The big Coronavirus thread
Comments
-
Mobile phone reception tends to be worse in Devon. Hmmmmmm.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Added 50% rather than doubled although that does get confusing at times as the other day people were talking about some European countries having an increase of 50% of their hospital deaths when adding on care homes when they actually meant care homes accounted for 50% of the total (i.e. adding 100% of hospital deaths).kingstonian said:China have adjusted (doubled) the death count they saw in Wuhan. Seems a bit weird to do so now.
0 -
Rick and I are looking into the future to how we can ease lockdown and get the economy going again.First.Aspect said:
Really? Is that the level of your understanding?rick_chasey said:Is the death count a proxy for infection rates as there is no adequate testing?
Yes. Ergo it needs to be done right.
No, the policy -rightly or wrongly - is test people who have symptoms, plus selected others (NHS workers at the moment). So you test only a proportion of those infected, missing the mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic. Your confirmed infected rate is a proxy for the overall infected rate. This is why the calculated % mortality rate varies so dramatically between countries and why scientists the world over are trying to guestimate overall mortality rates. Even German scientists.
The death rate from these cases is a proxy for the overall death rate. It is reasonable to assume that this is more accurate than the infected rate, because it is self filtering - people with severe symptoms are most likely get into the health system and people tend not to cough to death at home alone and in vast numbers without mentioning it to anyone.
There has been a scientist standing next to a politician every day for weeks now trying to explain this sort of stuff in simple enough terms. And if that's not simple enough, there have been scientists explaining that in simpler terms in phone ins for a few hours either side.
Jesus if there is one post to show how you are filtering information it is this one. Do you just groan and rock backwards and forwards in front of the radio and miss hearing stuff?
If more people were tested they would know they had C19 and recovered and could get on with life.
If more people were being tested you could monitor trends and the impact of easement measures.
Coopster put a cost of £2.4bn a day on lockdown, whether right or wrong it is probably in the right ball park so why not spend a fraction of it on measures that will speed up lockdown.0 -
Again I don't think a reliable version of that test exists yet does it? It would be lovely if it did.surrey_commuter said:
Rick and I are looking into the future to how we can ease lockdown and get the economy going again.First.Aspect said:
Really? Is that the level of your understanding?rick_chasey said:Is the death count a proxy for infection rates as there is no adequate testing?
Yes. Ergo it needs to be done right.
No, the policy -rightly or wrongly - is test people who have symptoms, plus selected others (NHS workers at the moment). So you test only a proportion of those infected, missing the mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic. Your confirmed infected rate is a proxy for the overall infected rate. This is why the calculated % mortality rate varies so dramatically between countries and why scientists the world over are trying to guestimate overall mortality rates. Even German scientists.
The death rate from these cases is a proxy for the overall death rate. It is reasonable to assume that this is more accurate than the infected rate, because it is self filtering - people with severe symptoms are most likely get into the health system and people tend not to cough to death at home alone and in vast numbers without mentioning it to anyone.
There has been a scientist standing next to a politician every day for weeks now trying to explain this sort of stuff in simple enough terms. And if that's not simple enough, there have been scientists explaining that in simpler terms in phone ins for a few hours either side.
Jesus if there is one post to show how you are filtering information it is this one. Do you just groan and rock backwards and forwards in front of the radio and miss hearing stuff?
If more people were tested they would know they had C19 and recovered and could get on with life.
If more people were being tested you could monitor trends and the impact of easement measures.
Coopster put a cost of £2.4bn a day on lockdown, whether right or wrong it is probably in the right ball park so why not spend a fraction of it on measures that will speed up lockdown.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
nickice said:
There have been a couple of interesting articles in the Telegraph today and yesterday. One strongly criticising the Swedish approach as it's led to a higher death count compared to other Scandinavian countries, though I think it's a bit soon to offer this as a major criticism. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/04/16/sweden-has-shown-not-tackle-coronavirus-fights-now-save-face/
The other, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/16/uk-faces-eight-ten-waves-coronavirus-population-achieves-herd/, talks about 8-10 waves before herd immunity is achieved as according to a Dutch study, only 3% of citizens have developed immunity. I'd bet the number who've had it is actually much higher as it seems a lot of young people have no antibodies or barely traceable antibodies which is a major problem for future policy.
Do they say the % of people who caught it who are now immune?0 -
Look at the criteria the government has set.morstar said:I think there is a philosophical difference in this thread between what we think is happening.
My personal belief is that the UK position remains one of protect the NHS (to coin a phrase) until herd immunity or a vaccine arrives.
It is not one of stop the virus.
The government states consistently through many different voices that it sees limited value in a test that is immediately out of date.
