The big Coronavirus thread

kingstongraham

rjsterry said:

coopster_the_1st said:

kingstongraham said:

If you look back at the Imperial study, all the graphs are symmetrical https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

Doesn't feel like that is what's actually happening.

Good spot!

There seems to be no account taken that as more people are infected/recover the R0 figure drops because there are less people able to transmit it. All graphs should show a tail off.

There is a lot of dispute around this study, the Swede's particularly.

I think @kingstongraham was referring to the steep descent in deaths after the peak, whereas all the real graphs show a much slower descent than the initial rise.

Exactly that.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

coopster_the_1st said:

kingstongraham said:

After adjusting for multiple underlying long term conditions, average number of years of life lost per death estimated in this study to be more than a decade.

To be clear about the adjustments that are made here: "The number and type of LTCs led to wide variability in the estimated YLL at a given age (e.g. at ≥80 years, YLL was >10 years for people with 0 LTCs, and years for people with ≥6)."

https://twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1253272389602983936</p>

This is at odds with the view of the person whose model our governmnet are following.

He said two thrids of those dying would have died in the next 6 months.

Also, by their nature, very few in a care home live for more than a couple of years(those in there will have already have been there some time already). How does this correlate with your view that the FT was correct with the number of care home deaths?

Seeing as we have a forum member working in that sector, I wonder what @mrfpb thinks.

Quick Google shows average length of stay in residential homes as 27 months and in nursing homes just under 12 months.

That is a lot shorter than I'd have guessed.

Both my grandmothers ended up in nursing homes. One was there for eight years, the other has been in one for seven years and is still going.

Those numbers are also in line with a what mate who works in the care home sector told me based on his Groups own stats. The nursing home stat does not surprise me as effectively most are 'on their last legs' when they go into one.

Although like you, I had one example in the family of someone (MIL) who was the exception that proved the rule.

Stevo_666

mrb123 said:

kingstonian said:

mrb123 said:

kingstonian said:

What I'm struggling to get to grips with is how Germany's numbers of deaths through this is so much lower. As of today, 151,000 confirmed cases compared to 159,000 in France and 138,000 in the UK, yet only 5,300 deaths compared to 21,300 in France and 18,700 in the UK (yes, I know there is debate regarding what is "in" and "out" of those death numbers, but that's separate).

Why would one country have so relatively few deaths? All 3 countries have solid healthcare systems. I don't believe any of the 3 countries have run out of ICU beds etc - they might have had to scramble to reconfigure wards, build new temporary hospitals etc, but they haven't run out to my knowledge. The medics are sharing treatment plans with each other, so it isn't as if Germany have discovered a cocktail of drugs which is way more successful.

Is it genetics, is it based on existing immunities, or something else? Really mystifying to me.

The easiest answer is that the true number of cases in France and the UK is much higher than those numbers.

So you think the UK and France have had 4x the number of cases than Germany, so the death rate is in fact the same? That's a possibility, but why would 3 fairly similar countries have such wildly different infection rates?

I just don't get it.

I suppose to turn that round, why would the death rate be so wildly different between those countries?

We already know with a fair degree of certainty that Germany's testing regime has been much more thorough than ours so they'll have been picking up far more mild/moderate/asymptomatic cases than us, whereas we're pretty much only testing people who are hospitalised.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109066/coronavirus-testing-in-europe-by-country/

I think this is the main reason.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

If you look back at the Imperial study, all the graphs are symmetrical https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

Doesn't feel like that is what's actually happening.

Under any of the 'supression' scenarios, the critical care capacity is forecast to be massively exceeded looking at those graphs - and we know that has not happened.

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

rick_chasey said:

It is going to kill so. many. people.

If the UK is at what, 30,000 now, a month and a half into it, and it's going to carry on for the next what, 12 months at least?

Now presumably the death rate will drop as those most vulnerable basically all die, but still.

Is this the dawning realisation that if there's no treatment or cure, it is a question of when not if and this is a giant exercise in palliative care?

In the UK, the answer is about 300,000-600,000.

I can't believe that over the next 12 months there won't be some developments that bring the average mortality rate down from 0.5-1%. But that's all it is. A belief.

No I'm trying to illustrate how restrictive the measures will be for quite a while.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

If you look back at the Imperial study, all the graphs are symmetrical https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

Doesn't feel like that is what's actually happening.

