Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[ManOfSussex]

The highest death total in one week for 20 years...What the hell occurred Jan 2000 ? Did I miss something ?

That was the first time weekly figures were gathered I believe.

 

[Machiavelli]

its unlikely to help renewables when oil costs so little. fracking will be wiped out, it'll come back once the price rises as its easy and quick to start up operations.

You're probably right on this. How long do you expect exceptionally low oil prices lasting? Or do you avoid bringing out the crystal ball?

 

[Machiavelli]

Do you know if Spain includes them in their numbers? Heard homes are very bad there...

I'm pretty sure they don't (whereas Belgium, for instance, does) and, yes, there have been some awful situations in care homes there.

 

[RossyG]

Any of our senior fans remember the Hong Kong Flu of 1968. I’d not heard of it until recently, but it killed 80,000 British people in 1968.

What was the mood like at the time? Obviously there were no mass lockdowns, but were hospitals struggling? Schools shut?

I’m about to research it online, but some personal recommendations would be fascinating.

 

[Notters]

So we're quite prepared to put the teachers at risk?

Aren't you basically just ignoring the article, my point, and the whole point in social distancing?

> IF shown that children do not easily transmit the virus then the teachers will be at low risk of contracting the virus, provided they distance from each other (as is the case anyway for most of the day)
> The point of the control measures is to reduce the rate of spread, not to stop people getting it (as a lot of people still seem to think)

 

[ManOfSussex]

I don't think what they're currently indicating is quite as bad as what I feared. They're indicating that "at least 15%" of deaths are occurring outside hospitals, whereas in other European countries this percentage was nearer 50% and, if this transpires to be the case, things aren't quite that sobering. I'd still like to see some focus on the care home sector, which has been at best a low priority thus far.

We'll obviously see what happens in hospitals with Covid-19 over the coming few days, but as I said in another post, these ONS figures are only up to and including a public holiday 11 days ago, therefore less deaths would be recorded on the 10th. It's care homes and the knock on effects of non Covid-19 cases not going to hospital or their GP as they would in normal times as well for me, that'd I'd like to see the focus on. We'll all have to see just what emerges over the course of time though.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

The biggest problem I have with schools returning soon is the wider one. Parents on the school run twice a day and thinking based on being able to do that, they can get back to work or generally go out more. It's not just the children's ability to infect that is the issue and whilst that one story is encouraging I would need far more to convince me to send my children back

Same here and then parents dropping their kids off at the grandparent(s), we could be hit with a second wave, and then go right back to square one.

 

[beorhthelm]

You're probably right on this. How long do you expect exceptionally low oil prices lasting? Or do you avoid bringing out the crystal ball?

as long as there is global lockdown. once economy returns to some normality (or Saudis and Russians cut production substantially), the oil demand will rise. give it a 3-6mth to get to price range $50-60.

 

[beorhthelm]

re country data, the standard is report on hospital numbers daily, they are what governments know with reasonable accuracy in that time frame. all other countries have the same problems with collecting collating data from multiple sources, so non-hospital data is delayed and added later. some also have issues with what they count, thats another matter that will become apparent later.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

It seems there's a possibility that children are a lot less infectious - as well as less susceptible, which could lead to schools reopening soon if proven?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ot-transmit-disease-to-more-than-170-contacts

Whilst that may be good news if it plays out in a wider context with other children being similarly predisposed, this paragraph highlights that the problem with schools re-opening is not restricted to the children being in school itself:

'Dozens of countries have closed their schools to slow the transmission of coronavirus, though the restrictions have been brought in to avoid the social gatherings that happen around schools as well as limiting spread of the virus within them.'

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Interesting that France and others also report these. Shows much bigger failings in this country.

I believe the majority of countries report the same way we do. It is for pure convenience in terms of a quick number allowing the data to be digested more rapidly. But you know that.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

The highest death total in one week for 20 years...What the hell occurred Jan 2000 ? Did I miss something ?

Millennium bug?

Aren't you basically just ignoring the article, my point, and the whole point in social distancing?

> IF shown that children do not easily transmit the virus then the teachers will be at low risk of contracting the virus, provided they distance from each other (as is the case anyway for most of the day)
> The point of the control measures is to reduce the rate of spread, not to stop people getting it (as a lot of people still seem to think)

I wonder how that works with viral load? Maybe the kids don't tend to get coronavirus badly, however, what if there are several sufferers in school or worse, one class, would that increase the viral load and therefore put any adults at high risk?

 

[WATFORD zero]

re country data, the standard is report on hospital numbers daily, they are what governments know with reasonable accuracy in that time frame. all other countries have the same problems with collecting collating data from multiple sources, so non-hospital data is delayed and added later. some also have issues with what they count, thats another matter that will become apparent later.

I believe the majority of countries report the same way we do. It is for pure convenience in terms of a quick number allowing the data to be digested more rapidly. But you know that.

I believe that Belgium, Sweden and France include Care home deaths, Italy, Spain and UK are hospital deaths only. (That is my understanding although getting definitive answers can be problematic !).

