[COVID-19] General Discussion

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

We've got a case on campus now, love to see it

 

[Amiga500]

Some stupid feckin eejit came back from Northern Italy and decided to go back into uni in QUB (Belfast).

Dunno how many have it off the clown. Will find that out over coming week (or so) I guess.

 

[bertiec]

To put it in prospective, in the time corona has been around approx 75k have died from flu and 1 every 10 secs from tb.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

To put it in prospective, in the time corona has been around approx 75k have died from flu and 1 every 10 secs from tb.

Bad use of stats though, those have been around a lot longer than a month and a half and weren't isolated then either.

 

[Yoshimitsu]

To put it in prospective, in the time corona has been around approx 75k have died from flu and 1 every 10 secs from tb.

I'm uncomfortable with this narrative.

In the U.K the average mortality rate of seasonal influenza is approximately 0.1%. This virus seems to around 1% with an upper estimate of 3%. Seasonal flu in the U.K has killed an average of 17,000 people per year (public health England). The chief medical officer (Chris Whitty) of the U.K believes that 80% of the U.K population could be infected and 1% of those could die. That's about 650,000 individuals or 38 and a half years worth of "normal" flu deaths.

And of course people aren't going to stop dying of TB and flu either.

On edit bad maths need correcting.... Originally forgot to deal with the 80%. So allowing for 60 million population that's 48,000,000 infected 480,000 dead which equates to 28.23 years worth of seasonal flu deaths

 

[TRF_Olyy]

Been through three international airports and only Tokyo you'd know there any illness and even then the hazmat suit section was solely for flights from South Korea and China

 

[TommiG88]

I'm uncomfortable with this narrative.

In the U.K the average mortality rate of seasonal influenza is approximately 0.1%. This virus seems to around 1% with an upper estimate of 3%. Seasonal flu in the U.K has killed an average of 17,000 people per year (public health England). The chief medical officer (Chris Whitty) of the U.K believes that 80% of the U.K population could be infected and 1% of those could die. That's about 650,000 individuals or 38 and a half years worth of "normal" flu deaths.

And of course people aren't going to stop dying of TB and flu either.

On edit bad maths need correcting.... Originally forgot to deal with the 80%. So allowing for 60 million population that's 48,000,000 infected 480,000 dead which equates to 28.23 years worth of seasonal flu deaths

Chief medical officer believes.... but you forgot to mention that this has also been stated as worst case scenario, which they also believe won't materialise.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

Just read that the game will be indefinitely postponed. Formal announcement later.

Shame, but sensible decision and better than playing behind closed doors.

 

[ncurd]

Yup better to postpone and play. The main thing you want to do discourage fans from hotspots travelling. The game still being played means people from Northern Italy may still travel to Rome. Now it decreases those chances further although they may still attend for fun.

 

[Leinster Fan]

Sensible thing to do with games involved with Italy.

Don't know how many cases there are in France/UK but those games can probably still go ahead.

 

[Yoshimitsu]

Chief medical officer believes.... but you forgot to mention that this has also been stated as worst case scenario, which they also believe won't materialise.

That's an entirely fair challenge. However, to get to a figure of 17,000 deaths as per seasonal flu you'd be looking at 1.7 million infections (with a mortality of 1% ). That would equate to 2.83% of the general population becoming infected.

At the moment based on observable cases the WHO have stated that 3.4% of confirmed cases have died. It's recognised that this cannot be used as reliable mortality figure as mild / asymptomatic cases are probably massively under reported. Some believe that Covid-19 may in fact be no worse in terms of mortality than flu. However, there is reasonable consensus on 1%. That's significantly more deadly than seasonal flu (approx 10x)

However, the points still stand. It's this + flu not either / or. The NHS can barely cope with the latter. It's going to be significantly challenged by Covid-19 should it take any meaningful hold. Given the government's stated strategy of contain, delay then mitigate it'll be interesting to see if / when they move to the latter.

on edit 12:24 - Well that aged badly. That time is now. Containment is no longer where we stand. We're now in "delay". I'd expect some impacts on transport / mass gathering at this stage.

 

[Amiga500]

Given the government's stated strategy of contain, delay then mitigate it'll be interesting to see if / when they move to the latter.

on edit 12:24 - Well that aged badly. That time is now. Containment is no longer where we stand. We're now in "delay". I'd expect some impacts on transport / mass gathering at this stage.

No shock there.

It would be generous to describe the containment "strategy" as half-assed. A harsher critic might say it was embarrassingly ill-considered.


edit: And this is another bare-faced lie from Johnson:

But Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the government's scientific advisory group for emergencies (Sage) had told him that closing schools and stopping big gatherings "don't work as well perhaps as people think in stopping the spread".

He told ITV's This Morning programme: "One of the theories is perhaps you could take it on the chin, take it all in one go and allow the disease to move through the population without really taking as many draconian measures. I think we need to strike a balance."

I suppose its consistent with Brexit - he didn't give two flying f**ks if it meant people dying due to drug shortages there either.

 

[ncurd]

No shock there.

It would be generous to describe the containment "strategy" as half-assed. A harsher critic might say it was embarrassingly ill-considered.

Or possibly they are being proactive in upping the scale and response? They raised it immediately once they were sure it was being passed without an area of known origin.

The UK is at 90 cases or 0.00000135% of the polulation

Italy has 3500 cases or 0.0000496% of the population.

So they have 36.74 times more cases in Italy per capita and only just put restrictions you were asking for earlier this week whereas the UK are moving to those stages now.

In comparison, to most other nations we are appear to be doing more in response than less.


Of course as I've pointed there out there are other factors, population density in the UK is 1.34 times higher in the UK which increases risk of exposure. How that effects any model is well beyond my expertise.



