Cynics both of you! The virus-zapping machine is there for the good of the congregation. Especially the generous ones
SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)
- Thread starter Don't Kill Bill
- Start date
Yes thats true. I suppose its just my own pathological fear of being coughed on , on the London Underground which makes me think this would be a good idea.
Although I think its increasingly becoming obvious that the instructions issued to the public to avoid wearing masks (surgical or N95) was plainly suspect. Loads of research has come out saying it does help in slowing down transmission.
To be honest I think the approach Sweden have taken is right given the information that's available.
It's not so much that "oh well a lot of these people are old or quite unwell so would probably die soon anyway"...it's more that there is actually very little reliable evidence to suggest the lockdown measures will actually save that many of those people, and no evidence at all that many of the ones it does save will not then be just as vulnerable due to the economic impact or impact of prolonged social isolation.
Lockdown is a pretty extreme measure with dire immediate situations for a lot of people and even worse longer reaching consequences, and it's all been done on some pretty baseless modelling and very basic science/maths. The slowing down the rate of infection thing makes sense, but the problem being if you are only testing people who are already ill, and don't know how long the virus has been in the open for, you have literally NO idea how many people already have it and have already passed it on, so no idea at what point you are starting that calculation from. After a time it becomes less and less effective if enough people arlready have it, and at a certain point it becomes fairly ineffective...and we have no idea. We might already have been at that stage a week ago. It's not a plan, it's a knee jerk reaction.
In this kind of situation we really should be modelling a strategy on what reliable information there is, not just doing things and hoping they work then changing our minds as we go.
It's not so much that "oh well a lot of these people are old or quite unwell so would probably die soon anyway"...it's more that there is actually very little reliable evidence to suggest the lockdown measures will actually save that many of those people, and no evidence at all that many of the ones it does save will not then be just as vulnerable due to the economic impact or impact of prolonged social isolation.
Lockdown is a pretty extreme measure with dire immediate situations for a lot of people and even worse longer reaching consequences, and it's all been done on some pretty baseless modelling and very basic science/maths. The slowing down the rate of infection thing makes sense, but the problem being if you are only testing people who are already ill, and don't know how long the virus has been in the open for, you have literally NO idea how many people already have it and have already passed it on, so no idea at what point you are starting that calculation from. After a time it becomes less and less effective if enough people arlready have it, and at a certain point it becomes fairly ineffective...and we have no idea. We might already have been at that stage a week ago. It's not a plan, it's a knee jerk reaction.
In this kind of situation we really should be modelling a strategy on what reliable information there is, not just doing things and hoping they work then changing our minds as we go.
They didn't want the public also stockpiling something which was more needed for frontline medical workers.
Decent article on this issue:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/31/health/cdc-masks-coronavirus.html
Obviously with the supply chain of such items being under severe pressure, its probably not practical at this stage for the UK for example to prioritise masks for the gen public when the NHS is facing shortages. However again, given that masks are incredibly cheap to procure, it does beggar belief why developed countries do not have larger stocks on hand for just such a pandemic. It would not cost billions thats for sure.
So that table above. UK has added a thousand dead in just four days. From 759 to 1,789. It took 20 days to get to 759.
Bloody hell. A more than 25% increase in the daily death rate.
Aren't today's numbers including deaths at home? All the other days weren't, so the growth looks massive
Yeah I know it was based on an average. I should have put that but because the post I was quoting said it was an average I din't think I needed to say that it was 25% of a year on average day.
Not bonkers, just a con-artist.My mum is Catholic so I know they’re not all bonkers.....though she definitely is
Income is a worry everywhere, but if he’s surviving on donations then he can ask for online donations maybe? I suspect, given the ‘virus-zapping machines, that he’s just bonkers
No no no. You gotta find the numbers for total daily deaths, then covid 19 daily deaths. Then anything over 1500 is an increase. Doubt we are quite upto that 25% increase yet, unless 1500 died of something not related to covid 19.
Chances are, some of those who died due to covid 19 were likely to die soon due to health conditions, age, etc. Covid 19 may have just sped it up.
I found out some days ago that I was intolerant to perfumed soap. My hands looked like an old mans hands with loads of pockholes and zits. And it itched like hell too. Bought perfume free soap and voila. Now my hands are getting back to normal again. Maybe the same with you so try perfume free soap.
Exactly this. Everyone understands 0.1% = somebody.
Even in the event that a vaccine is created and fast tracked by early 2021 (which is far from sure) testing, approval, manufacturing, distribution and administering it to people on the scale required could take far longer. So I very much doubt many if any countries will be on full lock down for that long.
1500 is an average day in an average year.
Isn't this what the herd immunity is partially about though? Lockdown is to stop the current spread rate, by time the vaccine is out herd immunity would have a lot of people who already had it and have the immune system / antibodies to fight it off a 2nd time so the amount of people to be vaccinated would be much less and easier to cope with the demand.
Lockdown till it's all over isn't feasible. Loads of reasons stated in here, the deaths from a recession would outweigh the deaths from the virus...
Or am I understanding this wrong?
Lockdown then vaccinate everyone isn't gonna happen.
Based on Imperial College's modelling, there will be a surge once the lockdown winds down (assuming the suppression/social distancing lasts until September). We obviously won't have a a vaccine out in Nov/Dec 2020 so the only thing we can hope for is a better treatment/more ventilators being online plus more field hospital in place.
That would be good news if it turns out to be accurate (less than the initial low end estimates of 1% or more) but of course even lower would be better.
Yeah, but 300/400 covid 19 deaths in one day doesn't mean that's a 25% increase to that number. Some of those deaths would have naturally happened, virus or not?
