comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 52 seconds ago
I would guess that around 40% ~ 50% of the UK population have already had the virus. Now do your maths again based on that assumption.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If he takes the EU figure of 2.4 percent requiring respiratory assistance. And your assumption that 40-50 percent have had virus. Then our NHS has already collapsed. So someone's assumption, either yours or the EUs are wrong.
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
Latest figures show that of the people admitted to hospital with confirmed CV, only 49% have been discharged
More than 30% have died. Around 17% are still in.
A reasonable assumption is probably that if you're admitted, your chances are 50-60% .
Similar to Ebola.
People getting complacent IMO. This thing is an absolute terror and the assumption that you've probably had it already and are fine might very well get you killed.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 7 minutes ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s “estimating that 50% of the population have had it already” based on, quite frankly, absolutely nothing.
Then there’s taking the latest, best-supported expert data and extrapolating based on that.
Which are obviously two completely different things.
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 18 minutes ago
I would guess that around 40% ~ 50% of the UK population have already had the virus. Now do your maths again based on that assumption.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, can we see your working please?
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
A reasonable assumption is probably that if you're admitted, your chances are 50-60% .
Similar to Ebola.
------
What? Exaggeration!
Ebola is 60% for very infected person. Covid is 60% for every hospitalised person. That's a humongously ginormous difference.
And that's assuming your math is correct in the first place.
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
Safety first as far as I'm concerned. Stay at home unless you have to work, Social distance if you have to go out to shop, and follow government guidelines.
You may feel invincible but please consider others. Lifting the lockdown too early may well be the start of a further spread of the virus.
When we do start to open up industry, commerce, shops, etc. It should be implemented in a way where social distancing can be maintained. Pubs, restaurants, and gatherings for sport and other events should be the last to be relaxed.
Playing football and other contact sports behind closed doors should only be allowed when it is absolutely safe to do so. The idea of players wearing masks is nonsensible and would never work. Players would be exerting themselves and need to get as much oxygen into their lungs as possible. Masks are known to restrict the volume of air reaching the lungs. It wouldn't be long before the masks were discarded. It would only take one player to be infected to possibly pass on the virus to over 100 other players and staff that would be needed to play a game.
Lives come before football.
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Adders pretty much always provides them. It’s his default setting.
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimate is based on numbers from a public health surveillance scheme in New York, which found that a quarter of the city's population of 8million people had been exposed to the virus - meaning that the approximately 16,000 deaths recorded there represent a death rate of 0.79 per cent.
Other estimates from cities in Europe and a study by the University of California, Berkeley, put the virus's death rate at between 0.19 and 0.5 per cent. In comparison, the death rate of flu is thought to be around the 0.1 per cent mark.
Extrapolating from these figures suggest that between 4.2 and 33.5million Britons have been infected with COVID-19, the vast majority of them untested, and between 935,000 and 3.8million people in London may have been ill already
From the mail but you get the jist.
Sunetra Gupta's rather sketchy Oxford "paper" which depending on which one of her assumptions you take. 68% would have been infected by 19/03/2020.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimate is based on numbers from a public health surveillance scheme in New York, which found that a quarter of the city's population of 8million people had been exposed to the virus - meaning that the approximately 16,000 deaths recorded there represent a death rate of 0.79 per cent.
Other estimates from cities in Europe and a study by the University of California, Berkeley, put the virus's death rate at between 0.19 and 0.5 per cent. In comparison, the death rate of flu is thought to be around the 0.1 per cent mark.
Extrapolating from these figures suggest that between 4.2 and 33.5million Britons have been infected with COVID-19, the vast majority of them untested, and between 935,000 and 3.8million people in London may have been ill already
From the mail but you get the jist.
Sunetra Gupta's rather sketchy Oxford "paper" which depending on which one of her assumptions you take. 68% would have been infected by 19/03/2020.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the first confirmed cases came on 29 January, and assuming very, very few would have been requiring respiratory ventilation in the first week, that would leave a window of something like eight weeks (up to 19 March plus two weeks) during which 1.1 million people would have required respiratory support or ventilation.
Given the nature of the exponential growth in cases and development of symptoms, the vast majority of those would fall into the last month of that eight weeks.
