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

[Vanden Saab]

Interesting information on the different strains of Covid from South Korea...
http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20200706000...

Koreaherald said:

The novel coronavirus spreading in South Korea now has its origin in Europe and the US, health authorities said Monday, and it is known to be six times as infectious as the original strain that emerged in China.
The variant belongs to the GH clade, which has largely been circulated in Europe and the US, according to an analysis by Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on 526 genome samples diagnosed with the COVID-19

And even more interesting...

Koreaherald said:

Of the total cases reported in the past week, infection routes for 10.7 percent of the cases remain unidentified, Jeong said, adding “quiet transmission” among those in their 50s or over is taking place in the community.

Even South Korea cannot trace over 10% of cases...

[Sophisticated Sarah]

vaud said:

From a source in the NHS, they are worried about the winter, partly because of CV19 but also because they are predicting a bad flu season - it was/is bad in the southern hemisphere and our winter flu variants follow theirs.

The U.K. had it quite bad last flu season too. Wife was working in A&E and the department was overrun with suspected flu patients suffering badly. However they don’t know if this was early signs of Covid 19 or ‘just’ the flu.

[motco]

[redacted]

[grumbledoak]

Graveworm said:

Not sure of your point or if you have one.

f(x) = a^x - QED

Zoom in much? Here is ONS total daily deaths to Jun 19 shown against f(x) = 2^x starting March 8



Deaths data from Figure 9 here:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...

Spot the difference?

[Graveworm]

It was cropped (not zoomed) to where we had exponential growth.. From 30 or so deaths a day on 21st March until the peak of just under a thousand 20 days later in a near flawless exponential growth graph. You said there wasn't exponential growth unequivocally during this period by deaths, cases any measure we did. Anything else is flat earthing.
Exponential doesn't mean 2^x
Here is figure 9 from your source
|https://thumbsnap.com/Yxkrmkyb[/url]

Edited by Graveworm on Wednesday 8th July 20:09

[WatchfulEye]

Here's a graph of daily deaths (ONS data) showing near perfect exponential growth during the early phase.

The curve starts to diverge at around the 30th March, after early changes in behaviour, handwashing advice, etc. started filtering through.

[grumbledoak]

Graveworm said:

Exponential doesn't mean 2^x

I used your numbers. You wrote f(x) = a^x and gave R0 = 2, above.

[Graveworm]

grumbledoak said:

Graveworm said:

Exponential doesn't mean 2^x

I used your numbers. You wrote f(x) = a^x and gave R0 = 2, above.

R0 is total not per day.. The X scale is in days... How many days is infection to transmission? If R0 was 2 that's the interval between cases doubling..

[WatchfulEye]

grumbledoak said:

I used your numbers. You wrote f(x) = a^x and gave R0 = 2, above.

No. You used a = 2.
Neither a nor x are R0. Indeed, R0 is not the relevant value when calculating rate of growth.

[rolex]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Shame about her withered left arm, but I guess no one noticed that.

[Dr Z]

WatchfulEye said:

grumbledoak said:

I used your numbers. You wrote f(x) = a^x and gave R0 = 2, above.

No. You used a = 2.
Neither a nor x are R0. Indeed, R0 is not the relevant value when calculating rate of growth.

Yep. From memory, this fit the UK NHS daily deaths almost perfectly: f(X) = e^(0.2*X)

[grumbledoak]

WatchfulEye said:

Here's a graph of daily deaths (ONS data) showing near perfect exponential growth during the early phase.

The curve starts to diverge at around the 30th March, after early changes in behaviour, handwashing advice, etc. started filtering through.

Those red columns rather massacre the measured data.

A straight line by eye on the log plot is a bit misleading, it is exponential by definition (not fitted), emphasizes the low quality data at the start, and hides how fast the deaths really diverge from the exponential. Showing both:

[MOTORVATOR]

https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/cases

Haven't quite got my head around this adjustment of case numbers they did a week ago for duplicates. If you take the raw data now from the bottom table which appears to carry adjusted numbers then there has been a massive spike in the daily case rate for the last seven days. Although perhaps they are continuing to include the duplicates that arise since and will adjust later?

