Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

MERS Coronavirus warning

JCC

War Hero
1601621822406.png

1601621802028.png

1601621778260.png

Source: Coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK
 
You're making a strawman argument. No-one's saying - as far as I'm aware - that we shouldn't take sensible precautions to limit the spread of this corona'.

Just like no-one's saying we ought to ban driving outright because it's a massive killer.

We impose sensible rules for driving and we ACCEPT the deaths that come from it.

A bit like what we should've done with the coronavirus.

The driving analogy is a pertinent one @terminal . As @Whey_Aye_Banzai points out though, we impose rules and accept deaths in a cost/benefit or risk matrix way.

As opposed to equating those who are advocating a proper risk analysis to be done on COVID deaths with them advocating getting rid of seatbelts, the equivalency is more those advocating for further lockdown with imposing a national 20mph speed limit.
 
The driving analogy is a pertinent one @terminal . As @Whey_Aye_Banzai points out though, we impose rules and accept deaths in a cost/benefit or risk matrix way.

As opposed to equating those who are advocating a proper risk analysis to be done on COVID deaths with them advocating getting rid of seatbelts, the equivalency is more those advocating for further lockdown with imposing a national 20mph speed limit.
The problem comes with the circular reasoning involved in saying that "only 'x' number of peopled died, therefore the measures taken to ensure that more didn't die weren't necessary".
 

It would be more useful if you included the number of tests performed each day along with the percentage of tests confirmed as positive.

There is far more widespread testing available now than there was back at the start of the year. In my neck of the woods, only patients admitted to hospital were tested back in March/April, now anyone can get tested. Numbers from March/April are likely a huge undercount.
 

JCC

War Hero
It would be more useful if you included the number of tests performed each day along with the percentage of tests confirmed as positive.

There is far more widespread testing available now than there was back at the start of the year. In my neck of the woods, only patients admitted to hospital were tested back in March/April, now anyone can get tested. Numbers from March/April are likely a huge undercount.

If you can find a good offical source for those figures, which I agree are vital in setting context, please share.

 
Which figures to you mean? The amount of tests performed per day or the suspected amount of unreported cases? If it's the latter there is no data, that's why it's unknown...
 

JCC

War Hero
You asked about " number of tests performed each day along with the percentage of tests confirmed as positive "so I dug around for these data sets:

1601628573038.png


Back in April the percentage of tests that returned postive was about 20%+.

1601629173634.png

Now its bouncing around 2%
 

Attachments

  • data_2020-Oct-01.zip
    7.7 KB · Views: 2
  • data_2020-Oct-01(1).zip
    8.4 KB · Views: 1
Was just doing some looking myself using the Scot Gov numbers Coronavirus (COVID-19): trends in daily data - gov.scot
Date notifiedNew casesReported
Daily% +
02/04/20202921,11826
03/04/20203991,52626
04/04/20203441,52223
05/04/20203613,01812
06/04/20202551,00625
07/04/20202681,09724
08/04/20203361,55522
09/04/20203921,64424
10/04/20203181,39123
11/04/20203151,58020
21/09/2020​
255​
3,330​
8
22/09/2020​
383​
4,492​
9
23/09/2020​
486​
5,900​
8
24/09/2020​
465​
5,896​
8
25/09/2020​
558​
5,834​
10
26/09/2020​
714​
5,668​
13
27/09/2020​
344​
3,992​
9
28/09/2020​
222​
3,753​
6
29/09/2020​
806​
3,607​
22
30/09/2020​
640​
5,349​
12
01/10/2020​
668​
7,321​
9
 
You asked about " number of tests performed each day along with the percentage of tests confirmed as positive "so I dug around for these data sets:

View attachment 508965

Back in April the percentage of tests that returned postive was about 20%+.

View attachment 508973
Now its bouncing around 2%

Makes you wonder how many people had this at the start of the year....

No idea why the X axis on those runs backwards though.
 

JCC

War Hero
Makes you wonder how many people had this at the start of the year....

No idea why the X axis on those runs backwards though.

Which the Herd Immunity people would argue was the reason that both the 1st and 2nd "outbreaks" seemed to naturally peak then decline with or without lockdowns.

Easy enough to resort the data by date but I couldn't be bothered.
 
Which the Herd Immunity people would argue was the reason that both the 1st and 2nd "outbreaks" seemed to naturally peak then decline with or without lockdowns.

Easy enough to resort the data by date but I couldn't be bothered.

Decided to do some more digging to try and get some idea of how many people may have actually had this, it's not as easy to find and I've been distracted by actually having to do some work.

Sero prevalence in London estimated at 15% which is 1.35 million people against a UK Gov confirmed positive total for UK of 453,000.... And that's just London.

Fair to assume the true number of positives in UK could be measured in the millions.
 

JCC

War Hero
Decided to do some more digging to try and get some idea of how many people may have actually had this, it's not as easy to find and I've been distracted by actually having to do some work.

Sero prevalence in London estimated at 15% which is 1.35 million people against a UK Gov confirmed positive total for UK of 453,000.... And that's just London.

Fair to assume the true number of positives in UK could be measured in the millions.

Truely I haven't a clue. When you introduce T-cell immunity, immunity for previous exposure to coronoviruses, and False Negatives then I'm not sure anybody does.

I think the Belgiums have scrapped PCR tests as a metric and have reverted to hospitalisations.

For UK/Ireland I'm not sure what the strategy is - lockdowns only postpone cases so are useful for managing the load on the medical resources?
 

Niamac

GCM
It’s still one MILLION grandmothers, grandfathers, uncles, aunts, mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, friends, colleagues. One million deaths of loved ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
True but I did say statistically. Remember the Stalin quote; "One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic."
 
Wee Cranky fae Scortlaend sticking the boot in to Margaret Ferrier saying she should resign as an MP. And so she should.
 

Niamac

GCM
Thanks. Not my usual reading but informative. We have had to limit some life chances as a wave of disease deadly to some nearly overwhelms the NHS. Probably there have been invidious decisions taken a patient level by stressed medical staff. There are limits of resource some caused by incompetence or bad planning and that will lead to people getting sub-optimal treatment. As a Western nation with a good health service we have over the 55 years successfully extended the lives of the population. However many will be susceptible and are being treated for chronic illnesses. The situation for men is shown;
1601644084267.png

The "peak" year for male death in 2018 is around 87; a great improvement from 1963 but probably leaving us with a larger cohort vulnerable to novel diseases. We are getting perilously close to seriously disturbing the balance of society by mortgaging the future of the young. I would not be surprised to see a rising level of disobedience at both political and personal level. You cannot command your way out of this; you have to take people with you.
 

Latest Threads

Top