SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

[Pogue Mahone]

https://www.businessinsider.com/cov...tourists-holiday-scientists-2020-10?r=US&IR=T

"The majority of new COVID-19 cases in Europe stem from a mutated strain of the coronavirus that has been traced back to Spain and was spread across the continent over the summer by tourists, scientists said in a report Thursday.

The variant most likely originated in farm workers in northeastern Spain, where it was first recorded in June, they said.

The team of scientists from the University of Basel, ETH Zürich in Basel, and SeqCOVID in Spain said a suspected "superspreader" event accounted for early proliferation of the virus, which was then spread abroad by tourists and other travelers."

By mutated strain it just means a slight variant they've traced, it's still the same virus and just as deadly. They change slightly all the time but it's still largely the same. Think of it as an id tag.

Interesting stuff. Makes me feel even more pissed off at the selfish tossers who couldn’t do without their annual pilgrimage to the Costa Del Sol.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

The stats are definatley being 'massaged' lets say.
If you die from any regular death but you have had Covid at some point in the last 28 days - then you are logged as being killed as a Covid death, which is ridiculous.
Lockdowns inevitably take the pressure away from the NHS but having spoke to an ICU nurse, its not even 10% as busy as it was a few months back - despite what stats are being thrown out there.

We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please'' except those at risk of dying from it, diabetics and so on.... they must be told to shield. Might not seem fair, but the chances of your average Joe needing a ventilator is incredibly slim. He will just be a tad poorly for a week or 2 and in many cases, will be well enough to work from home, whereas an asthmatic will almost certainly need the care.

You need to talk to more than just one ICU nurse, evidently.

On ward 26 - one of three dedicated Covid recovery units - nurse Mairead Meenan also expressed concerns.
The 51 year old from Creggan in Derry worked her way through the first wave of the pandemic but said it is now "completely different".
"We are on our knees at work," she said.
"People are coming in and they are so, so sick - it's completely different from the last time, it's scary watching them."

 

[0le]

So regarding this article:
https://english.elpais.com/society/...he-coronavirus-is-spread-through-the-air.html

I had a look at that...

These are respiratory droplets that are less than 100 micrometers in diameter that can remain suspended in the air for hours

In a quiescent environment, those large droplets will still settle fairly quickly due to gravity. The droplets which remain suspended for hours are of the order of about 1 micrometer in size and this is largely because of the fact they have a very small terminal velocity and are susceptible to Brownian motion. You can see sources for that here:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bubbles-Drops-Particles-Mechanical-Engineering/dp/0486445801
https://journals.ametsoc.org/jas/article/6/4/243/37442

What may happen is that the liquid content in the droplets evaporates more quickly than the droplet settles, leaving behind a solid particulate which is smaller and of perhaps of the order of 1 micron. This depends on the initial conditions of the droplets.

Droplets
These are particles that are larger than 300 micrometers and, due to air currents, fall to the ground in seconds

This is just factually incorrect. First of all, a droplet is just any small quantity of liquid. There is no obvious reason to make an arbitrary cut-off at 300um. A 1micrometer sized quantity of liquid is just as much a droplet as a 500micrometer one for example. Secondly, droplets of that size in quiescent air would settle quickly due to gravity. If you had air "currents", they may or may not settle quickly, depending on the strength of the air "currents". It is non-trivial as well. There is not an obvious linear relationship. It is actually non-linear. There is a lot of physics involved here and the answer is not so clear without additional information about the air flow. Some of the major work on studying settling velocity of particles/droplets is here:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...c-turbulence/E1D4020806EB90D78A0073359D234728
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...-simulations/377D142DD7EA77E4F59AAEB107E0A659

These aerosols, if not diffused through ventilation, become increasingly concentrated, which increases the risk of infection.

Diffusion is a molecular transport process. What they mean is advection or they can say convection as well. Better to actually just say "dispersed" because you don't normally use those previous words when describing this type of physics.

Methodology: we calculated the risk of infection from Covid-19 using a tool developed by José Luis Jiménez, an atmospheric chemist at the University of Colorado and an expert in the chemistry and dynamics of air particles. Scientists around the world have reviewed this Estimator, which is based on published methods and data to estimate the importance of different measurable factors involved in an infection scenario. However, the Estimator’s accuracy is limited as it relies on numbers that are still uncertain – numbers that describe, for example, how many infectious viruses are emitted by one infected person. The Estimator assumes that people practice the two-meter social distancing rule and that no one is immune. Our calculation is based on a default value for the general population, which includes a wide range of masks (surgical and cloth), and a loud voice, which increases the amount of aerosols expelled.

Why have they used an arbitrary tool rather than established CFD practices which have been used for decades?

