Covid-19

[If it be your will]

I think it will come, it’s just when!!!!

There's what, maybe 8 weeks left to find it? Jeez I hope you're right, but right now I can't think what it might be.

[Lowbankclaret]

I would not use data that experts warn is not a reliable measure. Because I know the limitations of my understanding. If they say it's not reliable, that'll do for me.

I don’t see how data based on positive test results and counting dead people cannot be reliable.

No expert is saying the test results are unreliable.
And I think we know when a person is dead.
The variable of unknown cases is a misnomer .

As an unknown unknown it can never be quantified. Therefore you can argue it forever.

[thatdberight]

I don’t see how data based on positive test results and counting dead people cannot be reliable.

No expert is saying the test results are unreliable.
And I think we know when a person is dead.
The variable of unknown cases is a misnomer .

As an unknown unknown it can never be quantified. Therefore you can argue it forever.

I'm not discussing this again. You're, on the one hand, wildly extrapolating into the future and on the other saying what happens in the future is too uncertain to be of value.

If serious scientists' last estimate was in the 1% range I take that. You're not a serious person in giving an estimate of that figure.

[Lowbankclaret]

There's what, maybe 8 weeks left to find it? Jeez I hope you're right, but right now I can't think what it might be.

I will use the example of penicillin.
Going off memory and not googled it.

Soldiers were dying anyway still they used it on them and they got better.
It might get to that again, sod the protocols. Just try new drugs on people that are dying anyway.
Italy’s doctors are making those decisions today on who not help.

[If it be your will]

With the common side effects & interactions that’ll only be suitable for some people even if it was successful, some high risk groups may consider the best option is to leave it well alone & let nature find a way.
https://www.everydayhealth.com/drugs/chloroquine

Perhaps, yes. It's not without risks, that's for sure.

[Lowbankclaret]

I'm not discussing this again. You're, on the one hand, wildly extrapolating into the future and on the other saying what happens in the future is too uncertain to be of value.

If serious scientists' last estimate was in the 1% range I take that. You're not a serious person in giving an estimate of that figure.

Even the World Health Org says it’s 3.4%, suddenly are they not serious scientists?????

[thatdberight]

Even the World Health Org says it’s 3.4%, suddenly are they not serious scientists?????

I'm not discussing this again.

Both your inability to differentiate between CFR and IFR and my tendency to tell posters exactly what I think of them when they are unable to rationally deal with data have already been proven. We'd be going over old ground.

Consider me unable to see your further misuse of data.

[Jakubclaret]

Perhaps, yes. It's not without risks, that's for sure.

I actually think lowbanks come out with a good idea, you might as well test some drugs on dying people, there’s nothing to lose, I know it’s not ethical but will speed science up.

[If it be your will]

I actually think lowbanks come out with a good idea, you might as well test some drugs on dying people, there’s nothing to lose, I know it’s not ethical but will speed science up.

This is already being done. Stuff is being thrown at people without clear evidence everywhere. The Italians, for instance, are pumping their patients with Chloroquine and Kaletra without even a single randomised control trial to confirm it even does anything.

[Jakubclaret]

This is already being done. Stuff is being thrown at people without clear evidence everywhere. The Italians, for instance, are pumping their patients with Chloroquine and Kaletra without even a single randomised control trial to confirm it even does anything.

So it’s wait & see?

[boatshed bill]

How long would someone be ill with this? I mean how long to recover, not die.

[Dark Cloud]

After this weekend no one will be going to football.

Well I will (If it's on!)

Genuine question. How reliable is the test to see if a person has this thing? They seem to be able to test and diagnose extremely quickly in every country in the world, which implies no lab analysis or the like. This makes me wonder if the test is totally reliable or if some of the "cases" are maybe mistakes, especially if a person has a cold or is poorly in some other way say.

[paulatky]

Let's just take the one I asked 3 times, why do you compare the UK outbreak to that in Italy, given the obvious lifestyle differences which make viruses spread by human contact far more likely in a country where bodily contact is the norm,to ours where it's frowned upon?

