Coronavirus

[RamNut]

16 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

As I understand it Derby is likely to be the third worst hit city in the UK based on forecasting regarding job loss.

The rhetoric of going back to work with a mask on will A/ Make few feel safe for a full working day.  B/ not be practical for anyone with asthma, hayfever and an number of conditions c/ will not be suitable for many jobs such as construction unless heatstroke is a pre requisite.

I know one elderly couple who headed off to India where they have a home at the start of March. They have just arrived back but had no checks and were advised to self quarantine with no checks . They are two of 20,000 .  Realistically, they should have had to stay where they were.

lockdown is effectively over now.  DIY shops are open. Tips are open. burger king and today chip shops are open .  Mark and spencers are selling clothes at the front of there food  stores.You, me and anyone else with a brain can suffer so that the brain dead few can get a cheeseburger, chips and be prevented from fly tipping .

 

County councillors are applying pressure to get the waste recycling centres back open. There is a political push to wind down the lockdown. And no political party will dare to try to enforce a lockdown which begins to crumble under combined weight of public pressure and economic pressure. So they will triumphantly brand the easing of restrictions as a hard earned victory thanks to their inspired leadership. the Police can pack away that silly drone as they will soon be spared the task of policing the impossible. And then the lottery will begin all over again.

 

[Archied]

3 hours ago, Tamworthram said:

Perhaps he should have just said we need to increase testing to the highest level we can then. I don't remember exactly what he said but if he did say focusing minds he meant on increasing testing - only one element of dealing with this crisis. 

Would that have satisfied you?

 

Telling it how it is would do for me , might suggest he’s more interested in saving lives rather than his own arse

[rammieib]

14 minutes ago, RamNut said:

County councillors are applying pressure to get the waste recycling centres back open. There is a political push to wind down the lockdown. And no political party will dare to try to enforce a lockdown which begins to crumble under combined weight of public pressure and economic pressure. So they will triumphantly brand the easing of restrictions as a hard earned victory thanks to their inspired leadership. the Police can pack away that silly drone as they will soon be spared the task of policing the impossible. And then the lottery will begin all over again.

 

This political pressure was a big reason why the lock down came when it did. They knew the public could open survive so long.

Also regarding the future, a few reasons why I don’t think we will see big second waves: 1) millions of us simply won’t go near other people 2) The increases testing will allow better isolation 3) Treatment ideas will come out quicker and quicker and more effective 4) Prime hotspots for transmission won’t exist and 5) I hate to say this but one round of vulnerable people have sadly been lost so those left are not quite as vulnerable. (Just my own theory that last one).

Still I genuinely worry for the economy, people’s jobs etc. We’re going to see mass redundancy’s in the upcoming months. This for me is a reason to try and open up again, albeit by taking sensible risks.

[Archied]

1 hour ago, Turk Thrust said:

Agree. @Archied seems not to realise that targets do focus minds and are meant to. A target is a goal that we are aiming to reach. But targets don’t just tell us what we are aiming for – they let us measure the distance by which we fall short, and the amount of work we need to do to make it up.

You need to have a target in order to judge whether you are making improvements. 

Great in theory totally useless if you move goalposts along the way and then lie about the figures ,,, I realise that all too well?

[GboroRam]

30 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

It is indeed just 1 month and it showed 3000 additional deaths year on year too and how these deaths are being recorded. But we can't have discussions about the facts unfortunately.  It did not show anything else.

The chart is a great indicator that will eventually lead to total Covid-19 deaths being revised down. 

Coming from the CDC and New York times. Hard evidence of what some people have been saying for a while. The numbers are inflated. Not conspiracy, not infactual, not far right blogs..

Which is fantastic news. Far less lives being lost to this than we all thought would be. ??

 

 

I'm loathe to respond, as it's pretty futile. If you want to get personal can we keep it to the politics thread - I think we will give a bit more leeway on there (but don't use personal insults, don't troll and don't use inappropriate language as always). 

I think you are overly optimistic about the data. It definitely shows an increase in the number of people dying year on year. That's not good news. 

Also NYC has about 35% of the population of NY state, and a much higher concentration of population. The figures for NYC will be a significant increase on the 3,000 for the month you showed. 

I don't see any reason for underestimating the disease from the chart you posted. I'm no expert, but I see a significant increase in deaths. 

If you are classifying all "died with coronavirus" as deaths from coronavirus, I agree those numbers are inflated. But that's not what the key says. I don't see any conspiracy to say all those infected people died directly from the virus. It is contributing to the cause of death in a number of cases, hard to measure but I'd estimate about 3,000 between mid March and mid April. If that represents 75% of total deaths in NY state (estimating 25% in NYC itself, surely a very Conservative figure - I wouldn't be surprised if it is nearer to 50%) that's about 4,000 in a month. 

