Coronavirus - the killer flu that will wipe us out? (Vol. 7)

[Zoobeef]

p1stonhead said:

Eh?

Where did that random detour come from!?
I honestly don’t follow.

You said that idiots like him were costing someone a bed. Lockdown lovers are costing people with cancer their lives. So why would they then deserve any of that treatment?

[Zoobeef]

markyb_lcy said:

sambucket said:

Zoobeef said:

I agree, also, anyone that condones lockdown or extreme social distancing should be at the back or removed from cancer treatment/screening lists.

Which country do you think we should model our response on? And did they cancel screening too?

Why do we have to model our response on another country at all? Is it not the case that some dynamism is lost if we must wait for whichever country is being modelled to react to something before we feel able to?

We are an advanced enough nation to have funded and undertook the required levels of research to form our own strategies.

The star student never needed to copy their classmates homework.

Sam the post deleter strikes again. Engages his fingers before his brain.

[anonymous-user]

smashing said:

Because you looked at the ICU and not hospitalisations

Which do you think is more relevant?

Is there any pesky footnote to your chart you might have cropped out?

[otolith]

markyb_lcy said:

The star student never needed to copy their classmates homework.

No, they read the textbook. Which in this case is still being written.

[smashing]

sambucket said:

Which do you think is more relevant?

Is there any pesky footnote to your chart you might have cropped out?

Well, from what I can see the ICU stats is showing all ICU beds whether it is covid related or not (from what I can see unless I have missed something).

here is the full screen grab, not sure what you would be looking for mind

[RTB]

sambucket said:

I followed your link and got this for ICU? Looks like it's trending up to me.

They could bring that trend down by steadily increasing their capacity. Or maybe the trend shown here is due to ICU capacity falling or being more available for non-covid patients. You managed to pick the only graph that you thought illustrated your point when it doesn't.

[Saweep]

Expat16 said:

Did anyone see the piece in the Guardian about CV19 immunity only lasting a few months?

“according to research suggesting the virus could reinfect people year after year, like common colds.”

So like every other coronavirus!

[RTB]

Saweep said:

Expat16 said:

Did anyone see the piece in the Guardian about CV19 immunity only lasting a few months?

“according to research suggesting the virus could reinfect people year after year, like common colds.”

So like every other coronavirus!

I'd be very surprised if immunity in those that had mild disease lasted very long. I'd also be surprised if re-infection caused severe disease in those mildly infected individuals within 2 or 3 years of the original infection.

The infection cycle for most other mild coronaviruses in 2/3 years on average. i.e. you're likely to become reinfected (bad enough to know) around every 2 to 3 years.

[anonymous-user]

RTB said:

They could bring that trend down by steadily increasing their capacity. Or maybe the trend shown here is due to ICU capacity falling or being more available for non-covid patients. You managed to pick the only graph that you thought illustrated your point when it doesn't.

I wonder what is the most likely explanation?

[RTB]

sambucket said:

I wonder what is the most likely explanation?

I don't know, it could well relate to more people in ICU with Covid19, but looking at the actual data points rather than the percentages it looks like total capacity is fluctuating over time which adds quite a bit of noise to those data. We also don't know what's happening in the wider healthcare environment. Are more surgical procedures being done as measures eased for example?

It's a poor set of data to support the position that things are getting worse in Arizona. That's not to say that things couldn't get worse but the graphs to watch are death rates and total cases normalised against testing, which look to be coming down and pretty flat respectively.

[JagLover]

RTB said:

Saweep said:

Expat16 said:

Did anyone see the piece in the Guardian about CV19 immunity only lasting a few months?

“according to research suggesting the virus could reinfect people year after year, like common colds.”

So like every other coronavirus!

I'd be very surprised if immunity in those that had mild disease lasted very long. I'd also be surprised if re-infection caused severe disease in those mildly infected individuals within 2 or 3 years of the original infection.

The infection cycle for most other mild coronaviruses in 2/3 years on average. i.e. you're likely to become reinfected (bad enough to know) around every 2 to 3 years.

Thank you.

I suspect it is the Guardian being disingenuous. To say you might have symptoms if re-infected does not mean they will be severe symptoms.

[rover 623gsi]

new positive tests and deaths

Monday 13 July - 530 / 11
Monday 6 July - 352 / 16
Monday 29 June - 735 / 25
Monday 22 June - 865 / 15
Monday 15 June - 874 / 38
Monday 8 June - 1,089 / 55
Monday 1 June - 1,418 / 111

...

7 days new positive tests and deaths

30 June - 6 July - 3,958 (ave 565.4) / 661 (ave 94.4)
7 July - 13 July - 4,365 (ave 623.5) / 594 (ave 84.8)

we have seen a few times in the past week there has a rise in the number of positive tests compared to the corresponding day in the previous week. This is disappointing, but I remain of the view that this is a combination of more testing (especially at Pillar Two) and localised outbreaks. There is no need to panic but we should 'stay alert'.

Edited by rover 623gsi on Monday 13th July 16:57

[FunkyNige]

sambucket said:

I followed your link and got this for ICU? Looks like it's trending up to me.