Under any of the 'supression' scenarios, the critical care capacity is forecast to be massively exceeded looking at those graphs - and we know that has not happened.

That's not strictly true. Look at the green line on figure 3B. It peaks around mid April below the critical care beds line, then declines. I was wrong - that portion of the graph does have a fast up and a slow down which looks remarkably like what we actually have seen. "Green shows a suppression strategy incorporating closure of schools and universities, case isolation and population-wide social distancing beginning in late March 2020. "


What you are seeing in figure 3A with the green line breaking through the critical care beds next winter is what is predicted to happen were the social distancing to be stopped after 5 months (late August).

kingstongraham

Or basically, if we aren't willing to try and find cases early and isolate them, we're not going to have any fun.

ddraver

Switzerland has recorded -82 deaths today which is....interesting...

Zombies?

morstar

ddraver said:

Switzerland has recorded -82 deaths today which is....interesting...

Zombies?

Babies being born with the virus?

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

If you look back at the Imperial study, all the graphs are symmetrical https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

Doesn't feel like that is what's actually happening.

Under any of the 'supression' scenarios, the critical care capacity is forecast to be massively exceeded looking at those graphs - and we know that has not happened.

That's not strictly true. Look at the green line on figure 3B. It peaks around mid April below the critical care beds line, then declines. I was wrong - that portion of the graph does have a fast up and a slow down which looks remarkably like what we actually have seen. "Green shows a suppression strategy incorporating closure of schools and universities, case isolation and population-wide social distancing beginning in late March 2020. "


What you are seeing in figure 3A with the green line breaking through the critical care beds next winter is what is predicted to happen were the social distancing to be stopped after 5 months (late August).

I was looking at figure 2 actually.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

If you look back at the Imperial study, all the graphs are symmetrical https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

Doesn't feel like that is what's actually happening.

Under any of the 'supression' scenarios, the critical care capacity is forecast to be massively exceeded looking at those graphs - and we know that has not happened.

That's not strictly true. Look at the green line on figure 3B. It peaks around mid April below the critical care beds line, then declines. I was wrong - that portion of the graph does have a fast up and a slow down which looks remarkably like what we actually have seen. "Green shows a suppression strategy incorporating closure of schools and universities, case isolation and population-wide social distancing beginning in late March 2020. "


What you are seeing in figure 3A with the green line breaking through the critical care beds next winter is what is predicted to happen were the social distancing to be stopped after 5 months (late August).

I was looking at figure 2 actually.

That's the mitigation, not the suppression figure. We've done a lot more than what is in figure 2.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

If you look back at the Imperial study, all the graphs are symmetrical https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/mrc-gida/2020-03-16-COVID19-Report-9.pdf

Doesn't feel like that is what's actually happening.

Under any of the 'supression' scenarios, the critical care capacity is forecast to be massively exceeded looking at those graphs - and we know that has not happened.

That's not strictly true. Look at the green line on figure 3B. It peaks around mid April below the critical care beds line, then declines. I was wrong - that portion of the graph does have a fast up and a slow down which looks remarkably like what we actually have seen. "Green shows a suppression strategy incorporating closure of schools and universities, case isolation and population-wide social distancing beginning in late March 2020. "


What you are seeing in figure 3A with the green line breaking through the critical care beds next winter is what is predicted to happen were the social distancing to be stopped after 5 months (late August).

I was looking at figure 2 actually.

That's the mitigation, not the suppression figure. We've done a lot more than what is in figure 2.

Need to do more than skim it...

kingstongraham

The green line looks remarkably like what we might be living. Holds up quite well, might drop a bit quicker because we have suppressed harder than the report suggests.

Pross

Hancock dangerously close to taking responsibility for outcomes just now. He stated that decisions are made by politicians and that the scientists / experts just provide the information on which those decisions are made.

Some on here will no doubt be pleased to hear the emphasis now on test, track and trace and they are still claiming they'll hit that 100,000 a day target on time.

rjsterry

ddraver said:

Switzerland has recorded -82 deaths today which is....interesting...

Zombies?

Number on a log scale graph? This happened the other day on the FT chart. The real figure isn't actually negative. They've now tweaked the scale to log (n+1) which removes the glitch.