 

[Pexbo]

The stats are definatley being 'massaged' lets say.
If you die from any regular death but you have had Covid at some point in the last 28 days - then you are logged as being killed as a Covid death, which is ridiculous.
Lockdowns inevitably take the pressure away from the NHS but having spoke to an ICU nurse, its not even 10% as busy as it was a few months back - despite what stats are being thrown out there.

We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please'' except those at risk of dying from it, diabetics and so on.... they must be told to shield. Might not seem fair, but the chances of your average Joe needing a ventilator is incredibly slim. He will just be a tad poorly for a week or 2 and in many cases, will be well enough to work from home, whereas an asthmatic will almost certainly need the care.

Why are you so desperate for there to be more to this than there actually seems?

It’s a pandemic of a virus that spreads rapidly and kills a percentage of those it infects. Letting people assess their own chances and just get on with it if they please would have a devastating effect. It’s exponential growth, we were up to 1.5k deaths a day in the first spike and a lock down got it under control. If we did as you say, that figure could be 10k deaths a day, it could be 50k.

These measures exist for a reason, the government clearly detest them so why do you think they persist?

 

[Jippy]

Oregon health official dressed as clown while announcing coronavirus deaths

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...mOtYmLGhXmeeXf5ANS-OGQTzp6-_Vhu-1c4dCnXIH0q4s

 

[prateik]

Is that really true?

I'm guessing it wont include people dying of obvious other causes..
Deaths lag infection by several weeks .. 2-8 weeks is what I remember reading.. There was someone here who posted data from the recent cases in Italy and it said the average gap between infection and death was about 38 days.

I am not sure how the UK is counting it.. but if they arent counting any deaths after 28 days of infection as Covid deaths, then they are almost certainly missing a few..

And you can always look at the excess death data.. There is no reason to believe the death figure is being inflated. Unless you have a large collection of tinfoil hats.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

So regarding this article:
https://english.elpais.com/society/...he-coronavirus-is-spread-through-the-air.html

I had a look at that...



In a quiescent environment, those large droplets will still settle fairly quickly due to gravity. The droplets which remain suspended for hours are of the order of about 1 micrometer in size and this is largely because of the fact they have a very small terminal velocity and are susceptible to Brownian motion. You can see sources for that here:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bubbles-Drops-Particles-Mechanical-Engineering/dp/0486445801
https://journals.ametsoc.org/jas/article/6/4/243/37442

What may happen is that the liquid content in the droplets evaporates more quickly than the droplet settles, leaving behind a solid particulate which is smaller and of perhaps of the order of 1 micron. This depends on the initial conditions of the droplets.



This is just factually incorrect. First of all, a droplet is just any small quantity of liquid. There is no obvious reason to make an arbitrary cut-off at 300um. A 1micrometer sized quantity of liquid is just as much a droplet as a 500micrometer one for example. Secondly, droplets of that size in quiescent air would settle quickly due to gravity. If you had air "currents", they may or may not settle quickly, depending on the strength of the air "currents". It is non-trivial as well. There is not an obvious linear relationship. It is actually non-linear. There is a lot of physics involved here and the answer is not so clear without additional information about the air flow. Some of the major work on studying settling velocity of particles/droplets is here:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...c-turbulence/E1D4020806EB90D78A0073359D234728
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...-simulations/377D142DD7EA77E4F59AAEB107E0A659



Diffusion is a molecular transport process. What they mean is advection or they can say convection as well. Better to actually just say "dispersed" because you don't normally use those previous words when describing this type of physics.



Why have they used an arbitrary tool rather than established CFD practices which have been used for decades?

Errors in the phraseology in the article aside (which you might expect in a lay publication covering science) do you see any obvious problems with their main findings?

 

[Pexbo]

Oregon health official dressed as clown while announcing coronavirus deaths

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...mOtYmLGhXmeeXf5ANS-OGQTzp6-_Vhu-1c4dCnXIH0q4s

One for the hypernormalisation thread that is

 

[SiRed]

You need to talk to more than just one ICU nurse, evidently.

likewise!

 

[SiRed]

Why are you so desperate for there to be more to this than there actually seems?

It’s a pandemic of a virus that spreads rapidly and kills a percentage of those it infects. Letting people assess their own chances and just get on with it if they please would have a devastating effect. It’s exponential growth, we were up to 1.5k deaths a day in the first spike and a lock down got it under control. If we did as you say, that figure could be 10k deaths a day, it could be 50k.

These measures exist for a reason, the government clearly detest them so why do you think they persist?