What I said was the Uk was 14 days behind Italy,

14 days ago Italy had 470 confirmed cases a very similar number to what we have today.

[Grumps]

You think it will be less severe. You may not want to commit to a figure but broadly how do you see this playing out? Do very few people get the virus because it's not as transmissible as thought? Do initial studies get superseded by later ones showing the fatality rate is much lower? Does it drop off in virulence with spring? Is there a vaccine/cure intervention? Genuinely interested to know how you're seeing this work through.

I've no idea how this will pan out, which is why I have not made any wild predictions

[Lowbankclaret]

I actually think lowbanks come out with a good idea, you might as well test some drugs on dying people, there’s nothing to lose, I know it’s not ethical but will speed science up.

If I thought I was dying I would agree to testing any new drug.

[Grumps]

You said far more than that, but how many deaths did they have, percentage wise?

[thatdberight]

I've no idea how this will pan out, which is why I have not made any wild predictions

OK. It's easy to constantly throw disbelieving statements at other posters (some of which deserve it) without saying anything in particular but your criticisms have always been of anything saying it's serious. You have not been even handed in dismissing posts of the "'tis but a scratch" variety.

You did also say, in one of the rare posts when you put a number on something, "... 85 in this country have it, probably none will die, so what's the mortality rate in this country ? "

[Lowbankclaret]

I'm not discussing this again.

Both your inability to differentiate between CFR and IFR and my tendency to tell posters exactly what I think of them when they are unable to rationally deal with data have already been proven. We'd be going over old ground.

Consider me unable to see your further misuse of data.

Like I say we will never agree.

You think Italy are being stupid and the figures are wrong.

There are hundreds of people dying in Italy’s hospitals but your experts are correct it’s all an overreaction.

[If it be your will]

How long would someone be ill with this? I mean how long to recover, not die.

To give you an idea:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... ients.html

Difficult. We don't know how many are missed from the data with completely inconsequential illness, for a start (though WHO seem to think 'not many'). I think you might be looking at feeling pretty wretched for about 2 weeks on average, but then again, there are reports of people saying things like 'It wasn't that bad, really'. It appears that if you make it to the middle of the second week without suffering either multi-organ failure or needing to be ventilated, you will likely to okay.

There seems to be very little data on the general condition of those that have 'recovered', or if there are any long term consequences, and if so, the severity and frequency of them.

[Lowbankclaret]

How long would someone be ill with this? I mean how long to recover, not die.

The first Italian case was a 38 year old male. From the article I think I linked. He was in intensive care for about three weeks. Was on a ventilator for a couple of weeks and Was now awake being given small amounts of oxygen.

[paulatky]

I've no idea how this will pan out, which is why I have not made any wild predictions

Thats called sitting on the fence.
Make an educated guess as to what you think will happen.
I think there will be far more deaths from this than seasonal flu both here and worldwide.
There will also be a very significant adverse economic effect.

[thatdberight]

You think Italy are being stupid and the figures are wrong.

Not Italy.

[FactualFrank]

Ever since it was brought to my attention that you can say “Covid-19” to the tune of “Come on, Eileen,” I’ve been unable to read it any other way.

[thatdberight]

To give you an idea:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... ients.html

Difficult. We don't know how many are missed from the data with completely inconsequential illness, for a start (though WHO seem to think 'not many'). I think you might be looking at feeling pretty wretched for about 2 weeks on average, but then again, there are reports of people saying things like 'It wasn't that bad, really'. It appears that if you make it to the middle of the second week without suffering either multi-organ failure or needing to be ventilated, you will likely to okay.

There seems to be very little data on the general condition of those that have 'recovered', or if there are any long term consequences, and if so, the severity and frequency of them.

Nadine Dorries didn't feel unwell until last Thursday and today says she's past the worst of it. Sample size, one - just an anecdote.

[If it be your will]

If I thought I was dying I would agree to testing any new drug.

This is part of the ethical conundrum. By the time you're nearly dying, and therefore willing to throw caution to the wind, it's already too late for any experimental intervention to do much good. Intervention has to be early. But that involves chucking untested (and reasonably toxic) medicine at people in the early stage of disease, most of whom would have been absolutely fine without it.