Despite a lockdown (I'd hazard a guess that NYC was late adopting it, which can't have helped) still 4,000 extra people died in a month. I will retract my comment scaling it up to an annual number because we have no idea if this is a good or a bad month, or how long the deaths will continue for. But I see no positive in 4,000 deaths. 

[Archied]

10 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I'm loathe to respond, as it's pretty futile. If you want to get personal can we keep it to the politics thread - I think we will give a bit more leeway on there (but don't use personal insults, don't troll and don't use inappropriate language as always). 

I think you are overly optimistic about the data. It definitely shows an increase in the number of people dying year on year. That's not good news. 

Also NYC has about 35% of the population of NY state, and a much higher concentration of population. The figures for NYC will be a significant increase on the 3,000 for the month you showed. 

I don't see any reason for underestimating the disease from the chart you posted. I'm no expert, but I see a significant increase in deaths. 

If you are classifying all "died with coronavirus" as deaths from coronavirus, I agree those numbers are inflated. But that's not what the key says. I don't see any conspiracy to say all those infected people died directly from the virus. It is contributing to the cause of death in a number of cases, hard to measure but I'd estimate about 3,000 between mid March and mid April. If that represents 75% of total deaths in NY state (estimating 25% in NYC itself, surely a very Conservative figure - I wouldn't be surprised if it is nearer to 50%) that's about 4,000 in a month. 

Despite a lockdown (I'd hazard a guess that NYC was late adopting it, which can't have helped) still 4,000 extra people died in a month. I will retract my comment scaling it up to an annual number because we have no idea if this is a good or a bad month, or how long the deaths will continue for. But I see no positive in 4,000 deaths. 

Is the positive that deaths from things like cancer and heart disease are falling so if we can get a handle on Covid then happy days ?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Uptherams said:

It is indeed just 1 month and it showed 3000 additional deaths year on year too and how these deaths are being recorded. But we can't have discussions about the facts unfortunately.  It did not show anything else.

The chart is a great indicator that will eventually lead to total Covid-19 deaths being revised down. 

Coming from the CDC and New York times. Hard evidence of what some people have been saying for a while. The numbers are inflated. Not conspiracy, not infactual, not far right blogs..

Which is fantastic news. Far less lives being lost to this than we all thought would be. ??

 

Are these the stats for NYC that you are discussing here?

Moving away from your theory for NYC how do you apply it to the UK ONS death rate stats?

 

[Uptherams]

26 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I'm loathe to respond, as it's pretty futile. If you want to get personal can we keep it to the politics thread - I think we will give a bit more leeway on there (but don't use personal insults, don't troll and don't use inappropriate language as always). 

I think you are overly optimistic about the data. It definitely shows an increase in the number of people dying year on year. That's not good news. 

Also NYC has about 35% of the population of NY state, and a much higher concentration of population. The figures for NYC will be a significant increase on the 3,000 for the month you showed. 

I don't see any reason for underestimating the disease from the chart you posted. I'm no expert, but I see a significant increase in deaths. 

If you are classifying all "died with coronavirus" as deaths from coronavirus, I agree those numbers are inflated. But that's not what the key says. I don't see any conspiracy to say all those infected people died directly from the virus. It is contributing to the cause of death in a number of cases, hard to measure but I'd estimate about 3,000 between mid March and mid April. If that represents 75% of total deaths in NY state (estimating 25% in NYC itself, surely a very Conservative figure - I wouldn't be surprised if it is nearer to 50%) that's about 4,000 in a month. 

Despite a lockdown (I'd hazard a guess that NYC was late adopting it, which can't have helped) still 4,000 extra people died in a month. I will retract my comment scaling it up to an annual number because we have no idea if this is a good or a bad month, or how long the deaths will continue for. But I see no positive in 4,000 deaths. 

The chart shows deaths year on year, as reported. It showed an increase of 3000 people in total. Year on year for that one month period. It showed the cause. The only variable being Covid-19. Year on year, the blue section which includes all deaths other than Covid 19, is down year on year from 13,000, to just 5,000. That figure is expected to be similar, year on year and yet it is significantly different. Which indicates the current statistics being used for Covid-19 are inflated and will at some point in time, be revised down. 

The official statistics currently show 11,000 Covid-19 deaths, where as the reality will be somewhere around the 3000 mark. 

 

 

[Rev]

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Are these the stats for NYC that you are discussing here?

Moving away from your theory for NYC how do you apply it to the UK ONS death rate stats?

 

New York State, excluding NYC.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, reverendo de duivel said:

New York State, excluding NYC.

I've missed the conversation.

Wondering if the point is that Covid 19 deaths for NY are inflated, or across the world. 

[Uptherams]

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Are these the stats for NYC that you are discussing here?

Moving away from your theory for NYC how do you apply it to the UK ONS death rate stats?

 

It's the same mechanism across the board. Using historical data. You'd have to compare deaths from a set period, year on year and separate them into two categories. All deaths and reported Covid-19 deaths during that period. 

