Coronavirus (OLD)

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Chris

On the contrary - there are very early signs in these figures that the curve is flattening. There is no evidence of a doubling of mortality on either a three-day or two-day trend here. Deaths per day are going up, but not by much.

The only figure we can rely on is the number of deaths, rather than some statto's 'flat curve'. Sad fact is there have been more deaths in the UK in the last 24 hours than any day in Spain and Italy. And we're ignoring any deaths outside hospitals e.g. care homes.

Originally Posted by Mr K

The only figure we can rely on is the number of deaths, rather than some statto's 'flat curve'. Sad fact is there have been more deaths in the UK in the last 24 hours than any day in Spain and Italy. And we're ignoring any deaths outside hospitals e.g. care homes.

I’m referring to the number of deaths.

And yes, I know once the ONS has had time to compile more comprehensive figures they will turn out to be rather higher. That however is a red herring here and now. The best means we have of determining how the virus is spreading is by counting hospital deaths. To maintain a consistent measure we will have to continue monitoring hospital deaths in the same way, even once we have access to the ONS research.

As of today, hospital deaths in the UK are not doubling every two days. They are not doubling every three days. This is the first indication of the virus *not* spreading exponentially. It is the first indication that government intervention is slowing the spread, or “flattening the curve” as they say.

This is an observation based on facts. If you can contradict the observation, based on facts, rather than your disdain for the party of government, I’d love to hear it.

[1andrew1]

Some good info here from the FT, and it's free for all to read. The number of deaths continues to rise each day in the UK and US but decline in Italy and Spain.
https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Chris

I’m referring to the number of deaths.

And yes, I know once the ONS has had time to compile more comprehensive figures they will turn out to be rather higher. That however is a red herring here and now. The best means we have of determining how the virus is spreading is by counting hospital deaths. To maintain a consistent measure we will have to continue monitoring hospital deaths in the same way, even once we have access to the ONS research.

As of today, hospital deaths in the UK are not doubling every two days. They are not doubling every three days. This is the first indication of the virus *not* spreading exponentially. It is the first indication that government intervention is slowing the spread, or “flattening the curve” as they say.

This is an observation based on facts. If you can contradict the observation, based on facts, rather than your disdain for the party of government, I’d love to hear it.

The facts are at least 980 have died over the last day, in comparison with other countries we aren't doing well.

We're in this for a lot longer than anyone is admitting. The new number of cases figures is still pants as we're not testing most of those with symptoms, which makes some of these charts/curves pointless.

Still no PPE for GPs. My sister in law is one and they've had to buy their own goggles from B&Q ffs... Care homes also struggling for staff and protection, which could be the next crisis to hit the headlines.

Btw 'disdain for the governing party'? Too right, they've been a shambles, too slow to react, too willing to blame others and let scientists answer the press. 10 years of running down the public sector, and making those pesky foreigners that staff the NHS feel unwelcome. Clapping for a few minutes doesn't make up for that.

[nomadking]

Being 2nd on the list of Pandemic preparedness is so bad, when we could've 14th like Germany.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Being 2nd on the list of Pandemic preparedness is so bad, when we could've 14th like Germany.

So where did their preparation go right and ours go wrong as we hit the 1000 per day mark compared to their 2728 in total?

It’s worth noting today’s total is just those announced today, not those having died in the 24 hour period. Most of them actually died at some point in the last week introducing administrative variations (e.g. low weekend counts catching up midweek) so it’s not truly a like for like figure.

[Julian]

This "statistical analysis" is somewhat tedious

Without post mortems to establish the cause of death the figures are meaningless.

What would be more relevant would be the number of deaths over and above the norm.

All deaths are tragic and to have people pigeonholed to become a statistic is totally wrong.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

So where did their preparation go right and ours go wrong as we hit the 1000 per day mark compared to their 2728 in total?

It’s worth noting today’s total is just those announced today, not those having died in the 24 hour period. Most of them actually died at some point in the last week introducing administrative variations (e.g. low weekend counts catching up midweek) so it’s not truly a like for like figure.

Nothing comparable at all. How many cases in Germany needed admission to hospital compared to the UK? The spreading depends on people's behaviour. No amount of preparation can cope with the stupidity of people in the UK. Germany only started it's lockdown 2 days before the UK, so that can't be a factor. Germany never reached the same starting point as the UK. Eg Germany has around a quarter of estimated cases compared to the UK.

The low figure is thought to be linked to mass testing, meaning that many people with mild symptoms are counted in Germany but not elsewhere.
However, the rate has been rising steadily, from 0.6 per cent a fortnight ago to 1.3 per cent last week and 2.1 per cent today.

