Coronavirus

[ariotofmyown]

53 minutes ago, Sith Happens said:

Derby now in the top 5 worst cities. I did see even Amber Valley was 25 in the list of areas. 

Really hope we see some improvement in the next couple of weeks or tier 3 will be a very big possibility when lockdown ends.

The BBC suggested yesterday spike of cases could be the result of people filling their boots between lockdown being announced and imposed. 

 

Never understood the time given between announcing lockdowns and implementing it. Just seems to give people a chance for a big blowout exactly at the point when infections are at their worst.

[Norman]

15 minutes ago, Albert said:

Are you saying that if someone told you "so, we've decided to cut 11.7 years from your lifespan", you'd be okay with it? 

You've not really made an argument in the above either, you're just declared that it's a bad way for them to look at it... arbitrarily it seems. It's also far from the 'worst one', even by whatever ad hoc you're using. 

So, you're dismissing academic work because 'they might have a motive'. Excellent argument there. 

"Both of the above calculations may overstate the loss of remaining life in that they assign the remaining life expectancy based only on age, without taking into account that COVID-19 deaths are disproportionately occurring among those with compromised health status. Hanlon et al. (10) estimate that those dying from COVID-19 have only about 1 y less of remaining life on average than those at the same age in the general population, which would mean that the overstatement is not very large, around 8%. On the other hand, our calculations will be an understatement if the epidemic damages the health of survivors"

 

[Norman]

I believe those studies also do not take into account care homes, and the average life expectancy in them, rather than the general population. Which is where a vast amount of deaths in the UK have originated from. 

[Albert]

3 minutes ago, Norman said:

I believe those studies also do not take into account care homes, and the average life expectancy in them, rather than the general population. Which is where a vast amount of deaths in the UK have originated from. 

The quote you chose to use noted that the paper cited suggested that the overestimate of years may only be 1 year, even taking into account other conditions that people who fall victim to the disease might have had. They also note that loss of life during infection isn't the only lost years that should be taken into account, given such diseases can shorten lifespans. We won't have the full picture of that for years though. 

[Norman]

7 minutes ago, Albert said:

The quote you chose to use noted that the paper cited suggested that the overestimate of years may only be 1 year, even taking into account other conditions that people who fall victim to the disease might have had. They also note that loss of life during infection isn't the only lost years that should be taken into account, given such diseases can shorten lifespans. We won't have the full picture of that for years though. 

I know. I quoted it. They also don't use care home figures from what I can find. It's flawed. 

[Sith Happens]

22 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said:

Never understood the time given between announcing lockdowns and implementing it. Just seems to give people a chance for a big blowout exactly at the point when infections are at their worst.

Its a difficult one, i sort of agree. It would be good if it could all be hidden from public view and the MP's debate and discuss without anyone knowing. Probably in matters like this debating it and needing MP's to vote them in isnt the right thing to do, perhaps the government should have authority to introduce whatever measures are needed without a vote.

There has been evidence also that when something is suggested as being with immediate effect people lose their heads because its too soon.

Of course the ideal scenario is for people to look and think 'hey if there is a lockdown coming, maybe i should modify my behaviour immediately not rush out to pack into primark etc'

 

[Albert]

3 minutes ago, Norman said:

I know. I quoted it. They also don't use care home figures from what I can find. It's flawed. 

So, based on basically just ad hoc claims you've made about the other source, you're rejecting their findings? If you think I'm being unfair, are you able to point to which part of Hanlon et al's methodology you think is flawed in this case, particularly given they made this determination with UK data? 

[Norman]

5 minutes ago, Albert said:

So, based on basically just ad hoc claims you've made about the other source, you're rejecting their findings? If you think I'm being unfair, are you able to point to which part of Hanlon et al's methodology you think is flawed in this case, particularly given they made this determination with UK data? 

The fact that they measure expected life against the general population. 

If they measured expected life in care homes and included the vast difference that would make to to the data, then I'd take more notice. 

I can't believe that you don't think missing out that crucial, large amount of data doesn't change their findings? 

Because it does. 

[Albert]

24 minutes ago, Norman said:

The fact that they measure expected life against the general population. 

If they measured expected life in care homes and included the vast difference that would make to to the data, then I'd take more notice. 

I can't believe that you don't think missing out that crucial, large amount of data doesn't change their findings? 

Because it does. 