[Lowbankclaret]

Well I will (If it's on!)

Genuine question. How reliable is the test to see if a person has this thing? They seem to be able to test and diagnose extremely quickly in every country in the world, which implies no lab analysis or the like. This makes me wonder if the test is totally reliable or if some of the "cases" are maybe mistakes, especially if a person has a cold or is poorly in some other way say.

No expert on the testing , but reading lots of stuff there appears to be different tests. This link has some information.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/the-f ... s-testing/

[icu81b4]

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/03/ ... -to-panic/

10 reasons not to panic



"Don't Panic..... Don't Panic....etc"

[thatdberight]

This is part of the ethical conundrum. By the time you're nearly dying, and therefore willing to throw caution to the wind, it's already too late for any experimental intervention to do much good. Intervention has to be early. But that involves chucking untested (and reasonably toxic) medicine at people in the early stage of disease, most of whom would have been absolutely fine without it.

And any credible mortality rate that's being put forward by the experts just doesn't justify it. Sad to say but the reality is that some sort of QALY calculation needs to be made and the payback just isn't big enough to justify that sort of gamble.

[Lowbankclaret]

This is part of the ethical conundrum. By the time you're nearly dying, and therefore willing to throw caution to the wind, it's already too late for any experimental intervention to do much good. Intervention has to be early. But that involves chucking untested (and reasonably toxic) medicine at people in the early stage of disease, most of whom would have been absolutely fine without it.

I agree, but at times you need to redefine the rules.

This might be one of those times.

[AlargeClaret]

Oxygen and antibiotics , we Brits keep things simple ,well for now anyway

[Lowbankclaret]

Thats called sitting on the fence.
Make an educated guess as to what you think will happen.
I think there will be far more deaths from this than seasonal flu both here and worldwide.
There will also be a very significant adverse economic effect.

He is not having that as in his statistical world of experts the death rate is no worse than flu.

[Zlatan]

JP Sears is back...

https://youtu.be/XPpzHYKpndk

[paulatky]

OK. It's easy to constantly throw disbelieving statements at other posters (some of which deserve it) without saying anything in particular but your criticisms have always been of anything saying it's serious. You have not been even handed in dismissing posts if the "'tis but a scratch" variety.

You did also say, in one of the rare posts when you put a number on something, "... 85 in this country have it, probably none will die, so what's the mortality rate in this country ? "

Grumps seems to be one of those people who never makes a decision or come to s conclusion but is always the 1st to rubbish other people’s opinions.

Those people usually suffer from splinters in the bum.

[thatdberight]

Dr. Anthony Fauci.. told.. that the virus would be "ten times more lethal than the seasonal flu" with a mortality rate of 1 percent.

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) director told... that the mortality rate for COVID-19 was "about 2, 2.5 percent" at the time but was "probably closer" to 1 percent.

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-top-coro ... lu-1491696

[Jakubclaret]

Think my bolthole will be my nuclear bunker as gordenvale suggested, it’s unusual him being quiet usually he provides some sort of input on the recent developments, some stuff I agree with some I don’t.

[Spijed]

If anyone has a potentially compromised immune system like me here is some good advice from a group of cancer charities:

https://mcusercontent.com/68b588bc5847c ... _FINAL.pdf

[Jakubclaret]

LET reporting 5th case in Lancashire over chorley way.
https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/n ... confirmed/

[If it be your will]

And any credible mortality rate that's being put forward by the experts just doesn't justify it. Sad to say but the reality is that some sort of QALY calculation needs to be made and the payback just isn't big enough to justify that sort of gamble.

I'm not certain of that. Let's say the mortality rate is 1%. Chloroquine has been around 70 years, taken by millions of people, is given long-term in quite decent doses for SLE patients without obvious harm, and the Chinese are saying they haven't had a single severe adverse reaction to it when treating Covid-19.

There are some patients that definitely should not take chloroquine, but for everyone else serious side effects are very rare (certainly a lot rarer than 1%). The really risky bit has been done by the Chinese already, from here I think it's worth a shot at hastily trialling it for those at initial (mild) presentation.

