Coronavirus - the killer flu that will wipe us out? (Vol. 5)
Discussion
pghstochaj said:
You’re not correct though. You can be as close as you want to as many people as you wish, but if barely any have corona, you’re not going to catch it. The rate of rise will be quicker however which is what I think you’re confusing with risk.
We will have lots of coronavirus. The best estimate of the current transmission rate by the Imperial report published on the 30th March is estimated to be around 1.ETA the table showing the estimated current transmission rates in the UK from the Imperial report on the 30th March. As you can see the middle estimate for transmission rates are still about 1.
Edited by EddieSteadyGo on Wednesday 8th April 09:26
A bad night in ooh gp land. My fears have been crystallised in a big way. Visited one home to palliate some poor soul, and confirm another death and was told that one floor of the home has been lost in the last week, that is 16 out of 40 residents. I saw three or four in passing that were also "on their way". No one is being let in and the ambulance service are not taking anyone out. Shocking to see. It's quite possible that this particular facility will have no paying customers in a week or two's time.
pneumothorax said:
A bad night in ooh gp land. My fears have been crystallised in a big way. Visited one home to palliate some poor soul, and confirm another death and was told that one floor of the home has been lost in the last week, that is 16 out of 40 residents. I saw three or four in passing that were also "on their way". No one is being let in and the ambulance service are not taking anyone out. Shocking to see. It's quite possible that this particular facility will have no paying customers in a week or two's time.
Good grief! And how are you bearing up?
EddieSteadyGo said:
pghstochaj said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
The ironic thing is that, in 6 weeks time, the risks of infection are going to be pretty much exactly the same as they are now, and the government is going to tell you that it is absolutely fine.
Why do you think that’s true? Probability of infection relates to:Your immunity (natural or artificial)
The number of people you are exposed to that have the infection.
The closeness of that interaction etc
Presumably when the lockdown is lifted, 2 will be considerably lower. That only comes with time.
If we take the best Imperial estimate for the current rate of transmission, it is about 1. So the lockdown has stopped an overwhelming healthcare surge, but there will be still lots of cases, many of which will be undetected.
EddieSteadyGo said:
So in 6 weeks time, we will probably have a similar total number of active infections (could be a bit lower in reality).
Why focus on active infections? Active is something that doesn't impact on the likelihood of infection alone, as the widespread level of immunity is also a factor and rests on total recovered cases. Neat swerve though.With uk cases decelerating from doubling every 3 days to doubling every 4 days (then 5, then 6 etc) why not get the usual graphics and the back of a fag packet and estimate how many cases there will have been in 6 weeks' time compared to now. Suggestion - use a realistic starting point e.g. Imperial College 1.8 million uk cases as reported 31 March.
Alternatively, to save time apply a bit of unsubtle nous.
pneumothorax said:
A bad night in ooh gp land. My fears have been crystallised in a big way. Visited one home to palliate some poor soul, and confirm another death and was told that one floor of the home has been lost in the last week, that is 16 out of 40 residents. I saw three or four in passing that were also "on their way". No one is being let in and the ambulance service are not taking anyone out. Shocking to see. It's quite possible that this particular facility will have no paying customers in a week or two's time.
Words fail.
pneumothorax said:
A bad night in ooh gp land. My fears have been crystallised in a big way. Visited one home to palliate some poor soul, and confirm another death and was told that one floor of the home has been lost in the last week, that is 16 out of 40 residents. I saw three or four in passing that were also "on their way". No one is being let in and the ambulance service are not taking anyone out. Shocking to see. It's quite possible that this particular facility will have no paying customers in a week or two's time.
Sounds horrific especially if being replicated in a lot of homes, I hope undertakers are removing bodies and they're not just left in a room?pghstochaj said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
We will have lots of coronavirus. The best estimate of the current transmission rate by the Imperial report published on the 30th March is estimated to be around 1.
We are not talking a week ago, you were talking about six weeks from now. Noticed on the BBC a story about big ussues in EU divide.
''The coronavirus pandemic has exposed deep divides in Europe, with EU member states arguing over how to tackle the economic fallout.