[Rev]

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I've missed the conversation.

Wondering if the point is that Covid 19 deaths for NY are inflated, or across the world. 

It's impossible to tell right now, I'd guess.

For every extra Covid death, there may be a lesser death in road accidents, for example.

Equally there will be extra deaths, through people not calling on services when needed.

There will be people who die of Covid who would've died regardless due to existing conditions.

I'd guess the best time to analyse the figures and set them into historical and medical context will be a year from now and beyond.

[Uptherams]

3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I've missed the conversation.

Wondering if the point is that Covid 19 deaths for NY are inflated, or across the world. 

The chart doesn't show anything else. It highlights what many doctors have been saying, that the threshold for Covid-19 being included in the official statistics is low and in the case of the US, opens you up to more federal funding and aid. For example, the exact same set of circumstances, swap out Covid-19 for seasonal flu and the person who died, doesn't get cited as having died from or with the Flu. 

But the assertion is that is happening in many regions and many nations. Hence why a nation such as Germany could have such a low level of mortality per capita. Because they haven't changed their approach to recording deaths.

It will take time, but this is indicating that many nations and regions will have the statistics revised down, due to the reference of historical data. 

[GboroRam]

16 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

The chart shows deaths year on year, as reported. It showed an increase of 3000 people in total. Year on year for that one month period. It showed the cause. The only variable being Covid-19. Year on year, the blue section which includes all deaths other than Covid 19, is down year on year from 13,000, to just 5,000. That figure is expected to be similar, year on year and yet it is significantly different. Which indicates the current statistics being used for Covid-19 are inflated and will at some point in time, be revised down. 

The official statistics currently show 11,000 Covid-19 deaths, where as the reality will be somewhere around the 3000 mark. 

 

 

I see what you are saying. I agree with you that those numbers are misleading. 

The Covid figure should be significantly reduced down to around 3,000.

But I don't see that as a reason for optimism. 

[Uptherams]

4 minutes ago, reverendo de duivel said:

It's impossible to tell right now, I'd guess.

For every extra Covid death, there may be a lesser death in road accidents, for example.

Equally there will be extra deaths, through people not calling on services when needed.

There will be people who die of Covid who would've died regardless due to existing conditions.

I'd guess the best time to analyse the figures and set them into historical and medical context will be a year from now and beyond.

100% agree. All this data does is confirm the anecdotal evidence of the doctors saying as such and highlights something to be expected when the statistics are revised. But as you say, a year from now and beyond. 

[GboroRam]

1 minute ago, Uptherams said:

100% agree. All this data does is confirm the anecdotal evidence of the doctors saying as such and highlights something to be expected when the statistics are revised. But as you say, a year from now and beyond. 

That's why I don't bother following the death counts or infection rates in the daily briefing any more. We haven’t even kept to one monitoring standard since this began, adding in care homes part way through, including deaths from prior to the monitoring period. Its fairly meaningless. The only figures we have are the comparison with previous years - and that's a false comparison during a nationwide lockdown. 

[Eddie]

18 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I see what you are saying. I agree with you that those numbers are misleading. 

The Covid figure should be significantly reduced down to around 3,000.

But I don't see that as a reason for optimism. 

Simply put, Covid19 increases your chances of death within the stated timeframe by 25%

[Rev]

5 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

That's why I don't bother following the death counts or infection rates in the daily briefing any more. We haven’t even kept to one monitoring standard since this began, adding in care homes part way through, including deaths from prior to the monitoring period. Its fairly meaningless. The only figures we have are the comparison with previous years - and that's a false comparison during a nationwide lockdown. 

It will be interesting to look back in years to come on the figures. 

How will they account for less deaths through local air pollution, RTA's, better personal hygiene etc, balanced against an increased in suicides, domestic violence deaths, more medical professionals dying at work, and people not seeking medical attention when they need it?

 

 

[Uptherams]

10 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Simply put, Covid19 increases your chances of death within the stated timeframe by 25%

Sorry, wouldn't that mean 25% increase in death not chance of death? ?

edit: If the infection fatality rate is 0.1% and everyone were to get it. That would mean people are 0.1% more likely to die. 

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

The chart doesn't show anything else. It highlights what many doctors have been saying, that the threshold for Covid-19 being included in the official statistics is low and in the case of the US, opens you up to more federal funding and aid. For example, the exact same set of circumstances, swap out Covid-19 for seasonal flu and the person who died, doesn't get cited as having died from or with the Flu. 

But the assertion is that is happening in many regions and many nations. Hence why a nation such as Germany could have such a low level of mortality per capita. Because they haven't changed their approach to recording deaths.

It will take time, but this is indicating that many nations and regions will have the statistics revised down, due to the reference of historical data. 

Not sure I see that being the case in the UK, which will make our figures look even worse in comparison to other countries.