Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[AZ Gull]

Guy on the right has nailed it.

John Terry never was the sharpest tool in the box.

 

[schmunk]

Wash your hands frequently, and don’t touch your eyes, mouth or nose.

No playing Heads, Shoulders, Knees and Toes, then...?

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

It has an incubation period of up to 2 weeks before symptoms show and during that time is also highly contagious. The news showed returnees being ferried in busses to quarantine with drivers not wearing hazmat suits and stating they would self quarantine, this is madness.

Not everyone is contagious during the incubation period. Those people that are contagious is due to the strain muting after around four person to person transmissions.

I was at an event at the weekend which had a number of medics present. They were the least worried of the people in the room. One of which had spent the weekend in York with her son whose is at the university of York ... as is my son.

One view was that whilst the number of deaths is likely to be accurate, the number of actual cases is understated which would mean the mortality rate is closure to 1-2%.

One thing that was annoying them was the number of people who wouldn’t know one end of virus from another suddenly becoming experts on viruses and the end of the world!

 

[Soylent Blue]

You haven't watched this yet but this chap looks clued up in your opinion? You can give an opinion on something you haven't seen?

I don't think I need to sort my head out thank you especially from someone who can form an opinion on something they haven't even seen.

The quote from brighton bluenose in my signature has never been so right.

Very badly worded by me, ive seen his last 3 daily updates and based it on that. Have watched it now though, pardon my misleading comment.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Guy on the right has nailed it.

Maybe he has a super hairy nose

 

[Soylent Blue]

One view was that whilst the number of deaths is likely to be accurate, the number of actual cases is understated which would mean the mortality rate is closure to 1-2%.

This is a misconception. If you take 100 people infected and follow their progress you come up with a percentage, it doesn't matter how many are outside the group, just grab 100 of them and see how they get along.

One such group of 99 of which about half were at the Wuhan market, 11 have died. It is then a case of seeing how that number was distorted, in this case the average age of deaths was 55 and 2/3s male, the former can be a reason for the high figure.

One thing that was annoying them was the number of people who wouldn’t know one end of virus from another suddenly becoming experts on viruses and the end of the world!

Well as I posted above to your other comment, good medics they may be but poor statisticians they also are. Sampling biases and other issues are better delt with by mathmaticians than medics. I admit Ive learned more about viruses in the last week than in my life but I'm just looking at the maths.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

This is a misconception. If you take 100 people infected and follow their progress you come up with a percentage, it doesn't matter how many are outside the group, just grab 100 of them and see how they get along.

One such group of 99 of which about half were at the Wuhan market, 11 have died. It is then a case of seeing how that number was distorted, in this case the average age of deaths was 55 and 2/3s male, the former can be a reason for the high figure.





Well as I posted above to your other comment, good medics they may be but poor statisticians they also are. Sampling biases and other issues are better delt with by mathmaticians than medics. I admit Ive learned more about viruses in the last week than in my life but I'm just looking at the maths.

I’ve held off for a couple hours but can’t resist .... “lies, damn lies and statistics”


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

This is a misconception. If you take 100 people infected and follow their progress you come up with a percentage, it doesn't matter how many are outside the group, just grab 100 of them and see how they get along.

One such group of 99 of which about half were at the Wuhan market, 11 have died. It is then a case of seeing how that number was distorted, in this case the average age of deaths was 55 and 2/3s male, the former can be a reason for the high figure.





Well as I posted above to your other comment, good medics they may be but poor statisticians they also are. Sampling biases and other issues are better delt with by mathmaticians than medics. I admit Ive learned more about viruses in the last week than in my life but I'm just looking at the maths.

The point that was being made that deaths are recorded. China has a culture of hiding things and many will not admit to having had the virus. You can only report infections that are reported.

100 is a shit sampling size, I would touch it with a barge pole. It’s open to a whole multitude of errors and coincidences.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

The point that was being made is that deaths are recorded. China has a culture of hiding things and many will not admit to having had the virus. You can only report infections that are reported.

100 is a shit sampling size, I wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole. It’s open to a whole multitude of errors and coincidences.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[sparkie]

So, the Chinese 'Porton Down' just happens to be in Wuhan.

Raised eyebrows. Fish market, hmmm....

 

[peterward]

Doctors & health workers wear masks to stop them passing on their germs by droplet infection. It does nothing to stop you catching anything. Wash your hands frequently, and don’t tough your eyes, mouth or nose.

That's not true. Regular surgical mask won't if someone sneezes at you, but N95 or FFP2/FFP3 will. Of course hand washing is crucial, just think how many passports the fella at passport control has handled, or how many people have opened the toilet doors!........, but it is a fact respitory illnesses of all types spread easily on aircraft (because of cabin air recycling) and whilst nobody could be 100% safe, you can make it far less likely.

 

[Soylent Blue]

The point that was being made that deaths are recorded. China has a culture of hiding things and many will not admit to having had the virus. You can only report infections that are reported.

100 is a shit sampling size, I would touch it with a barge pole. It’s open to a whole multitude of errors and coincidences.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Only used 100 for conveniance, Winnie the poo may hide stuff, as for academia if they didn't like it they would try to spike it.
As for the lies comment sounds like someone who doesn't understand statistics. your point is irelevant. Yea China may be hiding numbers but theres still 20,000 they have declared to work with.

There are not many variables in this model, sick live, sick dies, complications(which may be due to other factors like incompetence) and time.