Off-topic (maybe?), but look at how low that graph starts. I don't know what % occupancy they normally run at and if any additional occupancy was added before the graph starts, but 65% sounds very low compared to over here - picking a few random months from this link suggests in England we're normally hovering around the 80% mark.
Nothing to do with Covid-19, just an interesting observation.

[Cold]

"German study finds low Covid-19 infection rate in schools
Tests of pupils and teachers in Saxony suggest children may act as brake on infection."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/13/germ...

[RDMcG]

Much worse for young people if they smoke or vape:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/13/health/young-adults...

[markyb_lcy]

Zoobeef said:

markyb_lcy said:

sambucket said:

Zoobeef said:

I agree, also, anyone that condones lockdown or extreme social distancing should be at the back or removed from cancer treatment/screening lists.

Which country do you think we should model our response on? And did they cancel screening too?

Why do we have to model our response on another country at all? Is it not the case that some dynamism is lost if we must wait for whichever country is being modelled to react to something before we feel able to?

We are an advanced enough nation to have funded and undertook the required levels of research to form our own strategies.

The star student never needed to copy their classmates homework.

Sam the post deleter strikes again. Engages his fingers before his brain.

Why did you delete your post, Sam? Bit rude after I provided a reply (although I realise the question wasn’t directly aimed at me).

[anonymous-user]

markyb_lcy said:

Why did you delete your post, Sam? Bit rude after I provided a reply (although I realise the question wasn’t directly aimed at me).

Apologies, I replied to Zoo but thought better off it immediately after I pressed submit, as I never get a straight answer, so deleted rather than clog up the thread?

There must be some kind of cache thing going on, as the post was literally up a second or two. But he managed to catch it. Either that, or Zoo waits on my every word!

To pick up the cancer point, I'm not really sure there was a 'clever' way around the problem, given how under resourced the NHS was going into this. Which is why i was aksing, if there are any examples of countries that did keep these services going through the peak.

Perhaps Zoo wasn't criticising the UK response so much as the very idea 'any' country would suspend regular appointments to deal with covid. But I'm interested in the different approaches nonetheless. So in my typical half assed way, I googled a couple of hospitals, one in sweden and one in arizona. Sweden suspended for two months, and arizona is advising self examination and video calls to GPs. Which sounds fairly similar to UK really.

The sincerity that zoo insists treating covid is dangerous as hysteria really gets to me. I wonder, is there something to the hysteria argument. I'm not qualified to comment on the medicine. But the universality of response from pretty much every hospital in the world, says perhaps it's not hsyteria.

Wish I was more qualified to understand all of this.

[markyb_lcy]

sambucket said:

Apologies, I replied to Zoo but thought better off it immediately after I pressed submit, as I never get a straight answer, so deleted rather than clog up the thread?

There must be some kind of cache thing going on, as the post was literally up a second or two. But he managed to catch it. Either that, or Zoo waits on my every word!

To pick up the cancer point, I'm not really sure there was a 'clever' way around the problem, given how under resourced the NHS was going into this. Which is why i was aksing, if there are any examples of countries that did keep these services going through the peak.

Perhaps Zoo wasn't criticising the UK response so much as the very idea 'any' country would suspend regular appointments to deal with covid. But I'm interested in the different approaches nonetheless. So in my typical half assed way, I googled a couple of hospitals, one in sweden and one in arizona. Sweden suspended for two months, and arizona is advising self examination and video calls to GPs. Which sounds fairly similar to UK really.

The sincerity that zoo insists treating covid is dangerous as hysteria really gets to me. I wonder, is there something to the hysteria argument. I'm not qualified to comment on the medicine. But the universality of response from pretty much every hospital in the world, says perhaps it's not hsyteria.

Wish I was more qualified to understand all of this.

Fair enough.

Even the under resourced NHS didn’t burst past 60% ICU bed use at the peak. We know from reports on these here forums also, direct from health workers that many who were not dealing with Covid patients were twiddling their thumbs and “enjoying” their quietest period in their working life. On the face of it, it feels to me like we could have been doing more to avoid non-Covid excess deaths (and suffering).

[Zoobeef]

sambucket said:

There must be some kind of cache thing going on, as the post was literally up a second or two. But he managed to catch it. Either that, or Zoo waits on my every word!

Maybe one day you'll be right about something. Today, alas, is not that day. I didnt originally quote you.
I dont need to wait for your every word. Its guaranteed that you've written some new ones every time I log in.

[anonymous-user]

markyb_lcy said:

Fair enough.

Even the under resourced NHS didn’t burst past 60% ICU bed use at the peak. We know from reports on these here forums also, direct from health workers that many who were not dealing with Covid patients were twiddling their thumbs and “enjoying” their quietest period in their working life. On the face of it, it feels to me like we could have been doing more to avoid non-Covid excess deaths (and suffering).

Can you point me to the 60% figure? The only data I've found is this (sorry for repost) from the imperial june 15th report, which suggests normal NHS would have struggled with 20% of the 2700 odd covid ICU patients at peak? mostly due to nurses. They had to cancel electives, draft in students, use private resources, and still came in 200 short?

Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 13th July 21:40