I'd happily take it upon a diagnosis.

[thatdberight]

I'm not certain of that. Let's say the mortality rate is 1%. Chloroquine has been around 70 years, taken by millions of people, is given long-term in quite decent doses for SLE patients without obvious harm, and the Chinese are saying they haven't had a single severe adverse reaction to it when treating Covid-19.

There are some patients that definitely should not take chloroquine, but for everyone else serious side effects are very rare (certainly a lot rarer than 1%). The really risky bit has been done by the Chinese already, from here I think it's worth a shot at hastily trialling it for those at initial (mild) presentation.

I'd happily take it upon a diagnosis.

Apologies. I was talking about novel treatments with unknown side-effects. Of course, a drug which can't cause "any" harm is a different matter.

[thatdberight]

Hungary declares State of Emergency closes all Universities, bans indoor events for more than 100 (outdoor 500), stops flights, trains and buses from Slovenia and Austria, tightens border with Croatia...

[Spijed]

I'm not certain of that. Let's say the mortality rate is 1%. Chloroquine has been around 70 years, taken by millions of people, is given long-term in quite decent doses for SLE patients without obvious harm, and the Chinese are saying they haven't had a single severe adverse reaction to it when treating Covid-19.

There are some patients that definitely should not take chloroquine, but for everyone else serious side effects are very rare (certainly a lot rarer than 1%). The really risky bit has been done by the Chinese already, from here I think it's worth a shot at hastily trialling it for those at initial (mild) presentation.

I'd happily take it upon a diagnosis.

Like other malaria tablets, chloroquine has such a bitter taste, almost making you throw up!

[Lowbankclaret]

Close to 7000 new cases outside of China today.

Not that it’s a surprise , but biggest world wide rise to date.

[Dark Cloud]

That's an awful lot of testing kits all used in one day. They must be close to running out!

[Lowbankclaret]

Italy has now closed all businesses except Pharmacies and grocery stores.

Who thinks it’s still not serious???

[Lowbankclaret]

I think you are perhaps not in possession of all the facts.

You also need to look through the propaganda of the gov, trying to stop a panic.

Currently if you look at the percentages of people who have either died or recovered.

26% have died, 74% have recovered. Not exactly flu like numbers, Now the died percentage should drop over time.

However 15% of people currently infected are in a critical condition.

The Chinese have admitted anyone who dies who haven’t been tested will not be tested and hence will never appear in the figures.

What you also need to remember is the lag in the figures of the 14 days it takes to show symptoms.

The R zero number is currently 3-4 which means the spread will still be exponential.

Anyone who thinks this is not serious is not grasping the situation.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Let’s just go back to what I was saying over a month ago.
I saw it was serious then.

[Zlatan]

Let’s just go back to what I was saying over a month ago.
I saw it was serious then.

I don’t think anyone hasn’t agreed it’s not serious, but for heavens sake, those percentages you originally posted are and were so far out it needed correcting.

If you carry on with the boasting about being “right” you’ll get the bloody gold badge too

[CardyTheClaret]

Sounds to me like you’re desperate to be right.

[Jakubclaret]

I don’t think anyone hasn’t agreed it’s not serious, but for heavens sake, those percentages you originally posted are and were so far out it needed correcting.

If you carry on with the boasting about being “right” you’ll get the bloody gold badge too

You did about 3/4 weeks ago, you didn’t say outright it’s not serious, but the impression & general feeling from your posts suggested, it’s nothing to worry about & it’ll all blow over kind of thing & the numbers are dropping, in mitigation & defence, you wasn’t by yourself & the information at the time wasn’t as comprehensive & the vaccine outlook wasn’t as bleak. A few of us all along maintained the stance of how severe things were developing & don’t think I derive any pleasure from being correct I don’t, it’s absolutely dreadful what’s happening.

[CombatClaret]

ES1Te1PWsAM8sHi.jpg (158.56 KiB) Viewed 2796 times

[CombatClaret]

Simply being told to wash your hands is not enough.