Generic Virus Thread

[chrisp65]

12 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

Yes, however as noted in the article above we are now finding out the mortality rate is similar to the flu. The question then becomes should society lockdown every flu season to protect the thousands that are killed by that virus or are we selfish to plow on through each winter regardless?

I am not trying to be some sort of virus denier but there are genuine discussions to be had. I actually think in the years to come people will treat flu season more seriously and take special precautions that we wouldn’t have in previous years. Probably not a ‘lockdown’ but things like social distancing, mask wearing and hand washing  will likely become regular winter habits for a number of years. 

No, I don’t think you’re a denier, it’s just an interesting topics, and there clearly does have to be a cost benefit, or they’d ban cars and aircraft and booze.

Excess deaths due to flu, figures by public health england:

2015: 6,500

2016: 14,000

2017: 20,000

2018: 3,300

2019: 7,400

2020 Covid in 6 months: 41,551

so similar, as in more than double the worst figure of the last 5 years, in a shorter time span

 

It’s bloody tricky, and there does come a time when you have to say the lack of trade, the lack of tax revenue would at a very basic level damage the NHS and harm more than it would protect. But right now, with the incompetent and the greedy in charge, it would be a very dangerous conversation to be working out the cost benefit of our mothers and our children with asthma etc..

(the above goes some way to addressing Blandy’s point on numbers also)

[chrisp65]

4 minutes ago, blandy said:

Not making a judgement either way, but stats are interesting things. Especially when mixed with emotions.

 

Interesting times.

Agree entirely, we’re a weird bunch.

You’d imagine 700,000 british dead in World War 1 would be sufficient to end all wars.

Problems remain.

[Genie]

Panic over, it was just a blip. Today’s numbers well down... not

Quote

A further 2,948 confirmed cases of Covid-19 have been reported in the government’s daily figures for the UK today.

This is down slightly from 2,988 on Sunday, which was the highest since 22 May and prompted concern that the government was losing control of the crisis.

Source

Edited September 7, 2020 by Genie

[Davkaus]

I'm not sure how worried we should be about the cases going up yet.

We've seen the deaths stay very low and stablise at those very low numbers. What's more if you look at somewhere like France, who we seem to be about  a month behind, they've seen cases go up from about 2k a month ago to over 8k per day now.

 

What's curious is their deaths chart.

We're seeing this in other countries too. 

[bannedfromHandV]

It’s almost like something’s not adding up.......

[Genie]

1 minute ago, Davkaus said:

What's curious is their deaths chart.

We're seeing this in other countries too. 

No kidding, did about 250 people come back from the dead in the middle of May?

[blandy]

8 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

so similar, as in more than double the worst figure of the last 5 years, in a shorter time span

And despite a lockdown being implemented (albeit too late). It's clearly, demonstrably, much worse than flu in its lethality. it's not flu, it hasn't gone away, precautions are still utterly necessary. Because of the care homes thing it's possible a disproportionate number of vulnerable people died early. But there's still many many more vulnerable people potentially at risk of severe illness or death from it.

In pure statistical terms it seems (IMO) to be a case of there being a need to categorise people and deal with them differently according to vulnerability. Whether in societal terms that would be acceptable/tolerable, I dunno. But if we accept that people in care homes need to be protected better than children, then we're already on that road of either by regulation or by personal choice of action dealing with risk differently for different parts of society.

[blandy]

1 minute ago, Genie said:

did about 250 people come back from the dead in the middle of May?

Día de Muertos

[Davkaus]

1 minute ago, Genie said:

No kidding, did about 250 people come back from the dead in the middle of May?

I didn't even notice that 

They revised their death total down on that day, these figures are put together by the reported total deaths announced each day rather than a figure of how many people died on that die.

[bielesibub]

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

No kidding, did about 250 people come back from the dead in the middle of May?

Probably ties in with them starting filming more The Walking Dead filler episodes

[Stevo985]

21 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

No, I don’t think you’re a denier, it’s just an interesting topics, and there clearly does have to be a cost benefit, or they’d ban cars and aircraft and booze.

Excess deaths due to flu, figures by public health england:

2015: 6,500

2016: 14,000

2017: 20,000

2018: 3,300

2019: 7,400

2020 Covid in 6 months: 41,551

so similar, as in more than double the worst figure of the last 5 years, in a shorter time span

 

It’s bloody tricky, and there does come a time when you have to say the lack of trade, the lack of tax revenue would at a very basic level damage the NHS and harm more than it would protect. But right now, with the incompetent and the greedy in charge, it would be a very dangerous conversation to be working out the cost benefit of our mothers and our children with asthma etc..

(the above goes some way to addressing Blandy’s point on numbers also)

*With a lockdown and social distancing in place

[Davkaus]

Another school closed, but you have to allow yourself a wry smile for this one

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/coalville-school-closes-due-to-coronavirus-1-6826041

Quote

 

A school Boris Johnson visited days ago to promote children returning to education has closed after a staff member tested positive for coronavirus.

Pupils at Castle Rock High School in Coalville, Leicestershire were told to stay at home and self-isolate after a confirmed case of the virus.

Six tutor groups and two PE classes were told to stay home and wait for further instructions from the school to confirm for how long they needed to stay away.

Johnson visited the school on August 26 as it reopened, and he gave a speech saying that the biggest risk to children was not the virus, but “continuing to be out of school”.

 

[Stevo985]

15 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I'm not sure how worried we should be about the cases going up yet.

We've seen the deaths stay very low and stablise at those very low numbers. What's more if you look at somewhere like France, who we seem to be about  a month behind, they've seen cases go up from about 2k a month ago to over 8k per day now.

 

What's curious is their deaths chart.

We're seeing this in other countries too. 

