Coronavirus Outbreak [COVID-19]

Johnstown

Dominant Poster
Jun 4, 2013
25,100
8,231
We don't even have herd immunity from flu, so I find it difficult to believe we will just have herd immunity from the rona:

The one good thing is that apparently this coronavirus apparently doesn't mutate nearly as much as the Flu.
 

Johnstown

Dominant Poster
Jun 4, 2013
25,100
8,231
if that was gonna happen it would have during the first major wave. numbers atm are way lower than they were then.
People just started really getting infected ...it will take a week for the first batch to start getting sick enough for the hospital than the numbers will build up in the hospitals.
 
Reactions: all at sea

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
23,127
10,149
if that was gonna happen it would have during the first major wave. numbers atm are way lower than they were then.
I'm sure I read a claim from Johnson that there were already more people in hospital this time around than at the start of the first lockdown.

The number of new infections curve in the UK is headed upward and there is a time lag between infection and hospitalization and then another between hospitalization and death.
 

kf3

Jul 17, 2012
7,410
4,134
South London
I'm sure I read a claim from Johnson that there were already more people in hospital this time around than at the start of the first lockdown.

The number of new infections curve in the UK is headed upward and there is a time lag between infection and hospitalization and then another between hospitalization and death.
maybe, i'm too drunk to look it up now, what i looked at earlier said cases are < 20% of the major outbreak earlier in the year.

if that = more people in hospital i'd be very suprised. not that it means anything but last weekend i picked my mum up from a routine scan at a london hospital. i saw one guy on the door, 2 nurses in the endoscopy ward and 1 person when we were walking out, not exactly rammed to capacity(more like 28 days later tbh).
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
23,127
10,149
maybe, i'm too drunk to look it up now, what i looked at earlier said cases are < 20% of the major outbreak earlier in the year.

if that = more people in hospital i'd be very suprised. not that it means anything but last weekend i picked my mum up from a routine scan at a london hospital. i saw one guy on the door, 2 nurses in the endoscopy ward and 1 person when we were walking out, not exactly rammed to capacity(more like 28 days later tbh).
The spike in new cases in the UK now is of tidal wave proportions compared to the first wave. The numbers are about 3 times higher. The resulting impact on hospitals probably hasn't even been felt yet.
 

kf3

Jul 17, 2012
7,410
4,134
South London
The spike in new cases in the UK now is of tidal wave proportions compared to the first wave. The numbers are about 3 times higher. The resulting impact on hospitals probably hasn't even been felt yet.
what i said before was clearly wrong. prob looked at a different metric.

that's a difference in testing between the 2 waves. testing has gone up significanlty, cases have gone up significantly, hospital admissions and deaths have not.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ based on those graphs at the height of the deaths and hospital admissions basically nobody was being tested. there doesn't seem to be any significant lag between cases and admissions/deaths either.

i'm not gonna get into some big argument about it, if you wanna think it's worse fine, but understand why most people disagree with that view.
 
Last edited:

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
23,127
10,149
what i said before was clearly wrong. prob looked at a different metric.

that's a difference in testing between the 2 waves. testing has gone up significanlty, cases have gone up significantly, hospital admissions and deaths have not.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ based on those graphs at the height of the deaths and hospital admissions basically nobody was being tested. there doesn't seem to be any significant lag between cases and admissions/deaths either.

i'm not gonna get into some big argument about it, if you wanna think it's worse fine, but understand why most people disagree with that view.

Not looking for an argument. Just the facts :good
 

kf3

Jul 17, 2012
7,410
4,134
South London

Not looking for an argument. Just the facts :good
i genuinley don't know, the gov's daily updated official facts page says far less people are in hospital, i don't really know where else to get the facts.

maybe the left team paper talking about a right team gov decided to use the date of the lockdown to write bolox? look at the official number of cases in march and suddenly both the things can be true, it's hard to tell a march 23 figure from the admissions graph.

very confusing.
 
Last edited:

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
23,127
10,149
i genuinley don't know, the gov's daily updated official facts page says far less people are in hospital, i don't really know where else to get the facts.

maybe the left team paper talking about a right team gov decided to use the date of the lockdown to write bolox? look at the official number of cases in march.
All the 'facts' seem to vary to some degree depending on the source and in some cases their narrative.
 
