Jump to content

Coronavirus


faraway saint

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:

We're talking about a government that's running two death counts, one by the DoH & one by the ONS - I have no idea which is more accurate but I do know which is more convenient. :whistle

 

It's actually much worse than this.

Although the data given to Worldometer by or government is now known to be dodgy as f**k, you can see something very interesting. When a person gets this virus they either die, recover or are still ill. The total number of cases should equal the sum of all of those three things and for other countries this is indeed the case. For the UK though, there are no numbers under RECOVERED and the total cases is just the sum of active cases and deaths. That means the number of recovered is not included in the total cases. Figures show that the death rate is about 1-5% of all those who get infected which means that for every death, at least 95 others have recovered or are still ill. We can see how many are still ill so the recovered numbers are huge. This means the actual number of cases is much much higher than being reported. I reckon we could be looking at 7 figures. That's before we add the 50% of all cases which don't show any symptoms at all. Someone might be able to better interpret the numbers but it seems to me that millions of people in the UK have been infected and if that's true, no amount of lockdown is going to stop it so herd immunity has to be the objective. Every week people need to shop and that's why new infection rates are constant and will potentially remain so for the forseeable future. 

Hope that makes sense. If anyone can see a flaw in this analysis I'm all ears.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites


3 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

It's actually much worse than this.

Although the data given to Worldometer by or government is now known to be dodgy as f**k, you can see something very interesting. When a person gets this virus they either die, recover or are still ill. The total number of cases should equal the sum of all of those three things and for other countries this is indeed the case. For the UK though, there are no numbers under RECOVERED and the total cases is just the sum of active cases and deaths. That means the number of recovered is not included in the total cases. Figures show that the death rate is about 1-5% of all those who get infected which means that for every death, at least 95 others have recovered or are still ill. We can see how many are still ill so the recovered numbers are huge. This means the actual number of cases is much much higher than being reported. I reckon we could be looking at 7 figures. That's before we add the 50% of all cases which don't show any symptoms at all. Someone might be able to better interpret the numbers but it seems to me that millions of people in the UK have been infected and if that's true, no amount of lockdown is going to stop it so herd immunity has to be the objective. Every week people need to shop and that's why new infection rates are flat and will potentially remain so for the forseeable future. 

Hope that made sense.

Seems reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if I'm right, the lockdown will be lifted once numbers indicate that the NHS can cope rather than being based on absolute numbers of deaths or new cases.

If that's also true, then the government will almost certainly have decided on a figure of absolute deaths and a time frame for those deaths which is acceptable to them - say perhaps 100,000 total deaths before Christmas. If they can get the country back to normal and have covid as a background virus with affected numbers like the seasonal flu by then, I think they'd take that as a good outcome. I am so glad I don't have to make these sorts of decisions.

 

That's probably why moves are being made to start easing restrictions tonight or tomorrow.

 

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

BBC News - Coronavirus: Germany infection rate rises as lockdown eases
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52604676


STAY HOME, SAVE LIVES

The important fact here, in case anyone isn't following the science, is the reproduction rate going above 1 and not just the simplistic fact of the number of cases  I would think the German government will be monitoring this very closely as it's a fragile situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

The important fact here, in case anyone isn't following the science, is the reproduction rate going above 1 and not just the simplistic fact of the number of cases  I would think the German government will be monitoring this very closely as it's a fragile situation.

And if you know anything about science you'll know they will not rely on a single number which has been calculated from an empirical model and is prone to error and estimation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

So if I'm right, the lockdown will be lifted once numbers indicate that the NHS can cope rather than being based on absolute numbers of deaths or new cases.

If that's also true, then the government will almost certainly have decided on a figure of absolute deaths and a time frame for those deaths which is acceptable to them - say perhaps 100,000 total deaths before Christmas. If they can get the country back to normal and have covid as a background virus with affected numbers like the seasonal flu by then, I think they'd take that as a good outcome. I am so glad I don't have to make these sorts of decisions.

 

That's probably why moves are being made to start easing restrictions tonight or tomorrow.

 

I think you are right and this was always the case. I believe this government aren't so much concerned with the numbers who die as to the rate of hospitalized infected. They are now doing precisely what Trump did. They are setting the platform for reopening the economy and I think at too early a time. IF Germany, with a much lower R rate starting point, is already seeing the beginning returning to that exponential curve, then I hope Johnson and his cronies take note. Sadly, I don't think they will./

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

And if you know anything about science you'll know they will not rely on a single number which has been calculated from an empirical model and is prone to error and estimation.

Which is why I said they would be monitoring the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

My mistake. I thought you were having a dig at my previous post.

Sheesh what is wrong with me today......

No problem. given the number of times we've disagreed recently, I can see why you might jump to the conclusion. Good to see some can accept being in error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

So if I'm right, the lockdown will be lifted once numbers indicate that the NHS can cope rather than being based on absolute numbers of deaths or new cases.