I'm definitely not desperate for there to more to it. Quite the opposite. I just feel we are doing more harm than good in the long run by locking people away, limiting freedoms, crippling the economy.
I was worried what type of world my children were growing into before this pandemic but they will be the ones paying for this, and their children too. A snowball effect. Its going to be a miserable world long after this virus has gone because of the damage we are causing to our finances.... Maybe it wont be as bad as i think as all countries will be on their knees, and wealth is all relative but that is the fear i have. Im ok - ive had my younger years and will die one day knowing that the last half of my innings were a bit of a mess but atleast it was good before the pandemic - My kids wont have that, or might not have that and i feel bad about that!

 

[0le]

Errors in the phraseology in the article aside (which you might expect in a lay publication covering science) do you see any obvious problems with their main findings?

I can't speak about the absolute numbers, but yes, over some period of time, the suspended particles will cover the entire room. But it is already a well known fact and not something mysterious or ground breaking in itself. See the spoiler below for example.

EDIT: The parts about ventilation, whilst probably not documented, are obvious and not surprising.

Spoiler

Chapter 1 of "A first counrse in turbulence" collaborates this as well (page 9):
https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=A+First+Course+in+Turbulence+

According to Lumley, without any bulk air motion, it takes of the order of 100 hours for heat to diffuse by molecular processes alone from a radiator in a 5x5x5m room. With turbulence, this can take minutes. In reality, there will always be some weak bulk air motion, you just don't feel it, so a few hours sounds reasonable.

The motion of particles of the order of 1 micron is analogous in some respects to the way the heat disperses and such particles are called tracers. You do need to be careful and some people have characterised which particles can behave as tracers and under which fluids conditions:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0957-0233/8/12/005/meta

What probably makes this article noteworthy is they give precise numbers about how many people become infected, but I can't comment about the validity of those numbers, nor how they are obtained. The convention in the past for engineering problems is to use well established CFD methods, which have pros and cons, but to varying degrees of success, they simulate the flow of air and sometimes the inertial particles/droplets. My guess is that this article uses a mathematical model of some sorts and not a simulation as such.

 

[Hernandez - BFA]

Half of them look like the overweight diabetics the virus will be licking its lips at, the other half look like Millwall fans who are upset they haven't been able to have a fight for the last 6 months.

 

[Brwned]

I'm guessing it wont include people dying of obvious other causes..
Deaths lag infection by several weeks .. 2-8 weeks is what I remember reading.. There was someone here who posted data from the recent cases in Italy and it said the average gap between infection and death was about 38 days.

I am not sure how the UK is counting it.. but if they arent counting any deaths after 28 days of infection as Covid deaths, then they are almost certainly missing a few..

And you can always look at the excess death data.. There is no reason to believe the death figure is being inflated. Unless you have a large collection of tinfoil hats.

Or if you read the Daily Mail. Shameless bastards, but very effective communicators.

There's nothing inflated about the UK's numbers. The government have been very open about it for months. It was discussed openly in the media when they changed from 60 days to 28 days, with arguments against the change for the same reasons as you: it'll miss a few. But the PHE did some sound analysis on why the current method is the best balance. They still count 60 days on top.

The reality is @SiRed, we know the figures aren't inflated because of the excess death figures. Have a look at them. During the period where we had a legitimately huge number of covid deaths, so big it led you to say this yourself...

Wow - this is a statistic that i have never seen and shows the lockdowns etc as being a necessity at minimum.

...the excess deaths figures peaked right along with it. These people dying from covid were not being misreported, we had thousands of people dying every week that wouldn't have died otherwise, regardless of what they've put on the death certificate.

Now, there are fewer deaths. That's true of excess mortality, and that's true of deaths reported by covid from PHE. There's no misreporting there, no inflating of the numbers, most people that die of covid within 28 days of contracting it would not have died in the short-term if they hadn't contracted it.

But the papers are drawing your attention to the wrong figures - it's not about how many people are dying now, which is already much worse than they're portraying, it's how many will be dying if the cases continue to spread at this rate. That number could double in a fortnight, and double again in another fortnight, so by the end of November we're within the realms of 1,000 covid deaths a day, worse than the first peak, if not for restrictions. If a national lockdown is not a plausible option this time, then it's not inconceivable more people could die than last time.

And you said yourself just this week that if that many people are dying, of course we need to lockdown! Now you're saying it's no big deal, not only do we not need a lockdown, but let's open everything up?! The virus is spreading more quickly than we can manage even when we've put the worst-hit places under conditions very similar to the first lockdown. You don't need to do complicated maths to see that if we hadn't applied any restrictions since August, more people would be dying now than they were then, and many more would be infected.