I don't think what they're currently indicating is quite as bad as what I feared. They're indicating that "at least 15%" of deaths are occurring outside hospitals, whereas in other European countries this percentage was nearer 50% and, if this transpires to be the case, things aren't quite that sobering. I'd still like to see some focus on the care home sector, which has been at best a low priority thus far.

I believe that the figures from the ONS this morning were showing the daily Government figures to be underestimates in the 30%-40% range (which was similar to last week's ONS figures). Here's my post from the 'Number of Deaths' thread.

The ONS have released their total fatality figures today up to 10th April.

View attachment 122550

It looks like it's still running 30%-40% above the figures that the Government are announcing daily. (The ONS figures being a week in arrears in order to get the detailed information).

If these are updated on the COBR fatalities graph today up to day 25, (they appeared on the graph 5 days ago, but haven't been updated since) it will mean that the total fatalities on 10th April were about the same as Spain, with only US having more.

View attachment 122554

On the positive side though, although the numbers of fatalities has been underestimated, the overall curve still seems to have peaked (or be peaking). Unfortunately, we won't know what it peaked at until next Tuesday at least.

If the ONS figures are reflected on the updated COBR charts at the Government briefing today, things may be a little clearer, or not

 

[The Wizard]

778 England
70 Scotland
25 Wales
NI - ?

Looks like 880+ new deaths, I guess the weekend lag is really coming into play. Horrible. next few days numbers will give us a better indication of where we are at, last 3 days average is 631.

 

[Notters]

778 England
70 Scotland
25 Wales
NI - ?

Looks like 880+ new deaths, I guess the weekend lag is really coming into play. Horrible. next few days numbers will give us a better indication of where we are at, last 3 days average is 631.

Which is about where we should be according to my graph yesterday - on the assumption that actual figures occur about four days before reported figures.

 

[beorhthelm]

I believe that Belgium, Sweden and France include Care home deaths, Italy, Spain and UK are hospital deaths only. (That is my understanding although getting definitive answers can be problematic !).

agreed, i was going to edit the post after i couldnt find an actual reporting standard. France make quite a point they report care homes but less clear how they achieve that on daily basis. all countries are counting all deaths in their data eventually, so we shouldn't get too fixated, the trends are more important.

for UK the ONS delayed shows 10% in care homes, a lot lower than some projected.

 

[WATFORD zero]

agreed, i was going to edit the post after i couldnt find an actual reporting standard. France make quite a point they report care homes but less clear how they achieve that on daily basis. all countries are counting all deaths in their data eventually, so we shouldn't get too fixated, the trends are more important.

for UK the ONS delayed shows 10% in care homes, a lot lower than some projected.

Where did you get 10% from ? Sky have been reporting 41% from today's ONS figures.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-deaths-41-higher-than-governments-hospital-only-figures-ons-11976357

And from this graph from the ONS today, I estimated 30%-40%

 

[Swansman]

Daily press briefing in Sweden is done...

Weekend numbers are now counted and we remain steady on around 50-60 deaths per day as usual (about half of them hospital deaths and half care home deaths), numbers of new patients going into the intensive care unit is roughly the same number that is going out and everything keeps looking very fine and steady.

In their usual Powerpoint presentation they also showed that they believed our peak for Stockholm was April 15 and that by May 1 a third of Stockholm would have been infected.

Here's a photo of what the daily press briefing in Sweden looks like, and yes the people and the briefing are exactly as dull and undramatic as it looks like.



One month ago I couldnt in the wildest of my dreams have imagined that our strategy would turn out this well but I'm very glad it did.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Where did you get 10% from ? Sky have been reporting 41% from today's ONS figures (and, as I mentioned earlier, my rough estimates were 30%-40%)

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-deaths-41-higher-than-governments-hospital-only-figures-ons-11976357

On the Beeb:

 

[Mellotron]

New antibodies test in Stockholm area of Sweden - 11% are showing antibodies, but real % of infected will be higher.

They say the tests are 70-80% sensitive and therefore there will be some false negatives, but no false positives, thus 11% is almost certainly an underestimation of the numbers infected.

https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/11-procent-av-stockholmarna-har-antikroppar-mot-covid-19

Further down in the article, is the following;

One third were infected

Tom Britton, professor of mathematical statistics, says that a third of Stockholmers have already become infected. According to his calculations, the spread is still large, but is slowly declining.

- In about a month, the worst spread of infection will be over in Stockholm. Then we will be close to the so-called herd immunity, Tom Britton tells SVT.

Although Tom Britton's calculations do not fully match the tests conducted by Jan Albert, Tom Britton believes that there are no contradictions between the two studies.

- Both studies have uncertainties. If my estimation is slightly high and the other a little too low, it is likely that the truth lies somewhere in between, says Tom Britton.

Worth noting also that this was a test on blood donors, all of whom believed themselves to be completely healthy, and had shown no symptoms of COVID-19.