[Rexz]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Nothing comparable at all. How many cases in Germany needed admission to hospital compared to the UK? The spreading depends on people's behaviour. No amount of preparation can cope with the stupidity of people in the UK. Germany only started it's lockdown 2 days before the UK, so that can't be a factor. Germany never reached the same starting point as the UK. Eg Germany has around a quarter of estimated cases compared to the UK.

I have seen people saying that Germany doesn't report all deaths as coronavirus but of the underlying condition. How much of that is true I have no idea but it would lead to their lower death rate compared to their infection rate. Also stating people in the UK as being stupid but another nation as being somehow better is ridiculous. You think Germany or any other country doesn't have their own minority of people who don't follow the rules of lockdown or social distancing?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Nothing comparable at all. How many cases in Germany needed admission to hospital compared to the UK? The spreading depends on people's behaviour. No amount of preparation can cope with the stupidity of people in the UK. Germany only started it's lockdown 2 days before the UK, so that can't be a factor. Germany never reached the same starting point as the UK. Eg Germany has around a quarter of estimated cases compared to the UK.

Nothing comparable because it's an inconvenient truth to you that Germany made interventions other than a lockdown - mass testing, contact tracing, in line with internationally recognised and established guidance on pandemic flu.

We shrugged our shoulders for a week and said "herd immunity".

The Government message will ultimately be to blame the people at the end of this however, like Hillsborough, that simply won't wash.

[nomadking]

Germany started their lockdown on 22nd March, UKs was announced on 23rd. Not a great difference. Sweden is yet to have a similar lockdown. As Germany had less cases in the first place, they have the spare testing capacity. Not all areas of Germany are as affected, eg Eastern Germany.

The former East has generally been less affected. German media has suggested this could be linked to a lower population density and a less developed economy which makes encounters between global jet-setters less likely.

It all going to depend on points of introduction of the virus and the sorts of connections those "points" make with others.

The rising number of cases, after the daily count had fallen to a two-week low on Monday, is a setback to German hopes of ending the lockdown.

As the old saying goes ...

Their are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Unless every country in the world is using the same reporting system, and the same amout of testing (per population) then raw numbers dont tell you much, and are only useful for daily comparisons in the same country. Comparing countries is somewhat meaninless.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Germany started their lockdown on 22nd March, UKs was announced on 23rd. Not a great difference. Sweden is yet to have a similar lockdown. As Germany had less cases in the first place, they have the spare testing capacity. Not all areas of Germany are as affected, eg Eastern Germany.

It all going to depend on points of introduction of the virus and the sorts of connections those "points" make with others.

German states however took their own actions prior to this date. School closures (13 March) and banning mass gatherings of more than 1000 people (10 March) in North Rhine-Westphalia where the outbreak appears to have originated in Germany.

I’m unsure where your assertion Germany had less cases in the first place comes from - on 1st March we had 36 reported cases to Germany’s 130.

Not all of the UK is equally affected - London is much worse than Scotland. That’s a red herring. Considering the western German outbreak is closely intertwined with northern Italian I doubt anyone would consider the 9 hour drive from Lombardy to Cologne “global jet setting”.

[nomadking]

Allowing groups of up to 1000 people to gather, isn't exactly a lockdown, and possibly if anything worse than only allowing groups of more than 1,000. Those from smaller groups will then mingle with people from other smaller groups.


UK has an estimated 2.1m cases, compared to Germany's estimated 460,000.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Allowing groups of up to 1000 people to gather, isn't exactly a lockdown, and possibly if anything worse than only allowing groups of more than 1,000. Those from smaller groups will then mingle with people from other smaller groups.

Other smaller groups??? What other groups?

Compared with 55 000 people in a football stadium with larger numbers crowded into bars, fast food places, buses, metros, trams etc is definitely going to be worse.

It also has the effect of reducing the number of large events at once. 55 000 football fans don’t decide against going to the game and set up 55 x 1000 person gatherings doing something else.

Closing schools also has the effect of reducing the spread. A step taken earlier in Germany.

UK has an estimated 2.1m cases, compared to Germany's estimated 460,000.

You seem to be missing my point. Clearly if Germany has kept the numbers low, despite a higher population, I’m literally claiming they have better managed the situation.

At some point in time both countries presumably had a handful of cases. Unless you are claiming that a disproportionate amount of people travelling to the UK came into the UK with it and that they all came at once. Yet Germany, within Schengen, didn’t get this kind of simultaneous movement of infected people across it’s borders?