A virus that spreads this quickly can't travel freely in an open society without killing hundreds of thousands of people. More than you would have in any given year from all risk factors combined. It just isn't true to say we're inflating the figures, it's not that big a deal, let's open her back up and work through the worst of it. The worst of it is worse than anything you've experienced in your lifetime. What you're hearing is that in some regions, at some point in time, things aren't so bad now while they were terrible in the first wave. But in other regions things are terrible now, and weren't so bad in the first wave. What you need is to look at the wider picture, and for that you can look beyond the UK to see where we might be heading:

In Belgium, all nonessential hospital work has been postponed to deal with an influx of new Covid-19 patients, whose numbers have nearly doubled in the past week, matching levels seen in the first wave of the pandemic in the spring.

Croatia has asked former doctors to come out of retirement to help in hospitals, while National Guard troops have flown from the United States to the Czech Republic to assist overwhelmed health care professionals there.

In the Netherlands, new coronavirus patients have had to be transferred by helicopter to Germany to relieve Dutch intensive-care units.

Across Europe, hospitals are filling up at an alarming pace that harks back to the darkest hours of the first wave of the pandemic in the spring. The authorities are scrambling to slow the spread of a virus that threatens to bring ailing health care systems to the brink of collapse.

Nearly all countries in Western Europe have reported spikes in new cases — and for several of them, including Britain, France, Italy and Spain, their highest death tolls in months.

In announcing a new nationwide lockdown in France on Wednesday, President Emmanuel Macron predicted that the second wave of the virus would be more deadly than the first.

In France, one million people are currently estimated to be infected with the coronavirus, and 2,000 new patients are hospitalized every day, according to government data, the highest numbers in the country since mid-April. Doctors have warned that hospitals won’t hold in the winter if the virus can’t be stemmed, and Mr. Macron bluntly said on Wednesday that if France couldn’t put the brakes on the pandemic, doctors would soon have to choose which Covid-19 patients to save.

In Germany, as hospitalizations have doubled in the past 10 days and nearly 1,500 patients are in intensive care, Chancellor Angela Merkel announced new lockdown measures on Wednesday as she vowed to avoid “situations that are extremely difficult.”

Exhausted health care workers and other epidemics, like the flu, that arrive in winter have led authorities to warn that the worst is yet to come. While in Western Europe, the fear of overwhelmed hospitals brought a feeling of déjà-vu from the first wave in the spring, countries in Central and Eastern Europe, which escaped the first wave relatively unscathed, have faced a frighteningly new situation.

Countries like the Czech Republic and Poland imposed tough restrictions in the spring and saw lower infections rates, but soaring cases this fall have laid bare a critical shortage of nurses, doctors, and intensive care beds. In Bulgaria, scores of health care professionals are falling ill with the virus, and an acclaimed doctor became the 19th medical professional there to die of the virus earlier this month. In the Czech Republic, where cases are rising at one of the fastest paces in Europe, Prime Minister Andrej Babis has warned that the country’s health care system could collapse before mid-November.

It is an undeniable fact that if we let this thing spread uncontrollably, the best health systems in the world would collapse. And we don't have the best health system in the world. Most average health systems are struggling to keep things together even with these absolutely absurd restrictions on normal life.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I can't speak about the absolute numbers, but yes, over some period of time, the suspended particles will cover the entire room. But it is already a well known fact and not something mysterious or ground breaking in itself. See the spoiler below for example.

EDIT: The parts about ventilation, whilst probably not documented, are obvious and not surprising.

Spoiler

Chapter 1 of "A first counrse in turbulence" collaborates this as well (page 9):
https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=A+First+Course+in+Turbulence+

According to Lumley, without any bulk air motion, it takes of the order of 100 hours for heat to diffuse by molecular processes alone from a radiator in a 5x5x5m room. With turbulence, this can take minutes. In reality, there will always be some weak bulk air motion, you just don't feel it, so a few hours sounds reasonable.

The motion of particles of the order of 1 micron is analogous in some respects to the way the heat disperses and such particles are called tracers. You do need to be careful and some people have characterised which particles can behave as tracers and under which fluids conditions:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0957-0233/8/12/005/meta

What probably makes this article noteworthy is they give precise numbers about how many people become infected, but I can't comment about the validity of those numbers, nor how they are obtained. The convention in the past for engineering problems is to use well established CFD methods, which have pros and cons, but to varying degrees of success, they simulate the flow of air and sometimes the inertial particles/droplets. My guess is that this article uses a mathematical model of some sorts and not a simulation as such.

Ok, cool. It definitely feels very speculative, even to someone like me with very little clue about the science behind it. I do think the message is useful and it’s well presented. So overall probably a good piece of journalism?