Is this possibly just a result of increased hospital capacity and doctors learning how best to battle the virus?

Also as I mentioned previously I think the "normal" thing to happen with viruses is the deadliest strains only have one peak, because people who get it are so ill they can't move around or spread the virus. But the less deadly and less serious strains do get spread around because people are either well enough to still go about their business or don't even know they've got it as we've seen with Covid.

So this could be a case of we're getting a second peak, but it's the less serious strain of the virus so it's resulting in far less deaths

 

Pure speculation on my part, I'm not basing this on anything concrete

Edited September 7, 2020 by Stevo985

[chrisp65]

6 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

It’s almost like something’s not adding up.......

So, I work on building sites.

Last week we had 2 sites where we had to close due to people testing positive for covid. I strongly suspect nobody will die or carry long term illness or consequences from this.

One of the reasons I strongly suspect this, is we are still shielding older, fatter, more asthmatic staff from visiting building sites.

So back in March, the Clerk of Works on a site might typically have been brought in out of retirement, 66 years old with a waist size around a 48 inch. He’d have been in serious trouble if he’d caught it. Now, in September, everyone on those sites is younger and fitter. I’m in my 50’s, 38 inch waist, and a lot fitter than I was 6 months ago, I’m probably now the person most at risk on that site.

So more testing, more cases, less deaths.

That’s my theory contribution. It’ll be a hundred little things.

 

[Davkaus]

I don't think anyone really knows yet. One theory I've read is that it's partly due to reduced viral load, people are catching it, but they're not being exposed to it for long enough for it to be as serious as the cases we were seeing pre-lockdown. As people were posting earlier, once we reach winter and people are mixing more indoors, we may see if become more deadly again, but it's all guesswork I think.

[LondonLax]

12 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

No, I don’t think you’re a denier, it’s just an interesting topics, and there clearly does have to be a cost benefit, or they’d ban cars and aircraft and booze.

Excess deaths due to flu, figures by public health england:

2015: 6,500

2016: 14,000

2017: 20,000

2018: 3,300

2019: 7,400

2020 Covid in 6 months: 41,551

so similar, as in more than double the worst figure of the last 5 years, in a shorter time span

 

It’s bloody tricky, and there does come a time when you have to say the lack of trade, the lack of tax revenue would at a very basic level damage the NHS and harm more than it would protect. But right now, with the incompetent and the greedy in charge, it would be a very dangerous conversation to be working out the cost benefit of our mothers and our children with asthma etc..

(the above goes some way to addressing Blandy’s point on numbers also)

It is worse than the flu in the sense that there is no equivalent of a seasonal flu jab that will blunt its impact on the most vulnerable, hence the need for society to take special measures. However, is closing society down actually the most appropriate measure to cause the least damage on society?

I am interested to see what happens in Sweden this winter. Deaths have fallen to very low numbers despite no change in policy since the start of the pandemic and numbers of new cases are now lower than neighbouring Norway and Denmark who are both starting to see a rise again.

If that trend is sustained through the winter months as well then Sweden will consider its strategy to have been a success in the face of global peer pressure. However if there is also a second wave here the strategy will look like a folly. 

[LondonLax]

6 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Is this possibly just a result of increased hospital capacity and doctors learning how best to battle the virus?

Also as I mentioned previously I think the "normal" thing to happen with viruses is the deadliest strains only have one peak, because people who get it are so ill they can't move around or spread the virus. But the less deadly and less serious strains do get spread around because people are either well enough to still go about their business or don't even know they've got it as we've seen with Covid.

So this could be a case of we're getting a second peak, but it's the less serious strain of the virus so it's resulting in far less deaths

 

Pure speculation on my part, I'm not basing this on anything concrete

I think that is true. A virus is more successful at spreading if it doesn’t incapacitate its host so the mutations that are more mild are more successful. 

If that is appropriate to this virus than the Swedish strategy of keeping society open but instructing people with symptoms to stay home would have likely given the weakest strains a chance to spread more widely. 

[chrisp65]

5 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

It is worse than the flu in the sense that there is no equivalent of a seasonal flu jab that will blunt its impact on the most vulnerable, hence the need for society to take special measures. However, is closing society down actually the most appropriate measure to cause the least damage on society?

I am interested to see what happens in Sweden this winter. Deaths have fallen to very low numbers despite no change in policy since the start of the pandemic and numbers of new cases are now lower than neighbouring Norway and Denmark who are both starting to see a rise again.

If that trend is sustained through the winter months as well then Sweden will consider its strategy to have been a success in the face of global peer pressure. However if there is also a second wave here the strategy will look like a folly. 

It depends what you are using as your measure of closing down society and your measure of damage to society.

Close down here meant I was allowed to travel a maximum of 5 miles ‘or what was reasonable’. So at the strictest point in lockdown I could still travel to do my job, I could still go out for air and exercise and a change of scenery.

I personally would consider my society more damaged if I lost friends and family, than if coffee franchises go bust.

But obviously, we need the ability to fund power stations and hospitals, we need to keep the lights on. Perhaps if we were less reliant on buying shit and owning shit and amassing shit and travelling to Ibiza to drink lager, it would be an easier decision as to what is important, and what is actually, just shit.

[bickster]

Just around the corner from our office. Should be getting a visit from the council in the coming days

 

[PaulC]

We wont know for another 4 weeks whether the death rates are going to rise in line with the rise in cases. Hospitalisations will no doubt start to rise again but as its mainly young people who are getting infected theres not going to a surge in that or deaths rates  anyway. the kock-on effect could be devastating in coming weeks though. Its already difficult enough to get an appointment with a GP. I have recently changed doctors and spent two hours in a queue on the phone just to get through to the receptionist.