Jun 4, 2013
27,442
8,775
Man, you guys are all still arguing? Just wanted to say that two of my students just tested positive today. That university statistic is right on the chin, though. So many of my students have gotten it and are just fine. As I said, they're all getting traced to off-campus, nothing on campus. Either they're going back to their home and coming back positive or not. Anyways, I'll be back for Lomachenko, but in the meantime, I got a mid-term to do. Just got my promotion too. January I start. Gotta read a ton of papers and start figuring out what I want to do. My old mentor suggested cancer, but who knows. Kind of crazy how I'm going all over the place with my dissertation.

:tiphat
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
23,127
10,149
i think narrative is a big part, whether deaths and admissions go mad over the next week or not will tell us the answer.
Only time will tell.

We sweat on our daily COVID numbers every day here in Melbourne because they are what will determine when we come out of lockdown.
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
23,127
10,149
Strong rumour that the 5klm radius will be relaxed out to 20klms on Sunday. The Age website has already uploaded a '20klm from your home' gadget.

@homebrand
 
Aug 6, 2020
604
546
How many people in the USA need to get COVID before they start caring?

Over 64,000 new cases today. Just under 60,000 yesterday.
 
May 25, 2013
8,101
4,788
The problem with contact tracing isn't the app, it's the will of the people which isn't going to change. Sadiq Khan and said that we need to learn from Japan, South Korea etc., but it's not their better technology which makes a significant difference, it's the inclination to use apps that people deem to be an invasion of their privacy. It's not something I agree with, I know you don't, but it's the reality. We can't just copy these nations because their population has a vastly different mentality than we do, and no matter how good the technology is, the success or failure is down to the people. British people, for whatever reason, won't ever get on board so this idea that some politicians - like Khan - have called for a "circuit breaker" to allow us to then improve contact trasing is purely fantasy, it'll never happen because people don't want to.

Without wanting to sound too callous, there have been tens of thousands of care home patients who have recently died, so whilst there aren't a huge number of available beds, it's a start. That's the sort of thing we should be looking at, and you're right, there's lot of issues with that, it's not an easy thing to undertake, but it's a drastically better option than the alternative. You're going to have crowding, overworked staff, frantic conditions etc. that aren't ideal but even if this can't be perfect, it's the right sacrifice to make.

The only reason testing is where it's at now is because of funding, so everything can be scaled up when you look at the billions we've spent on furlough and loss of income through lockdowns. If we'd have set out in April to have 700,000 tests a day and dedicated massive funding to that instead of furlough, it would have been viable by now, so whilst you're right to point out we currently don't have the resources for it, that wouldn't necessarily have been the case had things been done differently. Furlough stretched the economy but without it, that massive effort could have been diverted to directly fighting the virus rather than paying people to stay at home, so the problem here isn't an impossible lack of resources, it's the incorrect allocation of the resources which have limited what we can achieve.

As for the number of carers, that's just something which would have to be worked around. Even if you couldn't solve it by offering short term contracts, moving NHS workers around, offering big wages etc., and no matter what you do, it wouldn't be enough...unfortunately, that might just have to be taken on the chin. Even if in the worst case scenario - which I think could be avoided - you had people who need carers and were struggling, not seeing them frequently enough, then that's no different to people with cancer growing inside them not being able to get an early diagnosis. Yeah, it's shit, but it's not like there's an alternative without many of the same dire consequences. That's just the nature of living with a pandemic that's draining our resources. We can't fight and win every battle, we have to choose where the losses come from, which is why I advocate fiercely protecting the vulnerable whilst allowing the rest of society to function as normal as posisble. It's not perfect, it'd require massive funding and a reallocation of resources, but whilst it's not a silver bullet, it's a better alternative that the absolute farce that national lockdowns have been.
While I agree with that you are are saying in part, that wasn't what I was saying in that particular post in regards to contact tracing. What I was saying is contact tracing is only effective when dealing with small numbers. If were dealing with say 10-50 cases it's far easier to track down maybe a few hundred people that have come in contact with these people to get them tested and to isolate compared to 20k cases and the possible 100k contacts they may need contact. Contact tracing as a tool even with a cooperative population is only effective when dealing with a manageable number of cases.

While you are right many have died in care homes, lets say 50% of deaths are in care homes, that's almost 22k new free spaces for 840k people that need care in the community. In fact if everyone in every care home died tomorrow there still wouldn't be enough care homes to house all those 840k.

I actually don't think just shipping people into care homes would make it safer for them even if it was possible. Vulnerable people are much safer in smaller bubbles sheltering in their own homes that some care home which will have far more opportunities for transmission.

Testing isn't just about funding like you say. The government have been under fire for testing for ages and they are of course trying to increase capacity their target is to get 500k tests per day by the end of the month, still far short of the required to do what you suggest. There's almost 300k tests done per day now and your asking for another possible 881k tests per day on top of that, doesn't matter how much money you throw at this there is a limit to how many labs we have and how many qualified people we have to work in these labs. Not to mention we'll need to get much larger quantities of the ingredients for these tests which we've had issues with even when doing the number of cases were currently doing.

Moving NHS workers isn't going to work as of course just like with carers there's not an abundance of staff. They couldn't even staff the Nightingale hospital properly during the last wave which is why it didn't receive many patients and why some patients had to be turned away. Especially during a 2nd wave the NHS staff we have will be needed in hospitals especially if the plan is just to let the virus run rampant through the population as you suggest.

The idea of isolating vulnerable people will simply not work. Best way we can protect the vulnerable is to ensure there are fewer cases in the population in general so it's less likely that these vulnerable will come into contact with someone who is positive. Allowing the rest of the population just "get on with it" and see huge numbers of healthy young people get infected only puts these vulnerable types at greater risk no matter what measures you put in place.
 

DB Cooper

peel me a grape
May 17, 2013
23,127
10,149
While I agree with that you are are saying in part, that wasn't what I was saying in that particular post in regards to contact tracing. What I was saying is contact tracing is only effective when dealing with small numbers. If were dealing with say 10-50 cases it's far easier to track down maybe a few hundred people that have come in contact with these people to get them tested and to isolate compared to 20k cases and the possible 100k contacts they may need contact. Contact tracing as a tool even with a cooperative population is only effective when dealing with a manageable number of cases.

While you are right many have died in care homes, lets say 50% of deaths are in care homes, that's almost 22k new free spaces for 840k people that need care in the community. In fact if everyone in every care home died tomorrow there still wouldn't be enough care homes to house all those 840k.

I actually don't think just shipping people into care homes would make it safer for them even if it was possible. Vulnerable people are much safer in smaller bubbles sheltering in their own homes that some care home which will have far more opportunities for transmission.

Testing isn't just about funding like you say. The government have been under fire for testing for ages and they are of course trying to increase capacity their target is to get 500k tests per day by the end of the month, still far short of the required to do what you suggest. There's almost 300k tests done per day now and your asking for another possible 881k tests per day on top of that, doesn't matter how much money you throw at this there is a limit to how many labs we have and how many qualified people we have to work in these labs. Not to mention we'll need to get much larger quantities of the ingredients for these tests which we've had issues with even when doing the number of cases were currently doing.

Moving NHS workers isn't going to work as of course just like with carers there's not an abundance of staff. They couldn't even staff the Nightingale hospital properly during the last wave which is why it didn't receive many patients and why some patients had to be turned away. Especially during a 2nd wave the NHS staff we have will be needed in hospitals especially if the plan is just to let the virus run rampant through the population as you suggest.

The idea of isolating vulnerable people will simply not work. Best way we can protect the vulnerable is to ensure there are fewer cases in the population in general so it's less likely that these vulnerable will come into contact with someone who is positive. Allowing the rest of the population just "get on with it" and see huge numbers of healthy young people get infected only puts these vulnerable types at greater risk no matter what measures you put in place.
Good post. Solid logic supported by data and obviously some relevant experience.

What compounds things of course is that people are currently being infected at such a rate in the UK only a lockdown can return things to manageable proportions again. That has to be the priority for the moment.
 
Reactions: Brighton Bomber
May 25, 2013
8,101
4,788
Good post. Solid logic supported by data and obviously some relevant experience.

What compounds things of course is that people are currently being infected at such a rate in the UK only a lockdown can return things to manageable proportions again. That has to be the priority for the moment.
Yes at this point the only thing we can do is lock down. We've allowed this thing to run rampant to the point where anything else like the half measures the government have been using will be ineffective.

Even the circuit breaker idea will have very limited effect as we should have done that over 3 weeks ago according to SAGE. This government simply are ignoring the science and crossing their fingers and hoping it all turns out alright, seeing cases rise then doing the same, it's the definition of madness.

The science is quite clear we need to lock down now, it's not telling us to use half measures or put the vulnerable in bubbles, we've cocked things up again and so again were left with only one choice a blunt tool for a messy job that if we'd been smarter we'd have never needed to use.

And yes once we're down to a manageable number of cases with the R rate below 1 again then we can open up again and hopefully learn from the first and 2nd wave when the 3rd wave hits.
 
Reactions: DB Cooper