You controll for time by following the disease in a group till its completion. If there are sampling biases they can be delt with in fresh samples.

As more people become infected in an area and the illness runs its course the fatality rate will rise in an asymptopic manner till its very close to the true number, hence the fatality rate in China is 2.1, in Hubewi its 3ish and in Wuhan its 4.9.

What you are alluding to is a type of "missing truth" fallacy favoured by anti-vaxxers. In that if their children are not vaccinated they wont show up in vaccine effectiveness samples, but the numbers will show up in death certificates.

Therefor rate of infection numbers are minimums, and the older infected areas will have numbers closer to the true R0.

so neeeeeeer lol.

 

[peterward]

One such group of 99 of which about half were at the Wuhan market, 11 have died. It is then a case of seeing how that number was distorted, in this case the average age of deaths was 55 and 2/3s male, the former can be a reason for the high figure

I read all about that first 99 (as it was described at length by a virologist), those 11 dying in that sample group of 99 is not a mortality rate of just over 11%. It's just 11% of that specific sample group happened to die.

The reason it's not a mortality rate of 11%........ all those 99 were admitted to hospital as all were very sick (at greater risk of death, which occurs in around 20% of infected people) but many others, in the majority of those who are infected are not always so sick or even admitted.

(One of the German cases just had diarrhea for 3 days)

For comparison regular seasonal flu kills over 500,000 people a year globally. (10,000 already in the US this winter)

If you took 99 people with more severe cases of regular flu who'd been hospitalised at the Sussex County and tried to work out a mortality rate, you simply can't as it doesn't count those not in hospital (less severe) who recover ok.

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

I always use the CDC website for information about the Coronavirus and similar outbreaks. It's always factual, informative and easy to understand without all the hype and hysteria generated by the media

 

[shingle]

Mrs Shingle and I came back from Beijing on Air China flight with coughing and spluttering Chinese passengers two weeks ago and for last five days I've had runny nose, headache etc, 99.9% sure its a common cold. Read the cdc thingy and they said coughing and fever were the main symptoms, which I havent got. Plus no one on the flight has, to my knowledge become ill, so not concerned.

 

[Baldseagull]

As it is Chinese and potentially deadly, should have been called Kung Flu.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

Only used 100 for conveniance, Winnie the poo may hide stuff, as for academia if they didn't like it they would try to spike it.
As for the lies comment sounds like someone who doesn't understand statistics. your point is irelevant. Yea China may be hiding numbers but theres still 20,000 they have declared to work with.

There are not many variables in this model, sick live, sick dies, complications(which may be due to other factors like incompetence) and time.

You controll for time by following the disease in a group till its completion. If there are sampling biases they can be delt with in fresh samples.

As more people become infected in an area and the illness runs its course the fatality rate will rise in an asymptopic manner till its very close to the true number, hence the fatality rate in China is 2.1, in Hubewi its 3ish and in Wuhan its 4.9.

What you are alluding to is a type of "missing truth" fallacy favoured by anti-vaxxers. In that if their children are not vaccinated they wont show up in vaccine effectiveness samples, but the numbers will show up in death certificates.

Therefor rate of infection numbers are minimums, and the older infected areas will have numbers closer to the true R0.

so neeeeeeer lol.

Oh the irony regards anti faxxer. There’s an anti-vaxxer thread on here somewhere and I’m very much in the vaccination camp. The reason that ******** Wakefield got it so spectacularly wrong and caused so much damage was because his sample size was <20. He wasn’t looking for autism but thought he saw a causal link and eureka. Prick.

Infections and deaths at source will be much higher hence the wuhan mortality rate. Ground zero if you will. The virus ability to spread ( how contagious it is), ability to mutate and mortality rate will all play a part.

And I do use statistics in my line of work ... failure rates, reliability, mean times etc ... the one thing that is clear that context also needs to be applied when using them. If I used the results at face value without applying context it would cost my projects a great deal of money.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[seagullsslimjim]

Mrs Shingle and I came back from Beijing on Air China flight with coughing and spluttering Chinese passengers two weeks ago and for last five days I've had runny nose, headache etc, 99.9% sure its a common cold. Read the cdc thingy and they said coughing and fever were the main symptoms, which I havent got. Plus no one on the flight has, to my knowledge become ill, so not concerned.

For real?

From the NHS website...

Travellers returning from other parts of China

If you've returned from other areas of China (but not Hong Kong or Macao) in the last 14 days, and get a cough or fever, or you feel short of breath:

stay indoors and avoid contact with other people

call NHS 111 to tell them of your recent travel to China

 

[shingle]

For real?

From the NHS website...

Travellers returning from other parts of China

If you've returned from other areas of China (but not Hong Kong or Macao) in the last 14 days, and get a cough or fever, or you feel short of breath:

stay indoors and avoid contact with other people

call NHS 111 to tell them of your recent travel to China

None of those symptoms fortunately and only transited through Beijing en route from Myanmar. The only thing that concerned me was the coughing, wheezing Chinese passengers sitting behind me who had started their journey from God knows where in China.

 

[Solid at the back]

None of those symptoms fortunately and only transited through Beijing en route from Myanmar. The only thing that concerned me was the coughing, wheezing Chinese passengers sitting behind me who had started their journey from God knows where in China.

And that's why the borders should of been closed. And also why this country and Europe already have an outbreak which can't contained now.
Far too little far too late, hundred of millions will die across the globe and simple closing of the borders would of saved lives in this country