 

[Jericholyte2]

Today's UK numbers:

Positive Cases: 23,065
Deaths: 280
Patients in hospital: 10,308
Patients on ventilator beds: 957
Patients admitted in last 24hrs: 1404

 

[Maagge]

These measures exist for a reason, the government clearly detest them so why do you think they persist?

I was in an argument about that the other day as well. Literally no one who's democratically elected and who wants to be so again wants any of these restrictions. They only do it because there aren't any better options.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Today's UK numbers:

Positive Cases: 23,065
Deaths: 280
Patients in hospital: 10,308
Patients on ventilator beds: 957
Patients admitted in last 24hrs: 1404

That’s not good at all. Any idea how many discharges? i.e. how many in hospital this time yesterday?

 

[cyberman]

Hospital in Derry is now rationing oxygen to patients.

 

[SiRed]

Or if you read the Daily Mail. Shameless bastards, but very effective communicators.

There's nothing inflated about the UK's numbers. The government have been very open about it for months. It was discussed openly in the media when they changed from 60 days to 28 days, with arguments against the change for the same reasons as you: it'll miss a few. But the PHE did some sound analysis on why the current method is the best balance. They still count 60 days on top.

The reality is @SiRed, we know the figures aren't inflated because of the excess death figures. Have a look at them. During the period where we had a legitimately huge number of covid deaths, so big it led you to say this yourself...
...the excess deaths figures peaked right along with it. These people dying from covid were not being misreported, we had thousands of people dying every week that wouldn't have died otherwise, regardless of what they've put on the death certificate.

Now, there are fewer deaths. That's true of excess mortality, and that's true of deaths reported by covid from PHE. There's no misreporting there, no inflating of the numbers, most people that die of covid within 28 days of contracting it would not have died in the short-term if they hadn't contracted it.

But the papers are drawing your attention to the wrong figures - it's not about how many people are dying now, which is already much worse than they're portraying, it's how many will be dying if the cases continue to spread at this rate. That number could double in a fortnight, and double again in another fortnight, so by the end of November we're within the realms of 1,000 covid deaths a day, worse than the first peak, if not for restrictions. If a national lockdown is not a plausible option this time, then it's not inconceivable more people could die than last time.

And you said yourself just this week that if that many people are dying, of course we need to lockdown! Now you're saying it's no big deal, not only do we not need a lockdown, but let's open everything up?! The virus is spreading more quickly than we can manage even when we've put the worst-hit places under conditions very similar to the first lockdown. You don't need to do complicated maths to see that if we hadn't applied any restrictions since August, more people would be dying now than they were then, and many more would be infected.

A virus that spreads this quickly can't travel freely in an open society without killing hundreds of thousands of people. More than you would have in any given year from all risk factors combined. It just isn't true to say we're inflating the figures, it's not that big a deal, let's open her back up and work through the worst of it. The worst of it is worse than anything you've experienced in your lifetime. What you're hearing is that in some regions, at some point in time, things aren't so bad now while they were terrible in the first wave. But in other regions things are terrible now, and weren't so bad in the first wave. What you need is to look at the wider picture, and for that you can look beyond the UK to see where we might be heading:



It is an undeniable fact that if we let this thing spread uncontrollably, the best health systems in the world would collapse. And we don't have the best health system in the world. Most average health systems are struggling to keep things together even with these absolutely absurd restrictions on normal life.

Youre right - i did say that. I have a tendency to let whatever i am thinking of at the time to alter my feelings towards it all. Im struggling a bit to be honest, mentally.
Youre posts on this thread always provide clear and concise information that brings me back to a more 'less tainted' perspective as i look at the pandemic situation so I thank you for that. I probably need to have a few days away from this thread, and newspapers. Follow the rules but try to forget about whats going on outside. Hard though!

 

[F-Red]

That’s not good at all. Any idea how many discharges? i.e. how many in hospital this time yesterday?

I think that data is from Sunday, I don't believe they update that figure in the daily numbers.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Youre right - i did say that. I have a tendency to let whatever i am thinking of at the time to alter my feelings towards it all. Im struggling a bit to be honest, mentally.
Youre posts on this thread always provide clear and concise information that brings me back to a more 'less tainted' perspective as i look at the pandemic situation so I thank you for that. I probably need to have a few days away from this thread, and newspapers. Follow the rules but try to forget about whats going on outside. Hard though!

Great advice. Keep meaning to do that myself. Difficult to stick to it but would be very good for the head.

 

[decorativeed]

The stats are definatley being 'massaged' lets say.
If you die from any regular death but you have had Covid at some point in the last 28 days - then you are logged as being killed as a Covid death, which is ridiculous.
Lockdowns inevitably take the pressure away from the NHS but having spoke to an ICU nurse, its not even 10% as busy as it was a few months back - despite what stats are being thrown out there.