Italy and Spain have accused northern nations - led by Germany and the Netherlands - of not doing enough. ''
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52200719
''The coronavirus pandemic has exposed deep divides in Europe, with EU member states arguing over how to tackle the economic fallout.
Italy and Spain have accused northern nations - led by Germany and the Netherlands - of not doing enough. ''
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52200719
Stay in Bed Instead said:
Did a little shop this morning.
Got loo rolls. First time for a month!
Some timely advice:Got loo rolls. First time for a month!
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/laxatives/
https://www.dulcolax.com/products
pneumothorax said:
A bad night in ooh gp land. My fears have been crystallised in a big way. Visited one home to palliate some poor soul, and confirm another death and was told that one floor of the home has been lost in the last week, that is 16 out of 40 residents. I saw three or four in passing that were also "on their way". No one is being let in and the ambulance service are not taking anyone out. Shocking to see. It's quite possible that this particular facility will have no paying customers in a week or two's time.
At least one news channel was stating recently, don't go into a care home as a new resident at the moment.We are being told (understandably) that if we all follow the rules then infections will drop and death rates will drop, we are also told hospitals are still within capacity.
At the same time the government are building several new hospitals over the country while at the same time cancelling as much other stuff they can freeing up other beds and staff, they have also recruited several thousand retired staff and volunteers.
But why do all that if infections will drop during a lockdown?
Imo the plan is to set everything up and send everyone back to work, social distancing will have to be a massive part of the plan where possible, pubs, clubs, schools and anything which will make it spread like wildfire to remain closed, vulnerable people will still be told to isolate.
Surely this is one of the only options to allow the economy to function and at the same time having as much care as possible for people who might need it.
The media has recently gone into another level of overdrive recently, talking about deaths of younger people and while its obviously terrible i do think its a level of propaganda to make the younger generation sit up but the fact is most people who get it will be ok and generally the older people and vulnerable are the ones likely to have issues.
At the same time the government are building several new hospitals over the country while at the same time cancelling as much other stuff they can freeing up other beds and staff, they have also recruited several thousand retired staff and volunteers.
But why do all that if infections will drop during a lockdown?
Imo the plan is to set everything up and send everyone back to work, social distancing will have to be a massive part of the plan where possible, pubs, clubs, schools and anything which will make it spread like wildfire to remain closed, vulnerable people will still be told to isolate.
Surely this is one of the only options to allow the economy to function and at the same time having as much care as possible for people who might need it.
The media has recently gone into another level of overdrive recently, talking about deaths of younger people and while its obviously terrible i do think its a level of propaganda to make the younger generation sit up but the fact is most people who get it will be ok and generally the older people and vulnerable are the ones likely to have issues.
turbobloke said:
Why focus on active infections? Active is something that doesn't impact on the likelihood of infection alone, as the widespread level of immunity is also a factor and rests on total recovered cases. Neat swerve though.
With uk cases decelerating from doubling every 3 days to doubling every 4 days (then 5, then 6 etc) why not get the usual graphics and the back of a fag packet and estimate how many cases there will have been in 6 weeks' time compared to now. Suggestion - use a realistic starting point e.g. Imperial College 1.8 million uk cases as reported 31 March.
Alternatively, to save time apply a bit of unsubtle nous.
Proportion of the population infected is still low according to the last Imperial report estimate. So I'm assuming that wouldn't afford much "herd immunity" protection.With uk cases decelerating from doubling every 3 days to doubling every 4 days (then 5, then 6 etc) why not get the usual graphics and the back of a fag packet and estimate how many cases there will have been in 6 weeks' time compared to now. Suggestion - use a realistic starting point e.g. Imperial College 1.8 million uk cases as reported 31 March.
Alternatively, to save time apply a bit of unsubtle nous.
And I am using active infections as that is the basis of the people who could be infectious.
The current rate of reported cases isn't reflecting active infections. Most of those are people were infected last month - their case has just escalated to now become more serious.
The current rate of transmission during lockdown is estimated to be around 1 according to Imperial. So the actual numbers are not scaling up, but if that is right, neither are they scaling down by that much.
Now, where we were talking about the "death rate"....