The test they want is the antibody test which is not yet ready to a standard they are happy with. They like this test as it is both absolute and confirms an individual can become productive.
The lock down will be managed to keep mortality and hospital capacity managed while allowing herd immunity to build.
To clarify, this is not my policy but it is what is happening.
If the social distancing is enough to allow a gradual spread without a second peak, the whole thing will just rumble on for months to come with a gradual decline in mortality and a gradual return to normality. Other tools and measures will be used to improve both care and protection (e.g. better medical response and apps).
I guess I don’t believe that we are simply slow to get ourselves into the same position as Germany or South Korea, I simply don’t think that is an objective.
US will be first major western economy to be more or less back to normal and I suspect we will probably be the next to follow. Although we will be considerably more cautious than US, we will be the next.
I think the belief remains to get through this without exceeding capacity. Testing may reduce mortality but it is not an exit strategy, it is a management strategy that is perceived to have an untenable duration and cost.
3. “We need to have reliable data from SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) showing that the rate of infection is decreasing to manageable levels across the board.”
You can't answer this question without testing.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rick_chasey said:
Is he explaining to all the staff who are not being tested why his mate and biggest political donor is in charge of testing?tailwindhome said:If you saw this picture 6 months ago what would you think had happened?
Can you give us a name to Google0 -
Tesco slots are available for next week if anyone is interested.0
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/15/testing-efforts-led-by-ex-lobbyist-who-backed-hancock-leadership-bidsurrey_commuter said:rick_chasey said:
Is he explaining to all the staff who are not being tested why his mate and biggest political donor is in charge of testing?tailwindhome said:If you saw this picture 6 months ago what would you think had happened?
Can you give us a name to Google
Most recently ran a corporate lobbying business. He happened to chair Hancock's leadership bid...0 -
No as it was from blood donors but this article,surrey_commuter said:nickice said:There have been a couple of interesting articles in the Telegraph today and yesterday. One strongly criticising the Swedish approach as it's led to a higher death count compared to other Scandinavian countries, though I think it's a bit soon to offer this as a major criticism. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/04/16/sweden-has-shown-not-tackle-coronavirus-fights-now-save-face/
The other, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/16/uk-faces-eight-ten-waves-coronavirus-population-achieves-herd/, talks about 8-10 waves before herd immunity is achieved as according to a Dutch study, only 3% of citizens have developed immunity. I'd bet the number who've had it is actually much higher as it seems a lot of young people have no antibodies or barely traceable antibodies which is a major problem for future policy.
Do they say the % of people who caught it who are now immune?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/15/uk-coronavirus-antibody-test-validated-results-show-under-40s/, explained that under 40s are developing hardly any antibodies or no antibodies at all. We can only hope it's due to a lack of sensitivity, otherwise I see no way forward. He also said, in another article I can no longer find, that two of the employees at the cancer centre he works at had it but 28 others were negative in antibody tests which was surprising as there is a lot of close contact. He thinks their immune system dealt with it without antibodies or, I suppose, it could be much less transmissible than thought.0 -
Basically population density and socioeconomic factors isn't it?briantrumpet said:Some more interesting regional stats here: https://www.hsj.co.uk/news/coronavirus-deaths-mapped-first-trust-records-500-fatalities/7027212.article
The regional variation continues to be stark - the number of deaths per 100k is ten times higher in the Black Country than Devon.
https://d3e6tmgg461bic.cloudfront.net/Pictures/780xany/4/1/6/3045416_deathspercapchart16.4.20_851356.png0 -
Interesting, there are clearly a range of views on the post infection immunity point, but we do need to understand this better as it could be critical.nickice said:
The other, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/16/uk-faces-eight-ten-waves-coronavirus-population-achieves-herd/, talks about 8-10 waves before herd immunity is achieved as according to a Dutch study, only 3% of citizens have developed immunity. I'd bet the number who've had it is actually much higher as it seems a lot of young people have no antibodies or barely traceable antibodies which is a major problem for future policy.
The point about those who only developed mild symptoms show in fewer antibodies makes sense. Although as has been mentioned before, could some of this be connected with the problem of getting accurate/sensitive testing for antibodies?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Heard an interesting interview this morning that the tests are about 80% accurate. So about 20% of people are falsely given the all clear and 20% needlessly isolating (potentially).
Discuss.0 -
NI data week ending 10th
In hospital 69% out of hospital 31%
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
0
-
Care to elaborate on where you heard this and who was in the discussion?First.Aspect said:Heard an interesting interview this morning that the tests are about 80% accurate. So about 20% of people are falsely given the all clear and 20% needlessly isolating (potentially).