We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please'' except those at risk of dying from it, diabetics and so on.... they must be told to shield. Might not seem fair, but the chances of your average Joe needing a ventilator is incredibly slim. He will just be a tad poorly for a week or 2 and in many cases, will be well enough to work from home, whereas an asthmatic will almost certainly need the care.

I'm hearing the exact opposite from my friend who is an ICU nurse in Bolton. She says it's awful at the moment - too many patients and not enough staff as so many are having to self isolate, but in April she said it was unexpectedly quiet.

 

[Jericholyte2]

That’s not good at all. Any idea how many discharges? i.e. how many in hospital this time yesterday?

Yesterday's figures for patients in hospital was 9,520 - so works out at a net increase of 788, so looks like 616 were discharged / otherwise 'left' hospital.

 

[0le]

Ok, cool. It definitely feels very speculative, even to someone like me with very little clue about the science behind it. I do think the message is useful and it’s well presented. So overall probably a good piece of journalism?

The message it conveys is good, but it should not focus so much on the absolute numbers.

I had a look at the model and I may be wrong but it looks like one large excel sheet where they've collected data, played around with some numbers (based on experience, historical and present data) as best as possible and got some results:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...Pj6ytf-RpPMlJ6aXFg3PrIQBbQ/edit#gid=519189277

 

[F-Red]

I'm hearing the exact opposite from my friend who is an ICU nurse in Bolton. She says it's awful at the moment - too many patients and not enough staff as so many are having to self isolate, but in April she said it was unexpectedly quiet.

My other half works at Trafford, and they have had to take further wards for more covid patients this week. Definite increase in admissions.

 

[Brwned]

Youre right - i did say that. I have a tendency to let whatever i am thinking of at the time to alter my feelings towards it all. Im struggling a bit to be honest, mentally.
Youre posts on this thread always provide clear and concise information that brings me back to a more 'less tainted' perspective as i look at the pandemic situation so I thank you for that. I probably need to have a few days away from this thread, and newspapers. Follow the rules but try to forget about whats going on outside. Hard though!

yeah you nailed it there! Hadn't even thought about it that way but that really is the key balancing act most of us - the fortunately uninfected - have to deal with day-to-day. That and the risks of going into work and maybe bringing the infection back to your family vs. not paying the bills.

To a degree it's useful to be informed and gut-check your feeling against the evidence of the time, but doing that without sending yourself down a mental black hole is fecking hard alright! I've fallen down that whole myself this last week, no emotional trauma yet but definitely close to an all-consuming focus, much more so than before. I expected a second wave but I expected it to be easier to manage, because we're legitimately better at managing it in hospitals now. Hadn't quite considered it would be spreading much more wildly. The fact they're saying in France they're expecting it to be worse, and France's response last time was considered a legitimate catastrophe...that's got me on a ledge alright. But I think you've just pulled me out of that one, so maybe we helped each other out! Sláinte

 

[11101]

I'm hearing the exact opposite from my friend who is an ICU nurse in Bolton. She says it's awful at the moment - too many patients and not enough staff as so many are having to self isolate, but in April she said it was unexpectedly quiet.

Same in Italy. The first time round everybody was terrified of hospitals and people were staying away unless they really had to go. In the news today they are saying there are huge waits in A&E, sometimes up to 48 hours for minor stuff. People are going to hospital as normal again, and they are worried about adding to that with a huge rise in Covid admissions over the next few weeks. Wards are being reorganised and field hospitals reopened in preparation.

 

[Abizzz]

I don't understand this whole "died within 28 days of positive test" means that the results are inflated argument. An average person has a 0.009% (28/81,1x365.25) chance of dying within the next 28 days, yet the people tested with covid have 5.1% chance of dying (49955/965.340).

Other causes of people dying with it are negligible.

 

[MTF]

I don't understand this whole "died within 28 days of positive test" means that the results are inflated argument. An average person has a 0.009% (28/81,1x365.25) chance of dying within the next 28 days, yet the people tested with covid have 5.1% chance of dying (49955/965.340).

Other causes of people dying with it are negligible.

Wait. I'm not onboard with the whole "died within 28 days registered as covid = inflated numbers", but where are your 50k deaths by 965k cases to = 5% mortality from? Because that's much much higher than the other IFR estimates that are generally below 1.0% nowadays.

 

[Nytram Shakes]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

You see I've read this and my brain just can't compute it, its basically saying the government can borrow as much as it likes and there isn't a down side, that just doesn't seem to be balanced.