Complete collapse of the healthcare system, with many tens of thousands of people dying in corridors and at home without any kind of respiratory support.
comment by rosso is done with this (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimate is based on numbers from a public health surveillance scheme in New York, which found that a quarter of the city's population of 8million people had been exposed to the virus - meaning that the approximately 16,000 deaths recorded there represent a death rate of 0.79 per cent.
Other estimates from cities in Europe and a study by the University of California, Berkeley, put the virus's death rate at between 0.19 and 0.5 per cent. In comparison, the death rate of flu is thought to be around the 0.1 per cent mark.
Extrapolating from these figures suggest that between 4.2 and 33.5million Britons have been infected with COVID-19, the vast majority of them untested, and between 935,000 and 3.8million people in London may have been ill already
From the mail but you get the jist.
Sunetra Gupta's rather sketchy Oxford "paper" which depending on which one of her assumptions you take. 68% would have been infected by 19/03/2020.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the first confirmed cases came on 29 January, and assuming very, very few would have been requiring respiratory ventilation in the first week, that would leave a window of something like eight weeks (up to 19 March plus two weeks) during which 1.1 million people would have required respiratory support or ventilation.
Given the nature of the exponential growth in cases and development of symptoms, the vast majority of those would fall into the last month of that eight weeks.
Complete collapse of the healthcare system, with many tens of thousands of people dying in corridors and at home without any kind of respiratory support.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why didn't it collapse then?
19th March was before we closed the economy.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
On 10 February, the govt strengthened powers for public health officials to quarantine people against their will, if necessary. People were already being forcibly quarantined coming off flights from China.
Public health advice issued in the first week of March instructed people with symptoms to self isolate, remaining at home.
Sporting events, including PL games, had already been suspended, as had public worship.
Nobody “closed the economy”. Larger parts of it are still fully functional.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by SUPERWHITEINEXILE (U2020)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
Safety first as far as I'm concerned. Stay at home unless you have to work, Social distance if you have to go out to shop, and follow government guidelines.
You may feel invincible but please consider others. Lifting the lockdown too early may well be the start of a further spread of the virus.
When we do start to open up industry, commerce, shops, etc. It should be implemented in a way where social distancing can be maintained. Pubs, restaurants, and gatherings for sport and other events should be the last to be relaxed.
Playing football and other contact sports behind closed doors should only be allowed when it is absolutely safe to do so. The idea of players wearing masks is nonsensible and would never work. Players would be exerting themselves and need to get as much oxygen into their lungs as possible. Masks are known to restrict the volume of air reaching the lungs. It wouldn't be long before the masks were discarded. It would only take one player to be infected to possibly pass on the virus to over 100 other players and staff that would be needed to play a game.
Lives come before football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree, fk masks as well they do more damage than good
Where does this 50% number come from for feck sake
The US has given 6million tests and 1million positives came from that. So that alone is 17%.
They have also done sample size testings of 3000 and again the number was around 16% or so.
So I would assume the number infected is around 15-20% max, not 50%.
comment by Cinciwolf----JA606 NFL Fantasy Champion 2019----No Emotional Attachments....five long years (U11551)
posted 3 minutes ago
Where does this 50% number come from for feck sake
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From the same place as the governments 100’000 tests a day.
Thin air.
Here’s the previously-referenced Fed Reserve/ Cambridge Uni study on the economic necessity of curbing the infection rate:
“...our integrated assessment framework suggests that the way an unchecked spread of an epidemic can create vast damage to the economy is by bringing the core industries to operate at their minimum scale—with the result of undermining efficient production in other sectors and thus aggregate economic activity.
“This is an argument for social distancing, on top of the argument stressing the need to reduce the loss of human life resulting from congestion overwhelming hospitals and health care systems.”
https://www.inet.econ.cam.ac.uk/working-paper-pdfs/wp2017.pdf
the issue is even $hit like this, when i said about nobody knows nothing, every time they get "some sort of information/evidence about one thing related to covid-19" there is then something else that conflicts it
Just look as one example
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/29/no-case-child-passing-coronavirus-adult-exists-evidence-review/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8272905/Children-catch-coronavirus-adults-study-finds.html
Just watching SKY News. They have just had a lady from University of Edinburgh on. They are number crunching the hospital admissions and deaths in hospital. It appears that obesity is as big a risk or even bigger than age, heart disease or dementia.