Thesprucegoose said:
Noticed on the BBC a story about big ussues in EU divide.
''The coronavirus pandemic has exposed deep divides in Europe, with EU member states arguing over how to tackle the economic fallout.
Italy and Spain have accused northern nations - led by Germany and the Netherlands - of not doing enough. ''
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52200719
The entire EU situation will be fascinating as the world recovers. ''The coronavirus pandemic has exposed deep divides in Europe, with EU member states arguing over how to tackle the economic fallout.
Italy and Spain have accused northern nations - led by Germany and the Netherlands - of not doing enough. ''
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52200719
turbobloke said:
ESG's post is inaccurate in the first waffly part ('pretty much exactly' 
the same risk, shoefixers to that) with wild crystal balling in the second part (six weeks, what the gov't will say). Kay Burley would appreciate a call on the 6 weeks bit.
I disagree. the same risk, shoefixers to that) with wild crystal balling in the second part (six weeks, what the gov't will say). Kay Burley would appreciate a call on the 6 weeks bit.The overall risks will be the same, but our understanding of how those risks are differentiated by health and age will have developed further. The stats on deaths from Italy indicate that CV19 is massively dangerous to the old and already-ill, and substantially less dangerous to the young and well.
If only 3% of deaths are from the 75% of us who are in the young/well group, then the terminal CFR’s for the two groups will differ by a factor of 100.
If the overall CFR continues to be expected to be below 1%, I think we will be asked to view the risk for the young/well group as acceptable.
turbobloke said:
pneumothorax said:
A bad night in ooh gp land. My fears have been crystallised in a big way. Visited one home to palliate some poor soul, and confirm another death and was told that one floor of the home has been lost in the last week, that is 16 out of 40 residents. I saw three or four in passing that were also "on their way". No one is being let in and the ambulance service are not taking anyone out. Shocking to see. It's quite possible that this particular facility will have no paying customers in a week or two's time.
Words fail.
This sort of thing should be more widely know, might stop more of the Muppets who are happy to risk spreading the infection to get a bit of sunbathing in.
m3jappa said:
We are being told (understandably) that if we all follow the rules then infections will drop and death rates will drop, we are also told hospitals are still within capacity.
At the same time the government are building several new hospitals over the country while at the same time cancelling as much other stuff they can freeing up other beds and staff, they have also recruited several thousand retired staff and volunteers.
But why do all that if infections will drop during a lockdown?
Because they will drop, but haven't dropped below peak as yet, we don't know precisely when the peak will be, so get facilities to a state of readiness in the context of hoping for the best but planning for the worst?At the same time the government are building several new hospitals over the country while at the same time cancelling as much other stuff they can freeing up other beds and staff, they have also recruited several thousand retired staff and volunteers.
But why do all that if infections will drop during a lockdown?
There would be hell to pay if facilities were to be needed but not available.
pneumothorax said:
A bad night in ooh gp land. My fears have been crystallised in a big way. Visited one home to palliate some poor soul, and confirm another death and was told that one floor of the home has been lost in the last week, that is 16 out of 40 residents. I saw three or four in passing that were also "on their way". No one is being let in and the ambulance service are not taking anyone out. Shocking to see. It's quite possible that this particular facility will have no paying customers in a week or two's time.
I was thinking that about care homes, must be like Christmas for CV, lots of physical contact, bodily fluids, close proximity and folk who may not be fully down with the advice due to failing faculties, coupled with age and inevitable pre existing conditions, you dont go in there because you are fully fit generally.I suppose it could be devastating to a car/nursing home if it loses a big proportion of its residents, I know from visiting my gran, death is a regular occurrence and goes with the territory but one every few days versus swathes in a few days. Could take a while for new residents to come through and in the meantime limited funding, my gran was paying a grand a week so losing 16 would almost half their income, sounds callous but they arent generally charities and need to pay staff, suppliers and the like.
Must be hard dealing with it normally, never mind now.
pghstochaj said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
We will have lots of coronavirus. The best estimate of the current transmission rate by the Imperial report published on the 30th March is estimated to be around 1.
We are not talking a week ago, you were talking about six weeks from now. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff