Covid-19

[CombatClaret]

cv.jpg (243.78 KiB) Viewed 3932 times

[RingoMcCartney]

Well you said
Attempting to compare individual unique countries with all sorts of vastly differing variables , especially while we're still in the midst of the unprecedented global pandemic. Is quite simply a fools errand.

And the Treasury Select Committee directly compared the UK to South Korea.

Now in the interest of putting up or stop making things up, I'd like to see the post where I claimed the Treasury Select Committee used raw mortality rates to draw conclusions and judgements on the UK government's handling of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic crisis.

No squirming, no shifting the goalposts, no "semantics" just copy/paste the post.

(As an aside, the first time you mentioned raw mortality rates was in response to my comment about the Treasury Select Committee. It's somewhat strange that you claimed that was your argument all along but hadn't used referred to mortality rates until that point.)

I said this the best part of a month ago

Sat Apr 18, 2020 2:12 pm

Name one person, just one person in the whole world, in any country you like , that right now, has all the available facts at their disposal, regarding the 2019 Covid 19 global pandemic. Who can therefore, draw objective conclusions and assessments and be in a strong position to name and shame who got it right and who got it wrong.

If you want to pretend that raw mortality rates arent part of "all the available facts at their disposal" You're only kidding yourself.

I note the Treasury Select Committee doesn't really agree with your approach.

I didnt directly claim you said the Treasury Select Committee used raw mortality rates to draw conclusions and judgements on the UK government's handling of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic crisis. But by virtue of the fact you seem to think you know enough about my "approach" to say the TSC disagree with it. I didnt need to because apparently you know what my "approach"/opinion . Your interpretation of my opinion, is not necessarily, my opinion.

Anyway rather than simply saying the TSC disagree with my approach and they "directly compared the UK to South Korea." Why not post a link? Then we can see what the context was. Were they comparing to make a judgement about the government's handling of the pandemic? Were considering other key factors when they made the comparison? Were they simply looking at something in isolation. Importantly, which members of the TSC made the comparison? Was it the Committee as a whole? Or was it a specific MP or a group of partisan MPs , with a political point scoring agenda?

Post the link with a bit more detail and meat on the bones aggi.

[martin_p]

I said this the best part of a month ago



If you want to pretend that raw mortality rates arent part of "all the available facts at their disposal" You're only kidding yourself.



I didnt directly claim you said the Treasury Select Committee used raw mortality rates to draw conclusions and judgements on the UK government's handling of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic crisis. But by virtue of the fact you seem to think you know enough about my "approach" to say the TSC disagree with it. I didnt need to because apparently you know what my "approach"/opinion . Your interpretation of my opinion, is not necessarily, my opinion.

Anyway rather than simply saying the TSC disagree with my approach and they "directly compared the UK to South Korea." Why not post a link? Then we can see what the context was. Were they comparing to make a judgement about the government's handling of the pandemic? Were considering other key factors when they made the comparison? Were they simply looking at something in isolation. Importantly, which members of the TSC made the comparison? Was it the Committee as a whole? Or was it a specific MP or a group of partisan MPs , with a political point scoring agenda?

Post the link with a bit more detail and meat on the bones aggi.

You still don’t understand what an available fact is do you.

[RingoMcCartney]

You still don’t understand what an available fact is do you.

Yes I do.

I also know that an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information is conjecture.

[martin_p]

Yes I do.

I also know that an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information is conjecture.

Like you thinking the government is doing a good job on the pandemic then?

[android]

EX6LLEeWAAAfpOG.jpg

No, no they would not.

I agree they should not have set a target, so they then didn't have to give into their inherent dishonestly to cook the numbers and achieve it.

According to worldometers those figures would be UK 9.1, Spain 9.1, France 7.8 (curiously France missing again) and Italy 12.3. But what does that prove? That the French government has done much worse than the Italian government? I doubt it.

In big picture terms 4 of the 5 big European countries including us have had similar experiences and outcomes with Germany the only outlier...so far...and based on their way of reporting data...much of this story still unknown and to follow...

But yeah - New Zealand or something.

[aggi]

I said this the best part of a month ago



If you want to pretend that raw mortality rates arent part of "all the available facts at their disposal" You're only kidding yourself.



I didnt directly claim you said the Treasury Select Committee used raw mortality rates to draw conclusions and judgements on the UK government's handling of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic crisis. But by virtue of the fact you seem to think you know enough about my "approach" to say the TSC disagree with it. I didnt need to because apparently you know what my "approach"/opinion . Your interpretation of my opinion, is not necessarily, my opinion.

Anyway rather than simply saying the TSC disagree with my approach and they "directly compared the UK to South Korea." Why not post a link? Then we can see what the context was. Were they comparing to make a judgement about the government's handling of the pandemic? Were considering other key factors when they made the comparison? Were they simply looking at something in isolation. Importantly, which members of the TSC made the comparison? Was it the Committee as a whole? Or was it a specific MP or a group of partisan MPs , with a political point scoring agenda?

Post the link with a bit more detail and meat on the bones aggi.

Interesting get out. You're basically saying that you've made every possible argument re: this as it's part of the "available facts". Even for you that's impressive goalpost shifting.

So you said
I didnt directly claim you said the Treasury Select Committee used raw mortality rates to draw conclusions and judgements on the UK government's handling of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic crisis.

But you also said:

So, the Treasury Select Committee did not as you claim,use raw mortality rates to draw conclusions and judgements on the UK government's handling of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic crisis.

That looks pretty direct to me.

Let's be honest, given the illustration above where you happily directly contradict yourself in an effort to not admit that you're wrong it's not really worth me digging the info out. Lots of people posted about it at the time but you'd continue to argue that black is white regardless.

[taio]

As discussed yesterday, approved mass antibody home testing would be a very positive step.

According to this morning's news, it looks like we now have one that will shortly rolled out:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52656808

It might also explain why the PM set a revised goal of 200k tests a day.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Nobody digs holes quite like Ringo do they.

[TVC15]

As discussed yesterday, approved mass antibody home testing would be a very positive step.

According to this morning's news, it looks like we now have one that will shortly rolled out:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52656808

It might also explain why the PM set a revised goal of 200k tests a day.

Really positive news.
Government minister on bbc says they are in negotiation with a company based in Germany who have developed them about manufacture, supply etc. Presumably we won’t be the only country after them though.
Not sure what other countries already have anti body tests in use. I know Czech Republic do and have had these for a few weeks. I know someone who had the test only this week.
What we won’t know yet - by definition - is how long any immunity to the virus lasts. But it would still be a big breakthrough.
Is it not also the case that you would need to have had it a few weeks ago for the anti bodies / immunity to build up ?

[tiger76]

Nobody digs holes quite like Ringo do they.

Bob the Builder?

[burnmark]

Has the testing site at Turf Moor now closed? Just tried to book a test but was only given the options of Bradford and Manchester.

[Paul Waine]

Really positive news.
Government minister on bbc says they are in negotiation with a company based in Germany who have developed them about manufacture, supply etc. Presumably we won’t be the only country after them though.
Not sure what other countries already have anti body tests in use. I know Czech Republic do and have had these for a few weeks. I know someone who had the test only this week.
What we won’t know yet - by definition - is how long any immunity to the virus lasts. But it would still be a big breakthrough.
Is it not also the case that you would need to have had it a few weeks ago for the anti bodies / immunity to build up ?

Roche in Switzerland (not Germany).

The Times report:

Coronavirus: ‘Game-changing’ antibody test gets green light for widespread use

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0675 ... f6f32b205d

[Devils_Advocate]

Bob the Builder?

More like Charlie DIMmock

[NottsClaret]

As discussed yesterday, approved mass antibody home testing would be a very positive step.

According to this morning's news, it looks like we now have one that will shortly rolled out:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52656808

It might also explain why the PM set a revised goal of 200k tests a day.

Like everything else on this scale, it'll take a while before we get the logistics of this sorted. But eventually - without a vaccine or cure - it's hopefully one way of getting back to something like normality in the long run.

[Devils_Advocate]

Dream scenario is we get a really good antibody test and we start to see that a huge amount of people have already had the virus but only shown very mild symptoms that wasn't picked up

Wishful thinking on my part but not impossible and would definitely be a game changer

[TVC15]

Roche in Switzerland (not Germany).

The Times report:

Coronavirus: ‘Game-changing’ antibody test gets green light for widespread use

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0675 ... f6f32b205d

Swiss company manufacturing these tests in their German base.

[Paul Waine]

Report in The Times on R for all the different regions of England

Ordered lowest to highest: London 0.4, Midlands 0.68, South East, 0.71, East of England 0.71, North West 0.73, South West 0.76, Northeast and Yorkshire 0.8

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b81b ... aa9f4a6f91

Surprising and encouraging that London is as low as 0.4. I guess it means there's some room for it to slip - which is the risk of everyone back on the buses, tubes and commuter trains.

Of course, we've all got to hope that these figures are as accurate as they can be. (Who'd be a scientist/mathematical modeller).

[Paul Waine]

Swiss company manufacturing these tests in their German base.

OK. All I've heard is that Roche has manufacturing sites around the world. I stand corrected if their main site is in Germany. That's possible.

Also heard, Germany has ordered 5 million kits a month. Lots of other countries also want to buy.

[Zlatan]

With a good antibody test it may negate the need for those who’ve already had it to not need the vaccine if it becomes available - making that more accessible to more of those who need it

[TVC15]

OK. All I've heard is that Roche has manufacturing sites around the world. I stand corrected if their main site is in Germany. That's possible.

Also heard, Germany has ordered 5 million kits a month. Lots of other countries also want to buy.

Just heard the health minister say they were being manufactured by a company in Germany.
Yes I agree there will he other countries looking to buy. There are other countries already using antibodies tests but I assume every country has its own standards in terms of approval and some companies are not meeting those required by the UK.
Remember it was a number of weeks ago we were told that this was imminent so I’m guessing we have been looking at several companies and we know some have failed to meet what the UK needed.

[TVC15]

With a good antibody test it may negate the need for those who’ve already had it to not need the vaccine if it becomes available - making that more accessible to more of those who need it

Not sure it will. Nobody knows how long a person would be immune for - and it could vary from person to person.
Plus we already know it is highly likely we will see different variations of the virus in the future like we do with influenza now. The vaccine is still the key and once we have a vaccine - history shows us that future vaccines are much quicker and easier to develop for the virus variations.

[Erasmus]

This test is not going to be quick or easy, I'm afraid, as it requires a full blood sample taken by a qualified nurse. It's a spike in a vein and then a phial or two of blood extracted. I have it done every few months and whilst it only takes five minutes or so, there is usually quite a queue. So to introduce this test on a mass scale there will be quite considerable logistical problems to overcome.

[tiger76]

Positive tales from round the globe.

New Zealand - hailed a world leader for its virus success - has moved into its next stage of reopening.

So what's open in the "Level 2" phase? Basically, everything except bars.

Shopping malls, clothing shops, cinemas, garden centres, hairdressers, massage parlours and restaurants are all open for business. Bars will have to wait another week

Up to 10 people can meet up, although more are allowed if they're family. But people should still maintain at least a 1m distance when going out.

New Zealand only started to exit its lockdown three weeks ago. It has reported no new cases for the past three days.

It’s been six months since the outbreak emerged in mainland China, just a short distance away, but we haven’t had any lockdown. People living in Taiwan, including myself, are feeling very fortunate.

As the Taiwanese watch the sharp rise in cases and deaths in other countries, they are quietly proud of going through one month - 31 straight days as of Wednesday - without any new domestically-transmitted cases, and six consecutive days of no new imported cases either.

With a total of 440 cases and only 7 deaths, Taiwan is doing much better than most countries.

Children are going to school and adults to work as normal, the streets are buzzing, and shops and restaurants have remained open.

Even Taiwan’s favourite pastime, baseball, can be enjoyed inside stadiums again – although only 1,000 fans are allowed at the moment.

But that doesn’t mean Taiwanese people are letting down their guard.

They know what has helped Taiwan is being vigilant - including early border controls, a ban on foreign visitors, mandatory quarantine for all overseas returnees, proactive detection at airports and hospitals, efficient contact tracing, and strict enforcement of hospital isolation and home quarantine.

All of these measures are expected to stay until the pandemic is brought under control worldwide.

So most Taiwanese gladly have our temperature checked - sometimes several times a day - voluntarily disinfect our hands, and follow the orders to wear a face mask on public transport.

In fact, some Taiwanese are shocked to see images on TV of people in the UK, or other countries, coming out of lockdown but not wearing masks on the subway trains.

Germany has reported 933 new Covid-19 infections in the past 24 hours, making 172,239 in total. The Robert Koch Institute says 89 more people have died and the reproduction (R) rate has dropped to 0.8. Rates above 1.0 mean that on average one person infects more than one other

[Paul Waine]

Germany has reported 933 new Covid-19 infections in the past 24 hours, making 172,239 in total. The Robert Koch Institute says 89 more people have died and the reproduction (R) rate has dropped to 0.8. Rates above 1.0 mean that on average one person infects more than one other

That's interesting that Germany is reporting higher R (0.8) than UK (0.76) - or is it England that has 0.76?

Also be interesting to know if the epidemiologists/modellers measure R the same way in every country - meaning same methods, be possibly different quality of data inputs. Or, is that getting "too geeky?"

[CombatClaret]

That's interesting that Germany is reporting higher R (0.8) than UK (0.76) - or is it England that has 0.76?

Also be interesting to know if the epidemiologists/modellers measure R the same way in every country - meaning same methods, be possibly different quality of data inputs. Or, is that getting "too geeky?"

As of May 3rd Germany had done 2.75million test while we had 880k so they've definitely got more data to work with which should increase accuracy.

[dsr]

Do they split R numbers between nursing homes and others?

[Paul Waine]

As of May 3rd Germany had done 2.75million test while we had 880k so they've definitely got more data to work with which should increase accuracy.

Yes, good point. Though, as R changes over time (I think London was reported above R 2.5 in March), there must be a lot more to it than the number of tests.

[Mala591]

Face coverings on public transport should be compulsory by law otherwise a second spike and lockdown are inevitable.

[Zlatan]

This test is not going to be quick or easy, I'm afraid, as it requires a full blood sample taken by a qualified nurse. It's a spike in a vein and then a phial or two of blood extracted. I have it done every few months and whilst it only takes five minutes or so, there is usually quite a queue. So to introduce this test on a mass scale there will be quite considerable logistical problems to overcome.

Understood, but there are already people who are high risk (me) who have bloods every 8 weeks or so, it should be routinely scheduled

[jackmiggins]

Be extremely interesting to check infection results against numbers & origin of flight passengers allowed into countries, and dates when these nations suspended flights. Strongly suspect that it won’t paint a pretty picture for the U.K.

[Grumps]

Don't normally go much for stats, but found this interesting

The Office for National Statistics says its data suggests an average of 148,000 people in England on any given day had COVID-19 between 27 April & 10 May which is an estimated 0.27% of the population


EDIT.... So interesting that sky news have removed it from their twitter account, which is where I copied and pasted it from

[Paul Waine]

Don't normally go much for stats, but found this interesting

The Office for National Statistics says its data suggests an average of 148,000 people in England on any given day had COVID-19 between 27 April & 10 May which is an estimated 0.27% of the population


EDIT.... So interesting that sky news have removed it from their twitter account, which is where I copied and pasted it from

Hi Grumps, found it on the ONS own site:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... d14may2020

Main points

• Within this bulletin, we refer to the number of coronavirus (COVID-19) infections within the community population; community in this instance refers to private households, and it excludes those in hospitals, care homes or other institutional settings.

• At any given time between 27 April and 10 May 2020, it is estimated that an average of 0.27% of the community population had COVID-19 (95% confidence interval: 0.17% to 0.41%).

• It is estimated that an average of 148,000 people in England had COVID-19 during this time (95% confidence interval: 94,000 to 222,000).

• For individuals working in patient-facing healthcare or resident-facing social care roles, 1.33% tested positive for COVID-19 (95% confidence interval: 0.39% to 3.28%); of those reporting not working in these roles, 0.22% tested positive for COVID-19 (95% confidence interval: 0.13% to 0.35%)

• There is no evidence of differences in the proportions testing positive between the age categories 2 to 19, 20 to 49, 50 to 69 and 70 years and over.

[Grumps]

Cheers, didn't think of that..... Do I read it right that there's an extremely low percentage chance of coming into contact with somebody who has the virus?

[android]

Wow, yes - those numbers are very low aren't they? So only about 1 in 400 of us had the infection in that period. But it was a long way into the lockdown. On the other hand, does it suggest that not as many of us have already had it as might be hoped? I haven't thought through whether it does mean that but I don't want to be the one to suggest that we don't still need to be cautious - or "stay alert" !

[Grumps]

Given those odds I'd be willing to go out and meet people, but I guess if we all did that the percentage would go up.

[martin_p]

There’s another report today saying 25% of the population have probably had it, so the numbers aren’t tying up. I don’t see how we can say either is true with any level of confidence since so few people have been tested compared to other countries.

[keith1879]

There’s another report today saying 25% of the population have probably had it, so the numbers aren’t tying up. I don’t see how we can say either is true with any level of confidence since so few people have been tested compared to other countries.

Think we have had about 50,000 excess deaths ,, so using the vague approximation of 1 in 100 who contract the disease die you get 5 million infected (roughly 1 in 10 of the population). All very rough and ready.

[keith1879]

Don't normally go much for stats, but found this interesting

The Office for National Statistics says its data suggests an average of 148,000 people in England on any given day had COVID-19 between 27 April & 10 May which is an estimated 0.27% of the population


EDIT.... So interesting that sky news have removed it from their twitter account, which is where I copied and pasted it from

There's a serious danger of us becoming amateur (and rubbish ) epidemiologists.....but bear in mind that the point at which the maximum number of people were infected should have been March 23 when locckdown started.....in the following 4 weeks the numbers infected should have fallen quite a bit and the 148,000 people who had the infection on May 10 would probably have been mostly different from the (insert your estimate here) who had it on March 23. You can say with absolute certainty that if 148000 people had it on May 10th then a lot more have had it in total.

[aggi]

Interesting graphic re: the antibody test. The antibodies don't hit their peak levels until 2 weeks plus after infection which, given the current short timescales, will obviously give some lag on the figures:

[Grumps]

There's a serious danger of us becoming amateur (and rubbish ) epidemiologists.....but bear in mind that the point at which the maximum number of people were infected should have been March 23 when locckdown started.....in the following 4 weeks the numbers infected should have fallen quite a bit and the 148,000 people who had the infection on May 10 would probably have been mostly different from the (insert your estimate here) who had it on March 23. You can say with absolute certainty that if 148000 people had it on May 10th then a lot more have had it in total.

That's why I try and just listen to the experts

The guy from ONS has just been on tv and seems pretty certain on what he says. It's up to others to interpret them moving forward.

[Ptangyangkipperbang]

Don't usually get involved with these discussions and I am trying to keep away from the news as much as possible.But i have just seen that now they think 1/3rd of the nation could have had the virus with most not showing symptons

[keith1879]

That's why I try and just listen to the experts

The guy from ONS has just been on tv and seems pretty certain on what he says. It's up to others to interpret them moving forward.

Agreed The point I was trying to make was that your(ONS) figure and some of the larger numbers regarding the total numbers who have been infected can both be right. We know beyond doubt that over 200,000 people have tested positive for the disease.

Edit. This data has just been expanded slightly in the presentation. What they are saying is that 148,000 people had the disease at some point between 27 April and 10 May ....so actually the number at any one point may have been lower. Also these figures EXCLUDE people in hospitals and care homes.

Editing Again. Looking back at yours and Paul's posts it is clear that the ONS figures refer to at any point......not to the whole period. So please ignore my first edit.

[Taffy on the wing]

Face coverings on public transport should be compulsory by law otherwise a second spike and lockdown are inevitable.

The fact that they aren't, and haven't been up to now.....Is mind-Boggling!

[android]

There’s another report today saying 25% of the population have probably had it, so the numbers aren’t tying up. I don’t see how we can say either is true with any level of confidence since so few people have been tested compared to other countries.

But as Paul pointed out, if I understood it correctly, the ONS is saying that their testing was large and wide enough to have 95% confidence in their figures (within a narrow range). That's a very high degree of confidence.

And as Keith has pointed out, this is not necessarily inconsistent with a much, much higher number of us having already had the virus (you mentioned 25% and someone else a third). This could easily be the case, as there was plenty of time for the virus to have been and gone from these people in the period up to 27 April when the ONS survey started. I have no idea on the source for the 25% or third and any confidence levels in those estimates.

[android]

The fact that they aren't, and haven't been up to now.....Is mind-Boggling!

But your mob in Wales are not even recommending them unlike England !

[CombatClaret]

Don't usually get involved with these discussions and I am trying to keep away from the news as much as possible.But i have just seen that now they think 1/3rd of the nation could have had the virus with most not showing symptons

There was a University of Manchester study released today saying possibly 25%, where are you getting 33% from?

Our lockdown was late & light but I'd be amazed If we were up to 25%

Spain's seroprevalence study >60,000 participants
Antibodies for #SARSCoV2:
5% of Spanish population
11% in region with highest incidence (Madrid)

Modeling seems to predict higher than tests seem to be bearing out. Lancet article from Sweden has Stockhold at 20-25% but a test study of around 500 people found only 7.5%

[android]

And as you previously posted Combat, a very recent French study estimated less than 5% in France had had the virus. There's no obvious reason why we should be vastly different to France - different yes, but by that much? I guess we will have to wait a little longer to know.

[Ptangyangkipperbang]

There was a University of Manchester study released today saying possibly 25%, where are you getting 33% from?

Our lockdown was late & light but I'd be amazed If we were up to 25%

Spain's seroprevalence study >60,000 participants
Antibodies for #SARSCoV2:
5% of Spanish population
11% in region with highest incidence (Madrid)

Modeling seems to predict higher than tests seem to be bearing out. Lancet article from Sweden has Stockhold at 20-25% but a test study of around 500 people found only 7.5%

Exactly why I don't bother in discussions I get news flashes when I switch my tablet on I rarely read them but this stat caught my eye don't know who or when but that's what it said I'm off this thread and away from all news.revel in your misery

[Taffy on the wing]

But your mob in Wales are not even recommending them unlike England !

I'm not Welsh!.......There are all kinds of areas, even entire States out here, who refuse to wear masks.
Probably because Domestos Don won't wear one...........It makes no sense whatsoever, this thing is going to drag on forever.