Discuss.0 -
And which test we're talking about?focuszing723 said:
Care to elaborate on where you heard this and who was in the discussion?First.Aspect said:Heard an interesting interview this morning that the tests are about 80% accurate. So about 20% of people are falsely given the all clear and 20% needlessly isolating (potentially).
Discuss.- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
I agree that the US will be first out the other side of this, as I said a couple of weeks ago but some states will do better than others because of the actions their respective governers take.morstar said:US will be first major western economy to be more or less back to normal and I suspect we will probably be the next to follow. Although we will be considerably more cautious than US, we will be the next.
I'm not sure the UK will be second out of this now. We seem to be pivoting to a suppression approach until a vaccine is available. I'm sure we and everyone else will eventually pivot to the US solution but the longer we wait the more damage we do to everyone else in the medium and long term
0 -
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!1
-
Anecdotes from the Alps again - I think there is an issue with timing the test as you can be about to be infected or have just gotten over it (a problem if you;re one of the lucky ones who is asymptomatic) and test negative as happened with 3 of my housemates testing positive but one, inexplicably IMO, testing negative. Ideally, you'd want to run the test over several days (or have an antibody test)pangolin said:
And which test we're talking about?focuszing723 said:
Care to elaborate on where you heard this and who was in the discussion?First.Aspect said:Heard an interesting interview this morning that the tests are about 80% accurate. So about 20% of people are falsely given the all clear and 20% needlessly isolating (potentially).
Discuss.
God bless you, but I think the obvious reason is the reason...nickice said:Could the disproportionate number of ethnic minority health workers dying be something to do with vitamin D (it takes much longer for them to produce it from sunlight)
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
According to this, there is no reliable antibody test, although the infection tests are apparently pretty accurate:pangolin said:
Again I don't think a reliable version of that test exists yet does it? It would be lovely if it did.surrey_commuter said:
Rick and I are looking into the future to how we can ease lockdown and get the economy going again.First.Aspect said:
Really? Is that the level of your understanding?rick_chasey said:Is the death count a proxy for infection rates as there is no adequate testing?
Yes. Ergo it needs to be done right.
No, the policy -rightly or wrongly - is test people who have symptoms, plus selected others (NHS workers at the moment). So you test only a proportion of those infected, missing the mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic. Your confirmed infected rate is a proxy for the overall infected rate. This is why the calculated % mortality rate varies so dramatically between countries and why scientists the world over are trying to guestimate overall mortality rates. Even German scientists.
The death rate from these cases is a proxy for the overall death rate. It is reasonable to assume that this is more accurate than the infected rate, because it is self filtering - people with severe symptoms are most likely get into the health system and people tend not to cough to death at home alone and in vast numbers without mentioning it to anyone.
There has been a scientist standing next to a politician every day for weeks now trying to explain this sort of stuff in simple enough terms. And if that's not simple enough, there have been scientists explaining that in simpler terms in phone ins for a few hours either side.
Jesus if there is one post to show how you are filtering information it is this one. Do you just groan and rock backwards and forwards in front of the radio and miss hearing stuff?
If more people were tested they would know they had C19 and recovered and could get on with life.
If more people were being tested you could monitor trends and the impact of easement measures.
Coopster put a cost of £2.4bn a day on lockdown, whether right or wrong it is probably in the right ball park so why not spend a fraction of it on measures that will speed up lockdown.
https://bbc.co.uk/news/health-51943612
Another practical issue with the testing strategy, although hopefully it will change. It also begs the question about the accuracy of studies to date related to antibodies and immunity."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I love your confidence.coopster_the_1st said:
I agree that the US will be first out the other side of this, as I said a couple of weeks ago but some states will do better than others because of the actions their respective governers take.morstar said:US will be first major western economy to be more or less back to normal and I suspect we will probably be the next to follow. Although we will be considerably more cautious than US, we will be the next.
I'm not sure the UK will be second out of this now. We seem to be pivoting to a suppression approach until a vaccine is available. I'm sure we and everyone else will eventually pivot to the US solution but the longer we wait the more damage we do to everyone else in the medium and long term
The US will not be back to normal until people stop dieing in large numbers, and it stays that way for a while. You can say "Back to normal! Mission accomplished!" all you like, but the economy was well on the way to being locked down before it was made official, and will be after it is "opened up". There are a lot of people looking at the way the federal government has done this and thinking "hmmm, I'm not sure they're the ones I want to trust on this." Confidence is so important.