Worrying if true.
comment by See You Next Tuesday (U3090)
posted 6 minutes ago
Just watching SKY News. They have just had a lady from University of Edinburgh on. They are number crunching the hospital admissions and deaths in hospital. It appears that obesity is as big a risk or even bigger than age, heart disease or dementia.
Worrying if true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems like nonsense to me given the huge amount of 80+ year old deaths around the world
Reduction in new COVID-19 hospital admissions has allowed the NHS to publish a six week plan to start moving services back towards normal.
Keep a lid on infections -> reduce COVID-19 burden on NHS -> free up staff and resources -> get the health service functioning properly again.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2020/04/second-phase-of-nhs-response-to-covid-19-letter-to-chief-execs-29-april-2020.pdf
comment by Cinciwolf----JA606 NFL Fantasy Champion 2019--... (U11551)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by See You Next Tuesday (U3090)
posted 6 minutes ago
Just watching SKY News. They have just had a lady from University of Edinburgh on. They are number crunching the hospital admissions and deaths in hospital. It appears that obesity is as big a risk or even bigger than age, heart disease or dementia.
Worrying if true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems like nonsense to me given the huge amount of 80+ year old deaths around the world
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cinci, this is what I am unsure about. If someone is in their eighties, obese and has an underlying health condition, what goes on the death certificate?
Sign in if you want to comment
Coming out of lockdown
Page 13 of 14
10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14
posted on 30/4/20
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 52 seconds ago
I would guess that around 40% ~ 50% of the UK population have already had the virus. Now do your maths again based on that assumption.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If he takes the EU figure of 2.4 percent requiring respiratory assistance. And your assumption that 40-50 percent have had virus. Then our NHS has already collapsed. So someone's assumption, either yours or the EUs are wrong.
posted on 30/4/20
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
posted on 30/4/20
Latest figures show that of the people admitted to hospital with confirmed CV, only 49% have been discharged
More than 30% have died. Around 17% are still in.
A reasonable assumption is probably that if you're admitted, your chances are 50-60% .
Similar to Ebola.
People getting complacent IMO. This thing is an absolute terror and the assumption that you've probably had it already and are fine might very well get you killed.
posted on 30/4/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 7 minutes ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There’s “estimating that 50% of the population have had it already” based on, quite frankly, absolutely nothing.
Then there’s taking the latest, best-supported expert data and extrapolating based on that.
Which are obviously two completely different things.
posted on 30/4/20
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 18 minutes ago
I would guess that around 40% ~ 50% of the UK population have already had the virus. Now do your maths again based on that assumption.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, can we see your working please?
posted on 30/4/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
posted on 30/4/20
A reasonable assumption is probably that if you're admitted, your chances are 50-60% .
Similar to Ebola.
------
What? Exaggeration!
Ebola is 60% for very infected person. Covid is 60% for every hospitalised person. That's a humongously ginormous difference.
And that's assuming your math is correct in the first place.
posted on 30/4/20
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
posted on 30/4/20
Safety first as far as I'm concerned. Stay at home unless you have to work, Social distance if you have to go out to shop, and follow government guidelines.
You may feel invincible but please consider others. Lifting the lockdown too early may well be the start of a further spread of the virus.
When we do start to open up industry, commerce, shops, etc. It should be implemented in a way where social distancing can be maintained. Pubs, restaurants, and gatherings for sport and other events should be the last to be relaxed.
Playing football and other contact sports behind closed doors should only be allowed when it is absolutely safe to do so. The idea of players wearing masks is nonsensible and would never work. Players would be exerting themselves and need to get as much oxygen into their lungs as possible. Masks are known to restrict the volume of air reaching the lungs. It wouldn't be long before the masks were discarded. It would only take one player to be infected to possibly pass on the virus to over 100 other players and staff that would be needed to play a game.
Lives come before football.
posted on 30/4/20
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Adders pretty much always provides them. It’s his default setting.
posted on 30/4/20
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimate is based on numbers from a public health surveillance scheme in New York, which found that a quarter of the city's population of 8million people had been exposed to the virus - meaning that the approximately 16,000 deaths recorded there represent a death rate of 0.79 per cent.
