Bob?)

Thanks for the info - I've never been Bob.  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

Test more and there’s more cases because it’s a massive variable but the deaths will always remain the same because it’s fixed and you can’t alter it.

Why should deaths be fixed? If there are more people with the virus, more people will die. If you are staying that more cases does not equal more deaths you need to find out why. It pretty much underpins all the decision making and the epidemiological models.

 

Ferguson predicted 500k deaths and we went into lockdown.a model used by the government to direct Policy.

 

They used his model for Sweden when they didn't go into lockdown and it predicted 100k deaths by June (using Sweden population, actual measures and rules). They are currently at 5,770. Of course, they said Sweden needs to go into lockdown right away and get them down to 20k. It doesn't take much to realise who was talking BS.

 

His model was used to direct Policy! It wasn't just wrong, it was by orders of magnitude.

 

More cases does not equal more deaths. The penny has dropped for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, simFox said:

Why should deaths be fixed? If there are more people with the virus, more people will die. If you are staying that more cases does not equal more deaths you need to find out why. It pretty much underpins all the decision making and the epidemiological models.

 

Ferguson predicted 500k deaths and we went into lockdown.a model used by the government to direct Policy.

 

They used his model for Sweden when they didn't go into lockdown and it predicted 100k deaths by June (using Sweden population, actual measures and rules). They are currently at 5,770. Of course, they said Sweden needs to go into lockdown right away and get them down to 20k. It doesn't take much to realise who was talking BS.

 

His model was used to direct Policy! It wasn't just wrong, it was by orders of magnitude.

 

More cases does not equal more deaths. The penny has dropped for you.

Deaths being fixed means the amount stays pretty much the same, so last month there were e.g. 1000 deaths and this month there is 1000. You can test 10000 people or 10million people but the deaths are still 1000.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

Deaths being fixed means the amount stays pretty much the same, so last month there were e.g. 1000 deaths and this month there is 1000. You can test 10000 people or 10million people but the deaths are still 1000.

I'm not sure what you think that means. So the virus has a quota on who it decides to kill; once it gets to 1000 it calls it a day?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, los dedos said:

Just had a lad back at work who had it . His daughter who doesn't live with him caught it off him and her husband did too. But his wife who lives with him in a flat didn't get it . :dunno:

Could be that she already had immunity from a previous corona virus infection. Hopefully more evidence will be published that will support that.

 

if that is true, the herd immunity will be far lower than previously thought. These utterances aren't new and surprising.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, los dedos said:

Just had a lad back at work who had it . His daughter who doesn't live with him caught it off him and her husband did too. But his wife who lives with him in a flat didn't get it . :dunno:

Presumably you mean she didn’t test positive and the others did ???    

Link to post
Share on other sites

First let me correct my previous data on the US as i was looking at the world graph - i was on my phone last night and i gave the world figures:

 

April 14: 27,446 cases - 2,630 deaths

Aug 7: 63,413 cases - 1,292 deaths

 

Florida governor is coming underfire for his lack of lock-down, yet cases are clearly dropping off. Despite what Yorkie thinks, this will inevitably lead to the fatalities dropping off with an apx 2-3 week lag. I have also read that Sao Paulo cases are falling as are Rio-DeJaneiro. It's quite clear to anyone that this virus just isn't killing people under 40yo, so why stop them from working? 

 

All we need to do is protect the weak and vulnerable and add covid to the very long list of nasty diseases that want to kill us. We should also consider that at the start of a pandemic, the susceptible will die off quickly and leave the stronger people behind to fight the disease, but locking down to protect the dead wont actually help them.

 

Interesting but long read if anyone is interested:

 

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/08/reasons-for-covid-19-optimism-on-t-cells-and-herd-immunity.html

 

Going back to Youyang Gu’s analysis, what he calls the “implied infection fatality rate” — essentially an estimated ratio based on his modeling of untested cases — has fallen for the country (USA) as a whole from about one percent in March to about 0.8 percent in mid-April, 0.6 percent in May, and down to about 0.25 percent today. In other words, at the population level, the lethality of the disease in America has fallen by about three-quarters since its peak. This is, despite everything that is genuinely horrible about the pandemic and the American response to it, rather fantastic.

 

on August 4, a group of 26 researchers, including the lead authors of the “20 to 50 percent” research finding, published a new paper in Science documenting both the origins and the shape of that T-cell cross-reactive immune response. To the lay reader, the paper is a tangle of detail about the immune system, but the headline finding was quite clear and explicitly stated: that preexisting T-cell response came primarily via the variety of T-cells called CD4 T-cells, and that this dynamic was consistent with the hypothesis that the mechanism was inherited from previous exposure to a few different “common cold” coronaviruses.

 

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/08/04/science.abd3871

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had it back in March (although couldn’t get a test) and my girlfriend who lives with me didn’t get any symptoms.

 

Her hair’s now falling out in clumps and I’m reading that it could be a long term effect of Covid, so she most likely did have it but was asymptomatic. The only doubt I had as to having it was if she didn’t catch it from me then maybe I didn’t have it as it’s really contagious, but I ticked all the other boxes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

This, plus I think doctors have become much better at treating the condition. This is another good reason for early measures to contain the infection when little was known about what treatments might work. I believe they use ventilators in different way now for example, and drugs like Dexamethasone help to reduce inflammation in late stage patients. I’m sure there are dozens of other things they’ve learned.

It's a good point. Our rate of development is pretty amazing. We've crammed about 2 years of work into 6 months, so actually the death rate will be falling slightly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Wet Trump said:

I had it back in March (although couldn’t get a test) and my girlfriend who lives with me didn’t get any symptoms.

 

Her hair’s now falling out in clumps and I’m reading that it could be a long term effect of Covid, so she most likely did have it but was asymptomatic. The only doubt I had as to having it was if she didn’t catch it from me then maybe I didn’t have it as it’s really contagious, but I ticked all the other boxes.

Is this true?? 

Link to post
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...