I'm all up giving Johnson a kicking he is definitely saying things contrary to what to the briefings people are giving of the measures they are taking. But I think its way too premature to suggest the civil service, NHS and other bodies involved aren't doing anything other than their level best to prevent a extremely serious outbreak directly proportionate to the actual extent of outbreak currently within this country. Lets also remember most experts think a serious outbreak (but lower than the worst case scenario) as inevitable its all about mitigation in response to stage of outbreak we are at.

 

[Yoshimitsu]

Or possibly they are being proactive in upping the scale and response? They raised it immediately once they were sure it was being passed without an area of known origin.

The UK is at 90 cases or 0.00000135% of the polulation

Italy has 3500 cases or 0.0000496% of the population.

So they have 36.74 times more cases in Italy per capita and only just put restrictions you were asking for earlier this week whereas the UK are moving to those stages now.

In comparison, to most other nations we are appear to be doing more in response than less.


Of course as I've pointed there out there are other factors, population density in the UK is 1.34 times higher in the UK which increases risk of exposure. How that effects any model is well beyond my expertise.



I'm all up giving Johnson a kicking he is definitely saying things contrary to what to the briefings people are giving of the measures they are taking. But I think its way too premature to suggest the civil service, NHS and other bodies involved aren't doing anything other than their level best to prevent a extremely serious outbreak directly proportionate to the actual extent of outbreak currently within this country. Lets also remember most experts think a serious outbreak (but lower than the worst case scenario) as inevitable its all about mitigation in response to stage of outbreak we are at.

Well yesterday the Department of Health and Social Care stated the would no longer be publishing location details daily as the numbers made it too hard to do other than on a weekly basis which is downright incompetent compared to say how Singapore are managing it and has consequences for people. They rightly got a belting in the media and rowed back.

Today? They simply failed to publish updated numbers at all as they state they will:

"The Department of Health and Social Care will be publishing updated data on this page every day at 2pm until further notice. This data is accurate as of 9am on the day of publication."

I'm afraid I don't share your views regarding the competence of the state apparatus. I guess that doesn't mean they aren't trying......

 

[ncurd]

Singapore has the 3rd highest GDP per capita in the world, >10% of our population, a highly authoritarian government and one the beat healthcare systems in the world according to WHO.

I'm not going to defend them saying they'd publish at 14:00 and at 15:45 still haven't published it. But we are talking a bureaucracy here including cross communication across several locations and needing to provide accurate data.
You also have no idea why there is a delay in that information, based on data it was decided that the government would enter the next stage in thier plan but that would been after the 9am deadline. It could be (and this is purely speculation) that the number has risen so much that it could induce panic and requires a better detailed statement than just raw figures.

The NHS has had chronic underfunding for years (and similar departments) which is news to nobody who cares. However in terms of a response to present it can only be measured on facilities on what it capable of doing, we can't despite what some political leaders think just magic up doctors and nurses from thin air.

 

[Amiga500]

Or possibly they are being proactive in upping the scale and response? They raised it immediately once they were sure it was being passed without an area of known origin.

"Proactive" in upping the scale and response? Wise up and start to think for yourself instead of drinking the kool-aid.

They are still reacting and are about 4 weeks behind where they need to be in terms of response.


What percentage of the workforce do you think travels abroad every month? Do you think its more than 10%? How much of that percentage could work-around not being able to travel?

Anyone coming back from any infected country should have been in 2 week isolation. Disruptive? Yep. But a damn sight less disruptive than "up to 20% of the workforce being off at any one time".
Even shutting down all flights for 6 months would be far less disruptive than "up to 20% of the workforce being off at any one time" as the internal economy could have rumbled on largely unabated.


For all the supposed brains running this, they've made a right f**k up of it by failing to grasp the two big fundamentals.
1. Find the chokepoint and make sure you have absolute control of that.
The chokepoint was the borders. Now its loose across the country and they have pretty much no control of what happens next.
2. The earlier you are on top of it, the smaller the problem will be.
The more it infects, the greater the subsequent spread, the larger the pressure there is on the NHS and the more economic disruption there will be.

 

[Amiga500]

The NHS has had chronic underfunding for years (and similar departments) which is news to nobody who cares.

Agreed 110%.

However in terms of a response to present it can only be measured on facilities on what it capable of doing, we can't despite what some political leaders think just magic up doctors and nurses from thin air.

All the more reason to come down hard to start with and not give the damn thing an inch to breath.


Instead they've went softly softly trying to minimise disruption - which will only lead to disruption a hundred-fold larger than anything they would have caused by acting.


'Tis like the mayor at Amity. "The beach ain't closing 'cos its too disruptive Chief."

 

[bertiec]

Bad use of stats though, those have been around a lot longer than a month and a half and weren't isolated then either.

as I said, in the same time. my family and I have worked at a uni since 1965 my father worked on the first esr and nmr machines my mother started in medical research in 68, notably on the genetic finger printing, I worked in a support role since 97. The staff are amazed at the hype to this above all other nasties.

 

[bertiec]

No shock there.

It would be generous to describe the containment "strategy" as half-assed. A harsher critic might say it was embarrassingly ill-considered.


edit: And this is another bare-faced lie from Johnson:


I suppose its consistent with Brexit - he didn't give two flying f**ks if it meant people dying due to drug shortages there either.

The only shortages so far are hrt patches, would you like me to look out for some for you.....

 

[ThebigARena]

Should be pretty quiet in here.

Please be wearing a facemask at all times whilst inside the thread.

Apply alcohol hand gel sanitizer (SOLD OUT) after typing to prevent the risk of infection.

That is all...