Other estimates from cities in Europe and a study by the University of California, Berkeley, put the virus's death rate at between 0.19 and 0.5 per cent. In comparison, the death rate of flu is thought to be around the 0.1 per cent mark.
Extrapolating from these figures suggest that between 4.2 and 33.5million Britons have been infected with COVID-19, the vast majority of them untested, and between 935,000 and 3.8million people in London may have been ill already
From the mail but you get the jist.
Sunetra Gupta's rather sketchy Oxford "paper" which depending on which one of her assumptions you take. 68% would have been infected by 19/03/2020.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf
posted on 30/4/20
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimate is based on numbers from a public health surveillance scheme in New York, which found that a quarter of the city's population of 8million people had been exposed to the virus - meaning that the approximately 16,000 deaths recorded there represent a death rate of 0.79 per cent.
Other estimates from cities in Europe and a study by the University of California, Berkeley, put the virus's death rate at between 0.19 and 0.5 per cent. In comparison, the death rate of flu is thought to be around the 0.1 per cent mark.
Extrapolating from these figures suggest that between 4.2 and 33.5million Britons have been infected with COVID-19, the vast majority of them untested, and between 935,000 and 3.8million people in London may have been ill already
From the mail but you get the jist.
Sunetra Gupta's rather sketchy Oxford "paper" which depending on which one of her assumptions you take. 68% would have been infected by 19/03/2020.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the first confirmed cases came on 29 January, and assuming very, very few would have been requiring respiratory ventilation in the first week, that would leave a window of something like eight weeks (up to 19 March plus two weeks) during which 1.1 million people would have required respiratory support or ventilation.
Given the nature of the exponential growth in cases and development of symptoms, the vast majority of those would fall into the last month of that eight weeks.
Complete collapse of the healthcare system, with many tens of thousands of people dying in corridors and at home without any kind of respiratory support.
posted on 30/4/20
comment by rosso is done with this (U17054)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by LoneWolf - Rebel Without A Cause (U22026)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
Ffs
The amount of quantum leaps on here to reach some understanding on the numbers is simply staggering on here at times.
Just fwcking hold your hands up and say you haven’t got the tiniest of ideas just like anyone else on here.
There are eminent specialists in number crunching and analysis who vary hugely with each other yet we have experts on here day after day uttering guttershite.
Amazing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's ultimately due to limited testing and the absence of antibody testing. Unfortunately many governments are making decisions without that data.
Hopefully in the coming week or two concrete information comes to light. But when guesses for UK exposure range from 5 percent to 80 percent caution is probably advisable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can rosso see your workings out please? 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimate is based on numbers from a public health surveillance scheme in New York, which found that a quarter of the city's population of 8million people had been exposed to the virus - meaning that the approximately 16,000 deaths recorded there represent a death rate of 0.79 per cent.
Other estimates from cities in Europe and a study by the University of California, Berkeley, put the virus's death rate at between 0.19 and 0.5 per cent. In comparison, the death rate of flu is thought to be around the 0.1 per cent mark.
Extrapolating from these figures suggest that between 4.2 and 33.5million Britons have been infected with COVID-19, the vast majority of them untested, and between 935,000 and 3.8million people in London may have been ill already
From the mail but you get the jist.
Sunetra Gupta's rather sketchy Oxford "paper" which depending on which one of her assumptions you take. 68% would have been infected by 19/03/2020.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the first confirmed cases came on 29 January, and assuming very, very few would have been requiring respiratory ventilation in the first week, that would leave a window of something like eight weeks (up to 19 March plus two weeks) during which 1.1 million people would have required respiratory support or ventilation.
Given the nature of the exponential growth in cases and development of symptoms, the vast majority of those would fall into the last month of that eight weeks.
Complete collapse of the healthcare system, with many tens of thousands of people dying in corridors and at home without any kind of respiratory support.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why didn't it collapse then?
19th March was before we closed the economy.
posted on 30/4/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/4/20
On 10 February, the govt strengthened powers for public health officials to quarantine people against their will, if necessary. People were already being forcibly quarantined coming off flights from China.
Public health advice issued in the first week of March instructed people with symptoms to self isolate, remaining at home.
Sporting events, including PL games, had already been suspended, as had public worship.