 

[Abizzz]

Wait. I'm not onboard with the whole "died within 28 days registered as covid = inflated numbers", but where are your 50k deaths by 965k cases to = 5% mortality from? Because that's much much higher than the other IFR estimates that are generally below 1.0% nowadays.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COVID-19_pandemic_data/United_Kingdom_medical_cases_chart

I was lazy and just googled it for Britain. This is the source google states. Having given it another thought we don't know how many of those who died died within 28 days, but I don't think it matters that much. (I used the average life expectancy of Britain as well, 81,16 years)

 

[golden_blunder]

The stats are definatley being 'massaged' lets say.
If you die from any regular death but you have had Covid at some point in the last 28 days - then you are logged as being killed as a Covid death, which is ridiculous.
Lockdowns inevitably take the pressure away from the NHS but having spoke to an ICU nurse, its not even 10% as busy as it was a few months back - despite what stats are being thrown out there.

We are all now well aware of the risks, along with the precautions to take to minimise your own personal risk - I think now is the time for the government to say - ''over to you guys, do as you please'' except those at risk of dying from it, diabetics and so on.... they must be told to shield. Might not seem fair, but the chances of your average Joe needing a ventilator is incredibly slim. He will just be a tad poorly for a week or 2 and in many cases, will be well enough to work from home, whereas an asthmatic will almost certainly need the care.

maybe you need to stop reading Facebook. There’s a pattern to your posts in this thread.
Post something verging on wummish, have it debunked, disappear for a few days to return with some other nonsense. Rinse and repeat

 

[golden_blunder]

Or if you read the Daily Mail. Shameless bastards, but very effective communicators.

There's nothing inflated about the UK's numbers. The government have been very open about it for months. It was discussed openly in the media when they changed from 60 days to 28 days, with arguments against the change for the same reasons as you: it'll miss a few. But the PHE did some sound analysis on why the current method is the best balance. They still count 60 days on top.

The reality is @SiRed, we know the figures aren't inflated because of the excess death figures. Have a look at them. During the period where we had a legitimately huge number of covid deaths, so big it led you to say this yourself...
...the excess deaths figures peaked right along with it. These people dying from covid were not being misreported, we had thousands of people dying every week that wouldn't have died otherwise, regardless of what they've put on the death certificate.

Now, there are fewer deaths. That's true of excess mortality, and that's true of deaths reported by covid from PHE. There's no misreporting there, no inflating of the numbers, most people that die of covid within 28 days of contracting it would not have died in the short-term if they hadn't contracted it.

But the papers are drawing your attention to the wrong figures - it's not about how many people are dying now, which is already much worse than they're portraying, it's how many will be dying if the cases continue to spread at this rate. That number could double in a fortnight, and double again in another fortnight, so by the end of November we're within the realms of 1,000 covid deaths a day, worse than the first peak, if not for restrictions. If a national lockdown is not a plausible option this time, then it's not inconceivable more people could die than last time.

And you said yourself just this week that if that many people are dying, of course we need to lockdown! Now you're saying it's no big deal, not only do we not need a lockdown, but let's open everything up?! The virus is spreading more quickly than we can manage even when we've put the worst-hit places under conditions very similar to the first lockdown. You don't need to do complicated maths to see that if we hadn't applied any restrictions since August, more people would be dying now than they were then, and many more would be infected.

A virus that spreads this quickly can't travel freely in an open society without killing hundreds of thousands of people. More than you would have in any given year from all risk factors combined. It just isn't true to say we're inflating the figures, it's not that big a deal, let's open her back up and work through the worst of it. The worst of it is worse than anything you've experienced in your lifetime. What you're hearing is that in some regions, at some point in time, things aren't so bad now while they were terrible in the first wave. But in other regions things are terrible now, and weren't so bad in the first wave. What you need is to look at the wider picture, and for that you can look beyond the UK to see where we might be heading:



It is an undeniable fact that if we let this thing spread uncontrollably, the best health systems in the world would collapse. And we don't have the best health system in the world. Most average health systems are struggling to keep things together even with these absolutely absurd restrictions on normal life.

Coming from you, who I’ve thought has given a very balanced, researched view in this thread, that’s a powerful post.

alas I think it will be in one ear and out the other.

 

[golden_blunder]

Youre right - i did say that. I have a tendency to let whatever i am thinking of at the time to alter my feelings towards it all. Im struggling a bit to be honest, mentally.
Youre posts on this thread always provide clear and concise information that brings me back to a more 'less tainted' perspective as i look at the pandemic situation so I thank you for that. I probably need to have a few days away from this thread, and newspapers. Follow the rules but try to forget about whats going on outside. Hard though!