Thanks, just got in from work and came to the thread, haven't seen all the graphs and that yet. They did expect a spike around now though due to mothers day the other week? Start or this week to end of this week was "peak time" ?
I think some level of restrictions will have to remain to keep the post lock-down spike to a minimum. I also imagine face masks, social distancing and better hygiene won't disappear overnight no matter what the regulations.
Based on Imperial College's modelling, there will be a surge once the lockdown winds down (assuming the suppression/social distancing lasts until September). We obviously won't have a a vaccine out in Nov/Dec 2020 so the only thing we can hope for is a better treatment/more ventilators being online plus more field hospital in place.
I wonder if a law that requires you to wear a face mask if you are sick could be enforced when this all settles down and they are available again?
Agreed about the vaccine. I'd say that if we had a vaccine that has been administered to much of the world by late 2021 would be impressive much less late 2020.
Couldn't form a coherent comment about this in 30 seconds....
Chinese conspira...oops.
But it will be very close to 25% as very few of that 300/400 would have died today otherwise. There might be a few who already died of Covid who would have died today of other things and there may be 1 or 2 who would have died today of their underlying conditions so perhaps the overall increase is very slightly less than 25%. I have seen people wanting to exclude people who would have died of something else in the future from the figures but that is irrelevant as it will only reduce the number of deaths on the day they would have died by 1 at some point in the future.
Read today they're testing out the old TB jab many of us had as a kid (it was pretty much retired around 2005 due to few cases) as possible treatment due to its impact on protecting the lungs.
https://nypost.com/2020/03/30/century-old-tuberculosis-vaccine-eyed-in-fight-against-coronavirus/
My crossing of fingers has always been one of the numerous being tested could actually partally work and act as a sticky plaster for next few months.
https://nypost.com/2020/03/30/century-old-tuberculosis-vaccine-eyed-in-fight-against-coronavirus/
My crossing of fingers has always been one of the numerous being tested could actually partally work and act as a sticky plaster for next few months.
They actually give a case fatality ratio (CFR) of 1.38. Which is 14 times higher than seasonal influenza. Good to see though. The worldometer data on closed cases (i.e. dead vs confirmed recovered) has been getting higher and higher. Currently almost 20%. Which is fecking scary.
The 0.66% is “infection fatality ratio” which seems to use some statistical jiggery pokery to estimate cases that aren’t confirmed. I’ve never seen an equivalent figure for flu.
I was just thinking what it would look like on a linear graph - lots of lines with all countries going almost straight up I'd assume.
This is the study btw:
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196234/covid-19-imperial-researchers-model-likely-impact/
I'm not quite sure why they assumed that restrictions will just end and things will go back to normal after a certain time. Think that might be the subject of another report they come out with? But it definitely would be a gradual easing up of restriction rather than a free for all. I think the most important thing is just society's fatigue with all this. Even 6 months is a massive ask for the current restrictions we have. Perhaps an end to the stay at home except for the people who most need it for their safety but you'd have to imagine they wouldn't open up pubs again or sport.
Regarding the masks thing, I'm not sure if they'd really police that. But there are similar mesures in the Coronavirus bill thats being proposed, not sure if its been passed yet does contain some fairly draconian measures with regard to policing the sick. Whether they actually enforce those measures remains to be seen but its definitely part of the governments agenda.
Again, though I find it a bit strange why this report seemingly glosses over the aftermath of the initial suppression. The graph clearly suggests it would only buy time and nothing else.
@Yik I've used a very similar one in army and trust me you don't want to wear it for long, I've spent 24 hours in one on a nuclear/bio excersize and it was horrible.
US doctors at press briefing expecting 100k deaths.
Shush you! I was looking forward to seeing this on my streets, Blitz spirit and all that!
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/415378
We're years away from finding out what this will mean long term, but I'd much rather be in the group to have never got it.
For anyone thinking it's just a good idea to just get it for the sake of herd immunity. It's a novel disease, we haven't got a clue what the long term effects of this disease are yet but if they're anything like the original SARS outbreak they're horrific. Even milder forms of permanent lung damage/scarring will be life changing for most young people.
We're years away from finding out what this will mean long term, but I'd much rather be in the group to have never got it.
Yes but NBC exercises require constant use. Presumably in his plan (daft as it is) you could take it off at times. I can remember trying to drink with my NBC mask on. It was fecking ridiculous hooking the pipe up from the mask to my water bottle.
Last year in week 14 there were an estimated 10126 all-cause deaths. You divide that by 7 you get 1446.5 so if other deaths replicate last year which is a stretch then 393 on top of that would be a 27% giving a margin of people who would have died on the same day regardless of whether they got Covid19 or not.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/weekly-all-cause-mortality-surveillance-2018-to-2019
Shane Goldmacher(@ShaneGoldmacher)
This White House briefing room slide lists as "goals" 100,000 to 240,000 deaths.
Breathtaking. pic.twitter.com/CrajjVGqVf
March 31, 2020
This White House briefing room slide lists as "goals" 100,000 to 240,000 deaths.
Breathtaking. pic.twitter.com/CrajjVGqVf
March 31, 2020
Trump won't like to be remembered as being responsible for the death of over 100k Americans.
Mid 2021 at earliest. I guess countries who are prepared to have a lot of sick people can start getting out of lockdowns around the second half of this year. Poland will not be one of them, I don’t expect us to get back to normal this year at all. We are barely prepared for 300 cases a day.
I don’t really think there will be a choice.
We are all stressed I think is the answer. I know I'm not managing my stress that well.
I didn't think your original post deserved more than someone saying why log scales were used and I think under normal circumstances that is what would have happened.
So lets all let this lie and carry on shall we (that was directed to everyone BTW)?