Coronavirus - Page 2

nomadking · 08-10-2020, 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman

Arguably those "never badly affected" implemented all the appropriate measures you should do in a pandemic to get the virus under control.

So where in the past explorers have been blamed for introducing new infectious diseases to a newly found area, the reason that population didn't previously have the disease was because they had taken "appropriate measures"?

Undeniable fact and just plain common sense, that the number of cases is directly connected to the number of people introducing it into the country and giving it to others.
Not a lot governments can do about this sort of thing.
Link

Quote:

Inspectors have demanded improvements from a hospital after a report highlighted a number of failings over Covid-19 precautions.
The Care Quality Commission inspected the emergency department and medical wards at the William Harvey Hospital in Ashford, Kent, on 11 August.
Staff were seen to be wearing masks incorrectly, not using hand sanitiser and not adhering to social distancing.

Link

Quote:

Its preliminary analysis shows there was “a very large number of importations due to inbound international travel”, with around a third of cases estimated to have come from Spain.
The study, which has not been peer-reviewed, states the coronavirus outbreak did not begin from one source – more commonly known as “patient zero” – but that there were at least 1,356 separate points of origin, which scientists warned is likely to be an underestimate.

If another country had just 13 "separate points of origin" then they would've had in the region of 1/100th of the number the cases the UK had.

**Mick** · 08-10-2020, 17:18

BREAKING: Coronavirus: UK records 17,540 new cases - 3,000 more than yesterday

**Damien** · 08-10-2020, 17:20

Getting pretty quite escalations now..

Mad Max · 08-10-2020, 17:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

BREAKING: Coronavirus: UK records 17,540 new cases - 3,000 more than yesterday

This is down to more testing.

jfman · 08-10-2020, 17:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad Max

This is down to more testing.

I'm guessing this isn't serious.

**Damien** · 08-10-2020, 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad Max

This is down to more testing.

Nah, the testing has been static for a while now: https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/testing

Mad Max · 08-10-2020, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman

I'm guessing this isn't serious.

My point being ( and yes I should have said)

I'm wondering how high the infection rates actually were back in March / April, when we didn't have testing.

jfman · 08-10-2020, 17:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad Max

My point being ( and yes I should have said)

I'm wondering how high the infection rates actually were back in March / April, when we didn't have testing.

Okay that's a fair point.

jonbxx · 08-10-2020, 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad Max

My point being ( and yes I should have said)

I'm wondering how high the infection rates actually were back in March / April, when we didn't have testing.

Yeah, if we look at hospitalisations, we're at around 17% of the peak earlier in the year (I picked hopsitalisations as deaths is not a good indicator as we're getting better at treatment). Extrapolating to testing we would expect over 100,000 cases per day if the testing rate was the same back in March/April time. Yikes!

**Mick** · 08-10-2020, 21:08

BREAKING: Europe reported 96,996 new cases, the highest total for the region ever recorded by the World Health Organisation.

Global deaths rose by 5,514 to a total of 1.05 million.

The previous WHO record for new cases was 330,340 on Oct. 2. The agency reported a record 12,393 deaths on April 17.

As a region, Europe is now reporting more cases than India, Brazil or the United States.

https://www.reuters.com/article/heal...source=twitter

Pierre · 08-10-2020, 21:36

And the death rate remains the same.

Since the rise in infections started 3 weeks ago now, death rates still below 100.

Since then the infection rate is now 4x that what it was three weeks ago and given that 10 days is the intervention threshold, really, if deaths, hospital admissions and ventilations have not increased dramatically by this time next week is anyone going to have a lightbulb moment?

nomadking · 08-10-2020, 22:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre

And the death rate remains the same.

Since the rise in infections started 3 weeks ago now, death rates still below 100.

Since then the infection rate is now 4x that what it was three weeks ago and given that 10 days is the intervention threshold, really, if deaths, hospital admissions and ventilations have not increased dramatically by this time next week is anyone going to have a lightbulb moment?

So 637 UK Hospital Admissions daily and rising, are nothing?
Link

Quote:

The most recent daily figure for England shows 524 people admitted to hospital with Covid-19 - double the number two weeks ago.
On Thursday, Health Minister Nadine Dorries predicted hospitals would reach a "critical" point within 10 days.

jfman · 08-10-2020, 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre

And the death rate remains the same.

Since the rise in infections started 3 weeks ago now, death rates still below 100.

Since then the infection rate is now 4x that what it was three weeks ago and given that 10 days is the intervention threshold, really, if deaths, hospital admissions and ventilations have not increased dramatically by this time next week is anyone going to have a lightbulb moment?

The percentage increases in all of those things are high. That means we are only a matter of days/weeks before crisis without intervention. There’s no ‘living with the virus’ to be seen here.

**Paul** · 09-10-2020, 15:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pierre

And the death rate remains the same.

Since the rise in infections started 3 weeks ago now, death rates still below 100.

and lets not forget, the UK 'death rate' is nonsense anyway.

As the reports keep telling you

Quote:

A further xx people died after testing positive for the virus within 28 days.

They did not necessarily die from the virus, they simply died with 28 days of a positive test. They could have been runover, died from natural causes, had a heart attack, accident, or any other number of things. In fact, they could have had no CV symptoms at all.

Why on earth cant we simply count those actually killed by the virus.

papa smurf · 09-10-2020, 15:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul

and lets not forget, the UK 'death rate' is nonsense anyway.

As the reports keep telling you

They did not necessarily die from the virus, they simply died with 28 days of a positive test. They could have been runover, died from natural causes, had a heart attack, accident, or any other number of things. In fact, they could have had no CV symptoms at all.

Why on earth cant we simply count those actually killed by the virus.

The truth wouldn't frighten the gullible and little children would it.