Nobody “closed the economy”. Larger parts of it are still fully functional.
posted on 30/4/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/4/20
comment by SUPERWHITEINEXILE (U2020)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
Safety first as far as I'm concerned. Stay at home unless you have to work, Social distance if you have to go out to shop, and follow government guidelines.
You may feel invincible but please consider others. Lifting the lockdown too early may well be the start of a further spread of the virus.
When we do start to open up industry, commerce, shops, etc. It should be implemented in a way where social distancing can be maintained. Pubs, restaurants, and gatherings for sport and other events should be the last to be relaxed.
Playing football and other contact sports behind closed doors should only be allowed when it is absolutely safe to do so. The idea of players wearing masks is nonsensible and would never work. Players would be exerting themselves and need to get as much oxygen into their lungs as possible. Masks are known to restrict the volume of air reaching the lungs. It wouldn't be long before the masks were discarded. It would only take one player to be infected to possibly pass on the virus to over 100 other players and staff that would be needed to play a game.
Lives come before football.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree, fk masks as well they do more damage than good
posted on 30/4/20
Where does this 50% number come from for feck sake
The US has given 6million tests and 1million positives came from that. So that alone is 17%.
They have also done sample size testings of 3000 and again the number was around 16% or so.
So I would assume the number infected is around 15-20% max, not 50%.
posted on 30/4/20
comment by Cinciwolf----JA606 NFL Fantasy Champion 2019----No Emotional Attachments....five long years (U11551)
posted 3 minutes ago
Where does this 50% number come from for feck sake
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From the same place as the governments 100’000 tests a day.
Thin air.
posted on 30/4/20
Here’s the previously-referenced Fed Reserve/ Cambridge Uni study on the economic necessity of curbing the infection rate:
“...our integrated assessment framework suggests that the way an unchecked spread of an epidemic can create vast damage to the economy is by bringing the core industries to operate at their minimum scale—with the result of undermining efficient production in other sectors and thus aggregate economic activity.
“This is an argument for social distancing, on top of the argument stressing the need to reduce the loss of human life resulting from congestion overwhelming hospitals and health care systems.”
https://www.inet.econ.cam.ac.uk/working-paper-pdfs/wp2017.pdf
posted on 30/4/20
the issue is even $hit like this, when i said about nobody knows nothing, every time they get "some sort of information/evidence about one thing related to covid-19" there is then something else that conflicts it
Just look as one example
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/29/no-case-child-passing-coronavirus-adult-exists-evidence-review/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8272905/Children-catch-coronavirus-adults-study-finds.html
posted on 30/4/20
Just watching SKY News. They have just had a lady from University of Edinburgh on. They are number crunching the hospital admissions and deaths in hospital. It appears that obesity is as big a risk or even bigger than age, heart disease or dementia.
Worrying if true.
posted on 30/4/20
comment by See You Next Tuesday (U3090)
posted 6 minutes ago
Just watching SKY News. They have just had a lady from University of Edinburgh on. They are number crunching the hospital admissions and deaths in hospital. It appears that obesity is as big a risk or even bigger than age, heart disease or dementia.
Worrying if true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems like nonsense to me given the huge amount of 80+ year old deaths around the world
posted on 30/4/20
Reduction in new COVID-19 hospital admissions has allowed the NHS to publish a six week plan to start moving services back towards normal.
Keep a lid on infections -> reduce COVID-19 burden on NHS -> free up staff and resources -> get the health service functioning properly again.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2020/04/second-phase-of-nhs-response-to-covid-19-letter-to-chief-execs-29-april-2020.pdf
posted on 30/4/20
comment by Cinciwolf----JA606 NFL Fantasy Champion 2019--... (U11551)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by See You Next Tuesday (U3090)
posted 6 minutes ago
Just watching SKY News. They have just had a lady from University of Edinburgh on. They are number crunching the hospital admissions and deaths in hospital. It appears that obesity is as big a risk or even bigger than age, heart disease or dementia.
Worrying if true.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems like nonsense to me given the huge amount of 80+ year old deaths around the world
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cinci, this is what I am unsure about. If someone is in their eighties, obese and has an underlying health condition, what goes on the death certificate?
Page 13 of 14
10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14