Pross

Presumably London based journalist (slight paraphrasing): you said London is 2 weeks ahead of everyone else, any chance you can ease the restrictions on us first please as we're more important?

rick_chasey

Pross said:

Hancock dangerously close to taking responsibility for outcomes just now. He stated that decisions are made by politicians and that the scientists / experts just provide the information on which those decisions are made.

Some on here will no doubt be pleased to hear the emphasis now on test, track and trace and they are still claiming they'll hit that 100,000 a day target on time.

Naturally am deeply sceptical of that claim but hopefully because the issue is logistics more than capacity (for now...!) they can ramp it up sooner.

I bet they will regret saying keeping deaths below 20,000 will be a success...

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Hancock dangerously close to taking responsibility for outcomes just now. He stated that decisions are made by politicians and that the scientists / experts just provide the information on which those decisions are made.

Some on here will no doubt be pleased to hear the emphasis now on test, track and trace and they are still claiming they'll hit that 100,000 a day target on time.

Naturally am deeply sceptical of that claim but hopefully because the issue is logistics more than capacity (for now...!) they can ramp it up sooner.

I bet they will regret saying keeping deaths below 20,000 will be a success...

It would have been, but it's already long gone, I fear.

rick_chasey

Disappointing news in an accidental WHO leak - the most promising vaccine so far flopped hard in its first randomised trial.

rick_chasey

kingstongraham said:

The green line looks remarkably like what we might be living. Holds up quite well, might drop a bit quicker because we have suppressed harder than the report suggests.

I can't believe anyone tolerating that massive spike in October?

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

The green line looks remarkably like what we might be living. Holds up quite well, might drop a bit quicker because we have suppressed harder than the report suggests.

I need to have another look at the report, as even the good scenario looks nasty later in the year.

pblakeney

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

The green line looks remarkably like what we might be living. Holds up quite well, might drop a bit quicker because we have suppressed harder than the report suggests.

I can't believe anyone tolerating that massive spike in October?

I struggle to believe anyone that thinks we have a choice, far less being in control.

morstar

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

The green line looks remarkably like what we might be living. Holds up quite well, might drop a bit quicker because we have suppressed harder than the report suggests.

I can't believe anyone tolerating that massive spike in October?

It is actually showing a higher peak later in the year than the unmitigated strategy would have done now. This despite the fact that by then, a growing minority will have already been through the virus.
Area under the 2nd peak seems slightly smaller.

rick_chasey

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

The green line looks remarkably like what we might be living. Holds up quite well, might drop a bit quicker because we have suppressed harder than the report suggests.

I can't believe anyone tolerating that massive spike in October?

I struggle to believe anyone that thinks we have a choice, far less being in control.

Keep up social distancing

tailwindhome

Pross said:

Some on here will no doubt be pleased to hear the emphasis now on test, track and trace and they are still claiming they'll hit that 100,000 a day target on time.

It's the only show in town.

First.Aspect

morstar said:

ddraver said:

Switzerland has recorded -82 deaths today which is....interesting...

Zombies?

Babies being born with the virus?

A repatriation flight?

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

Disappointing news in an accidental WHO leak - the most promising vaccine so far flopped hard in its first randomised trial.

Do you have a link to that? I'm curious on the approach they were taking. Was it the UC San Diego one?

rick_chasey

https://t.co/0T8QaQFeAx?amp=1

Gilead - China I think. Gilead are one of the big big boys so it’s a real shame.

They are anti-viral specialists.

rjsterry

morstar said:

rick_chasey said:

kingstongraham said:

The green line looks remarkably like what we might be living. Holds up quite well, might drop a bit quicker because we have suppressed harder than the report suggests.

I can't believe anyone tolerating that massive spike in October?

It is actually showing a higher peak later in the year than the unmitigated strategy would have done now. This despite the fact that by then, a growing minority will have already been through the virus.
Area under the 2nd peak seems slightly smaller.

Turn to Figure 4. Tightening and releasing restrictions until November 2021.

pangolin

Fig 3 shows the outcome (in green) if we maintain lockdown for 5 months and then just switch it off.

We're what, 4 weeks in? And people are nagging for a way out. No way it goes on for 5 months, but also no way it just ends abruptly either.

I guess they need to keep the green line hovering around the 4 bed mark indefinitely so we get enough people infected and recovered that it starts to make a meaningful dent in any second peak.