If that's also true, then the government will almost certainly have decided on a figure of absolute deaths and a time frame for those deaths which is acceptable to them - say perhaps 100,000 total deaths before Christmas. If they can get the country back to normal and have covid as a background virus with affected numbers like the seasonal flu by then, I think they'd take that as a good outcome. I am so glad I don't have to make these sorts of decisions.

 

That's probably why moves are being made to start easing restrictions tonight or tomorrow.

 

And as the preponderance of those people dying are likely to be impoverished, on a poor diet, lacking in exercise, in ill-health that would be a wee win in terms of who votes and who no longer can, eh? 

win-win...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

So if I'm right, the lockdown will be lifted once numbers indicate that the NHS can cope rather than being based on absolute numbers of deaths or new cases.

If that's also true, then the government will almost certainly have decided on a figure of absolute deaths and a time frame for those deaths which is acceptable to them - say perhaps 100,000 total deaths before Christmas. If they can get the country back to normal and have covid as a background virus with affected numbers like the seasonal flu by then, I think they'd take that as a good outcome. I am so glad I don't have to make these sorts of decisions.

 

That's probably why moves are being made to start easing restrictions tonight or tomorrow.

 

I'd be very surprised, that works out at, roughly, over 300 a day, every day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TPAFKATS said:
2 hours ago, FTOF said:
That's your opinion. Mine differs.

OK, but do you have anything to back up that opinion?

Do you have anything to back up your opinion?

We could go on all day, but I won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

So if I'm right, the lockdown will be lifted once numbers indicate that the NHS can cope rather than being based on absolute numbers of deaths or new cases.

If that's also true, then the government will almost certainly have decided on a figure of absolute deaths and a time frame for those deaths which is acceptable to them - say perhaps 100,000 total deaths before Christmas. If they can get the country back to normal and have covid as a background virus with affected numbers like the seasonal flu by then, I think they'd take that as a good outcome. I am so glad I don't have to make these sorts of decisions.

 

That's probably why moves are being made to start easing restrictions tonight or tomorrow.

 

I stopped reading after the first clause, as you are never right. You're a self-important clown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, antrin said:

And as the preponderance of those people dying are likely to be impoverished, on a poor diet, lacking in exercise, in ill-health that would be a wee win in terms of who votes and who no longer can, eh? 

win-win...

It would imply a lot of the old neds I see about would snuff it, so aye. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TPAFKATS
Do you have anything to back up your opinion?
We could go on all day, but I won't.
I'm only asking you to back up in what way Scottish independence affected the covid19 strategy.
I don't have to prove there isn't a connection.

For a guy that's been demanding everything should be evidence based on this thread that's a strange change of direction you've taken.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:

I'm only asking you to back up in what way Scottish independence affected the covid19 strategy.
I don't have to prove there isn't a connection.

For a guy that's been demanding everything should be evidence based on this thread that's a strange change of direction you've taken.

Didn't you make a post that was simply an opinion that someone had died from the virus with no concrete EVIDENCE? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:

I'm only asking you to back up in what way Scottish independence affected the covid19 strategy.
I don't have to prove there isn't a connection.

For a guy that's been demanding everything should be evidence based on this thread that's a strange change of direction you've taken.

 

Seems to me he was suggesting that the UK government's preoccupation with Brexit and Scottish independence over the past few years distracted them from making proper preparations for dealing with a pandemic.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, smcc said:

 

Seems to me he was suggesting that the UK government's preoccupation with Brexit and Scottish independence over the past few years distracted them from making proper preparations for dealing with a pandemic.  

That is not a good enough excuse for the Tories/the govt to utilise.  It doesn't show them in a good light.

Apart from cost-cutting and being short-sighted - there is no excuse.  It is the duty of a government to plan for and protect the people.

When you can have people like oxter breezily typing, "the government will almost certainly have decided on a figure of absolute deaths and a time frame for those deaths which is acceptable to them - say perhaps 100,000 total deaths before Christmas", and not appearing to be even a wee bit sick at that thought and perhaps wording it differently...  then we know we are a long way down the not-giving-a-f**k slope.

Humans are expendable... especially if they're from a part of society you don't inhabit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, antrin said:

That is not a good enough excuse for the Tories/the govt to utilise.  It doesn't show them in a good light.

Apart from cost-cutting and being short-sighted - there is no excuse.  It is the duty of a government to plan for and protect the people.

When you can have people like oxter breezily typing, "the government will almost certainly have decided on a figure of absolute deaths and a time frame for those deaths which is acceptable to them - say perhaps 100,000 total deaths before Christmas", and not appearing to be even a wee bit sick at that thought and perhaps wording it differently...  then we know we are a long way down the not-giving-a-f**k slope.

Humans are expendable... especially if they're from a part of society you don't inhabit.

I was not putting it forward as an excuse and neither was FTOF; merely as an explanation1

Link to comment
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.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...