Sure, some people will go straight out to crowded bars if they are allowed to, but a lot will still be staying mostly at home.0 -
And what would that be?ddraver said:
Anecdotes from the Alps again - I think there is an issue with timing the test as you can be about to be infected or have just gotten over it (a problem if you;re one of the lucky ones who is asymptomatic) and test negative as happened with 3 of my housemates testing positive but one, inexplicably IMO, testing negative. Ideally, you'd want to run the test over several days (or have an antibody test)pangolin said:
And which test we're talking about?focuszing723 said:
Care to elaborate on where you heard this and who was in the discussion?First.Aspect said:Heard an interesting interview this morning that the tests are about 80% accurate. So about 20% of people are falsely given the all clear and 20% needlessly isolating (potentially).
Discuss.
God bless you, but I think the obvious reason is the reason...nickice said:Could the disproportionate number of ethnic minority health workers dying be something to do with vitamin D (it takes much longer for them to produce it from sunlight)
0 -
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
What day is it?tailwindhome said:0 -
I think today it's a gradual opening up, with no set timeframe, and it's up to the governors to decide when it happens in their state.
Yesterday, it was get everyone back to work as soon as possible because everything's going great, and it's all up to the President.0 -
A medical expert from South Korea also mentioned this. The tests work, but need to have a count of more than 3000 to show a positive (other tests maybe different). Consequently some people have it in their system, but throw a negative, yet the virus continues to spread in their system. It was suggested this can happen multiple times depending on the state of the immune systems battle with the virus.ddraver said:
Anecdotes from the Alps again - I think there is an issue with timing the test as you can be about to be infected or have just gotten over it (a problem if you;re one of the lucky ones who is asymptomatic) and test negative as happened with 3 of my housemates testing positive but one, inexplicably IMO, testing negative. Ideally, you'd want to run the test over several days (or have an antibody test)pangolin said:
And which test we're talking about?focuszing723 said:
Care to elaborate on where you heard this and who was in the discussion?First.Aspect said:Heard an interesting interview this morning that the tests are about 80% accurate. So about 20% of people are falsely given the all clear and 20% needlessly isolating (potentially).
Discuss.
God bless you, but I think the obvious reason is the reason...nickice said:Could the disproportionate number of ethnic minority health workers dying be something to do with vitamin D (it takes much longer for them to produce it from sunlight)
0 -
I think we're all agreed that more testing is needed but ideally antibody testing to determine who has had it and as Pangolin said there unfortunately doesn't seem to be a reliable antibody test available at the moment. Giving people the all clear when they might actually have the virus or potential to still catch it wouldn't be good.surrey_commuter said:
Rick and I are looking into the future to how we can ease lockdown and get the economy going again.First.Aspect said:
Really? Is that the level of your understanding?rick_chasey said:Is the death count a proxy for infection rates as there is no adequate testing?
Yes. Ergo it needs to be done right.
No, the policy -rightly or wrongly - is test people who have symptoms, plus selected others (NHS workers at the moment). So you test only a proportion of those infected, missing the mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic. Your confirmed infected rate is a proxy for the overall infected rate. This is why the calculated % mortality rate varies so dramatically between countries and why scientists the world over are trying to guestimate overall mortality rates. Even German scientists.
The death rate from these cases is a proxy for the overall death rate. It is reasonable to assume that this is more accurate than the infected rate, because it is self filtering - people with severe symptoms are most likely get into the health system and people tend not to cough to death at home alone and in vast numbers without mentioning it to anyone.
There has been a scientist standing next to a politician every day for weeks now trying to explain this sort of stuff in simple enough terms. And if that's not simple enough, there have been scientists explaining that in simpler terms in phone ins for a few hours either side.
Jesus if there is one post to show how you are filtering information it is this one. Do you just groan and rock backwards and forwards in front of the radio and miss hearing stuff?
If more people were tested they would know they had C19 and recovered and could get on with life.
If more people were being tested you could monitor trends and the impact of easement measures.
Coopster put a cost of £2.4bn a day on lockdown, whether right or wrong it is probably in the right ball park so why not spend a fraction of it on measures that will speed up lockdown.
On the wider question of testing for frontline staff, yesterday I heard that there weren't as many staff turning up at testing stations as the stations can deal with. Nursing Unions were saying that you can't expect sick staff to travel to testing stations and that testing needs to go to them. Surely that would mean that the amount of tests that can be undertaken would drop dramatically due to the logistics? Also, if a staff member is that ill that they can't ravel to a testing station then they probably shouldn't be travelling to work whether they are ill with Covid or something else. Again, it shows the need for an antibody test so that these key workers can be tested once they recover to determine if it was Covid or nor.0 -
Either that story does not pass the BS test or the supply chain is beyond fvcked.rick_chasey said:
How in the name of God could the best possible solution be for this chap to ring a BBC journo asking for a phone number?0