So the obvious metric that would possibly be comparable would be the hospital admissions except that those are reported to 25/6 but portrayed as todays number whilst total patients in hospital are to 6/7 which tells us nothing if more are going out than coming in.

Lets hope it's down to bad numbers and not creative accounting.

[grumbledoak]

MOTORVATOR said:

https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/cases

Haven't quite got my head around this adjustment of case numbers they did a week ago for duplicates. If you take the raw data now from the bottom table which appears to carry adjusted numbers then there has been a massive spike in the daily case rate for the last seven days. Although perhaps they are continuing to include the duplicates that arise since and will adjust later?

So the obvious metric that would possibly be comparable would be the hospital admissions except that those are reported to 25/6 but portrayed as todays number whilst total patients in hospital are to 6/7 which tells us nothing if more are going out than coming in.

Lets hope it's down to bad numbers and not creative accounting.

I would imagine that the last week is still including the 30,000 (ish?) double counted.

[MOTORVATOR]

grumbledoak said:

I would imagine that the last week is still including the 30,000 (ish?) double counted.

Yes but look at the data itself in that last table. That would show we were well below 500 cases per day already after the adjustments and now we are back up there?

[Welshbeef]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/07/08/ca...

So £15 billion people are not happy we’ve spent so much for NHS PPE?
On the one hand the media and the whole public - per yougov - wanted PPE to the NHS and the gift did poorly in getting enough PPE to the NHS. Yet they are unhappy with the huge PPE cost.

So what does this mean? People and media want PPE in unlimited supply for free or they didn’t really they were just trying to bash govt at the time and now are doing the same.

Shameful and these people and media need to be called out on it.

[JagLover]

Welshbeef said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/07/08/ca...

So £15 billion people are not happy we’ve spent so much for NHS PPE?
On the one hand the media and the whole public - per yougov - wanted PPE to the NHS and the gift did poorly in getting enough PPE to the NHS. Yet they are unhappy with the huge PPE cost.

So what does this mean? People and media want PPE in unlimited supply for free or they didn’t really they were just trying to bash govt at the time and now are doing the same.

Shameful and these people and media need to be called out on it.

The signal to noise ratio in this crisis has been some of the worst ever due to constant politicisation.

As you say you cannot have it both ways. Either there isn't enough PPE and you have to purchase some more or there is enough. PPE also has a shelf life so cannot be simply stock piled in sufficient quantities for a pandemic.

[MOTORVATOR]

JagLover said:

Welshbeef said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/07/08/ca...

So £15 billion people are not happy we’ve spent so much for NHS PPE?
On the one hand the media and the whole public - per yougov - wanted PPE to the NHS and the gift did poorly in getting enough PPE to the NHS. Yet they are unhappy with the huge PPE cost.

So what does this mean? People and media want PPE in unlimited supply for free or they didn’t really they were just trying to bash govt at the time and now are doing the same.

Shameful and these people and media need to be called out on it.

The signal to noise ratio in this crisis has been some of the worst ever due to constant politicisation.

As you say you cannot have it both ways. Either there isn't enough PPE and you have to purchase some more or there is enough. PPE also has a shelf life so cannot be simply stock piled in sufficient quantities for a pandemic.

Considering the circa 300k patients treated for 15 billion quids worth of PPE alone which works out at 50k per head it would appear it would have made economic sense to just shoot the infected.

[red_slr]

There is a big flood in Wuhan, the worry now is that the 3 Gorges Dam might give way which would cause really bad situation to say the least on top of CV.

[21st Century Man]

Welshbeef said:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/07/08/ca...

So £15 billion people are not happy we’ve spent so much for NHS PPE?
On the one hand the media and the whole public - per yougov - wanted PPE to the NHS and the gift did poorly in getting enough PPE to the NHS. Yet they are unhappy with the huge PPE cost.

So what does this mean? People and media want PPE in unlimited supply for free or they didn’t really they were just trying to bash govt at the time and now are doing the same.

Shameful and these people and media need to be called out on it.

Agreed, the hysteria of the media at the time was palpable and now this hypocrisy, it's just incredible.