My last post may have been a harsh reply to you, I apologize. I have 2 young boys myself and we’ve been cocooning since March so the idea of people running free doing whatever really irritates me as it will keep this thing going around in circles for god knows how long. A virus doesn’t have legs, it needs fresh hosts to spread so the idea of people doing whatever.. well let’s just say I’d see no end in sight till health services can’t cope and hundreds of thousands die or are left with serious long term side effects.
Every country is going to be in serious financial difficulties so from my simplistic point of view, I don’t think we should worry about the long term financial abilities of countries. They will go on.
short term yes, job losses etc but we will recover.
anyways I think @Brwned said it all better than me but good advice to, stay away from papers and FB etc for a detox. I’m currently detoxing FB for similar reasons

 

[MTF]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COVID-19_pandemic_data/United_Kingdom_medical_cases_chart

I was lazy and just googled it for Britain. This is the source google states. Having given it another thought we don't know how many of those who died died within 28 days, but I don't think it matters that much. (I used the average life expectancy of Britain as well, 81,16 years)

Oh ok, got it. Yeah the CFR is 5% for the UK per what you sent... it seems to be mainly that early on in most countries an absolute huge number of infections went undetected when tests were mainly limited to hospitals. But just so we don't get things confused, the IFR is generally estimated to be below 1.0%, or at most thereabouts. So there's not really a 5% probability of dying if one contracts covid.

 

[MTF]

My last post may have been a harsh reply to you, I apologize. I have 2 young boys myself and we’ve been cocooning since March so the idea of people running free doing whatever really irritates me as it will keep this thing going around in circles for god knows how long. A virus doesn’t have legs, it needs fresh hosts to spread so the idea of people doing whatever.. well let’s just say I’d see no end in sight till health services can’t cope and hundreds of thousands die or are left with serious long term side effects.
Every country is going to be in serious financial difficulties so from my simplistic point of view, I don’t think we should worry about the long term financial abilities of countries. They will go on.
short term yes, job losses etc but we will recover.
anyways I think @Brwned said it all better than me but good advice to, stay away from papers and FB etc for a detox. I’m currently detoxing FB for similar reasons

That is just several degrees too simplistic. Every recession has significant negative impacts on society, most notably an increase in poverty, but also often political instability that can lead to internal or external conflict. And this one is setting up to be the biggest one since 1929.

 

[Abizzz]

Oh ok, got it. Yeah the CFR is 5% for the UK per what you sent... it seems to be mainly that early on in most countries an absolute huge number of infections went undetected when tests were mainly limited to hospitals. But just so we don't get things confused, the IFR is generally estimated to be below 1.0%, or at most thereabouts. So there's not really a 5% probability of dying if one contracts covid.

Yeah, you're right, that seems to be the current scientific consensus (1.0%). I probably should have phrased that differently, or looked into it more than what I was capable of doing at the top of my head (just to check the theory for myself). I'll probably stick to the CFR though because it's easier to grasp for those who are convinced the numbers are inflated. (and myself)

 

[golden_blunder]

That is just several degrees too simplistic. Every recession has significant negative impacts on society, most notably an increase in poverty, but also often political instability that can lead to internal or external conflict. And this one is setting up to be the biggest one since 1929.

I know it’s simplistic, purely from a financial point of view every country will be in the same boat. I am off course not taking into account the things you note

 

[MTF]

I know it’s simplistic, purely from a financial point of view every country will be in the same boat. I am off course not taking into account the things you note

Yes, the majority of countries are/will be in pretty rough situations. But that tends to make outcomes worse, not better. It might feel like crap to be the one country in a recession while everyone else booms, but in a practical sense it makes it all the more likely in a globalized economy that exactly the strong activity in other places and willingness of investors to take risk can help a country going through an individual recession to be pulled out. Everyone in recession risks become a negative feedback loop, which is part of what happened in the 1930s.

 

[Sarni]

I'm guessing it wont include people dying of obvious other causes..
Deaths lag infection by several weeks .. 2-8 weeks is what I remember reading.. There was someone here who posted data from the recent cases in Italy and it said the average gap between infection and death was about 38 days.

I am not sure how the UK is counting it.. but if they arent counting any deaths after 28 days of infection as Covid deaths, then they are almost certainly missing a few..

And you can always look at the excess death data.. There is no reason to believe the death figure is being inflated. Unless you have a large collection of tinfoil hats.

Agree with all of the above. I’ve heard many arguments about doctors putting covid in death certificate even if death is from other causes but that wouldn’t explain excess deaths. I’ve had people trying to convince me that excess deaths are purely from lack of medical assistance on other issues due to hospitals only caring about covid patients but again, this cannot explain the magnitude of excess deaths.