Well, care home residents have an average life expectancy about 2.2 years, and an average age is 87 years. Based on full UK data, you'd expect an 87 year old to live for another 5.89 years on average. 

The real question you've got to ask of Hanlon et al, however, is whether or not it's being in the care home, or the conditions that lead them to being in one, that leads to that discrepancy. Hanlon et al deal with the impact of the conditions. 

Now, unless you feel it's the care homes themselves that are leading to that drop in life expectancy, you're not really challenging anything in that paper. 

[Anag Ram]

Just now, Albert said:

Well, care home residents have an average life expectancy about 2.2 years, and an average age is 87 years. Based on full UK data, you'd expect an 87 year old to live for another 5.89 years on average. 

The real question you've got to ask of Hanlon et al, however, is whether or not it's being in the care home, or the conditions that lead them to being in one, that leads to that discrepancy. Hanlon et al deal with the impact of the conditions. 

Now, unless you feel it's the care homes themselves that are leading to that drop in life expectancy, you're not really challenging anything in that paper. 

That care home statistic is also weighted by more expensive care homes in affluent areas in which residents have much higher life expectancy.

[Archied]

2 hours ago, Albert said:

Not really sure what your point is. Both point are true. 

Life expectancy is median age at death, and people who reach a given age have a well defined 'expected years remaining'. That is, people who reach the life expectancy aren't expected to all just up and die immediately. For example, in Australia in 2015-17, the male life expectancy at birth was 80.76 years, but an 80 year old had 9.02 years of expected life left, while an 81 year old had 8.44 years. That is, for all men who reached 80 years old, 50% of them would go on to reach 89. 

When you take into account that plenty of younger people have died due to Covid-19 as well, it's not surprising that the average number of expected years of life lost per death is 11.7 years. There really is no denying that while Covid-19 disproportionately kills older people, there are many years of life being lost. 

Additionally, we're not talking into account years lost from the other impacts of the disease, including organ damage, as discussed on here earlier. Depending on how severe that turns out to be in future years, that could become a very significant concern. 

Define plenty

[DarkFruitsRam7]

1 hour ago, ariotofmyown said:

Never understood the time given between announcing lockdowns and implementing it. Just seems to give people a chance for a big blowout exactly at the point when infections are at their worst.

I suppose it's to help businesses prepare a little bit? That would be my guess.

[DarkFruitsRam7]

It's mad that those who didn't want the Conservatives and Boris Johnson anywhere near Downing Street (me included) seem far more supportive of government actions than those who voted for him. 

That isn't intended as an opinionated, political comment. It's just another example of the strange times we live in.

[Albert]

6 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

That care home statistic is also weighted by more expensive care homes in affluent areas in which residents have much higher life expectancy.

So, do you have a source on this, and a breakdown of life expectancy for elsewhere? 

1 minute ago, Archied said:

Define plenty

More than a few. 

[Eddie]

4 hours ago, Archied said:

Or they could just be desperate to keep they’re jobs ?

or their lives

[Archied]

28 minutes ago, Albert said:

So, do you have a source on this, and a breakdown of life expectancy for elsewhere? 

More than a few. 

I only ask because you seem to need opposing views to be backed with in depth figures but for you plenty will suffice ?‍♂️

[Archied]

32 minutes ago, Eddie said:

or their lives

Not had too many 82 year olds turn up with deliveries round mine

[Cardinal]

2 hours ago, Albert said:

Are you saying that if someone told you "so, we've decided to cut 11.7 years from your lifespan", you'd be okay with it? 

You've not really made an argument in the above either, you're just declared that it's a bad way for them to look at it... arbitrarily it seems. It's also far from the 'worst one', even by whatever ad hoc you're using. 

So, you're dismissing academic work because 'they might have a motive'. Excellent argument there. 

I'm not sure you read my post properly. Where did I dismiss academic work?

I was simply highlighting that the authors admit themselves that there is a range of evaluations that can be made from the data, some overwhelmingly large and some almost negligible. That is their words not mine. Hence my comment you have to take it with a pinch of salt. 

As I said I would prefer to listen to the people who are closest to it and not pick and choose the reports and information within them to help me make my point. 

 

[jimmyp]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-nurse-death-world-war-one-ww1-b1448185.html

 

“As many nurses have now died from coronavirus than were killed during the entirety of the First World War, the International Council of Nurses (ICN) has revealed.”

 

Not many any of these unfortunate folk would of been in their 80’s. 

[May Contain Nuts]

At times, this thread...