In the week ending 3rd April just over 16,300 people in England and Wales died (registered deaths) compared with an average for the previous 5 years of 10,300, number of those with a covid 19 on the death certificate was 3,475.Originally Posted by Jdh1
But the increase above the average is 5,000 in a week Which if they were all actual caused by covid would give a death rate of just over 0.9 %
This jump may be caused by a delay in reporting and also time from infection until death but sofar there aren’t any figures
for after 3rd of April.
Yes it's a confusing picture. How many would have died anyway? How many would have died within the next few weeks? How many died with, but not of, the virus? How many of the additional deaths were colateral damage as a result of the lockdown? What is the delay/omissions in reporting?
It seems to me that getting he answers to these sort of questions is key to finding the best way out of this.
I can only see three ways out of this. 1. We keep the lockdown until cases are in such small numbers we can contact trace, test and isolate to stop further spread. 2. Ease the lockdown in the knowledge the number of cases will rise again, but hope the NHS can cope with the numbers and expect to lose some of the more vulnerable people. 3. Find a vaccine.
Hopefully someone with better knowledge on this will have other options!
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
To achieve 1) we would have to test everyone, simply because of the high number asymmetric carriers. You would also have to retest frequently (daily even) simply because the test only shows the patient is infected or not, at the moment the swab is taken.
2) Is the only option (short term), however I doubt it would be without restrictions. I.e. the most at risk, will need to self isolate pretty much indefinitely or until a vaccine is available. Hopefully augmented with more testing and an antibody test, providing of course having antibodies in the system means you cannot catch it again, however it so, it sort of defeats the object of a vaccine.
3) would be the ideal solution, however given the amount of testing required required to determine effectiveness, side effects, risks, etc, it will take months/years before it’s ready and safe. Also don’t forget we already have 4 Coronavirus in circulation which is dangerous to Humans and we don’t have a vaccine for any of them yet.
There is another option, which is to find a cure for all the secondary complications caused by Covid19, which often actually causes the deaths rather than the virus itself.
Last edited by Andyg; 19th April 2020 at 20:31.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
The point of quoting the average for previous years was to take how many would have died anyway out of the
equation, the number of people dying from respiratory problems but not confirmed as having covid was actually
about the same as previous averages for this week.
Personally don’t think the collateral from lockdown would be that big especially for this week fairly early in lockdown so
conclusion is that close to 5,000 may have died from covid but delay could mean this was actually for a longer period
than a week. It will become clearer when figures for next couple of weeks are released.
Have a look at this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654
Lots of interesting information, including the fact that of the 6,000 'extra' deaths 2,500 couldn't be linked to Covid-19 so maybe collateral damage could be a significant issue. As you intimate though, delays in reporting and registering coupled with omissions can throw the whole thing out in the short term.
It’s a tricky one, simply because we do not have a full years data to compare it with. A situation made worse because lots of death rates are defined by deaths per head of population, therefore it takes into consideration birth rates. Also it’s specific to region because Scotland, for example, has a higher death rates/lower life expectancy that other parts of the UK. Then you have to take into consideration demographics - Bournemouth for example has a much older population than other parts. Finally you have to consider ethnicity, simply because many people who migrated to the UK in the past 30 years might not have benefited from the same standard of living, health care, etc as those born in the UK.
That said in 2019 the UK had a death rate of 9.4/100K of population, and I would expect this to increase by 5% in 2020, but, and this where it gets interesting is whether we would actually see a reduction in 2021, 2022.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
It’s unlikely you will see much “collateral damage” after 5 weeks. Its much more likely to occur in 3-6 months when the furlough period has run out, saving ps have been spent, mortgage holidays are over, etc and people are out of work, getting evicted and really desperate.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Immigrants to the UK have an overall mortality advantage.
Was typo in my message should have been 6,000 not 5,000 which actually makes it 1% death rate and can’t see how some kind of collateral damage could cause 2,500 extra deaths in a week. Close to 5,000 of the extra deaths were of people aged
60 and above.
Neither can I really but the figure is there none the less. I don't know enough about this to know what effect cancelled operations, delayed diagnosis and people generally ignoring other health issues (presentation at A&E with heart attacks, strokes and appendicitis down 50%) might have on the overall figures. I don't think you can underestimate the mental issue either. We often hear stories about old folk who die soon after a milestone birthday or event, the narrative being that they were able to keep going through sheer will long enough to get there and then 'gave up'. Well if there's something that might cause people close to the end of their life to 'give up' this is it.
What do you base this on? I would assume that a recent refugee from the Middle East or Asia would be in worse shape that some of the same age, who was born in the UK.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Greggs and Dominos Andy
Speak for yourselfGreggs and Dominos Andy.
But that’s like suggesting that obesity, diabetes and heart problems doesn't effect immigrants - which is clearly false. Especially given that the highest rate of obesity in the UK is the Black community.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Evidence such as this
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...994?via%3Dihub
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
A dozen or so people on this forum really are the gift that keeps on giving
The parents of one of my students is a nurse. A few weeks ago she was ill and said that she had tested positive for Covid-19 via swab so she was off work. She was remarkably chilled about it and said that 85% of cases sail through without major symptoms. She did say that she was very very tired though but that she hoped to be back to work again soon. I spoke to her again last week and she was already back to work. I'm not suggesting we should be complacent but it seems for most it's not a death sentence.
If some of the serological surveys are correct (still an 'if' at this stage) and that many of the cases are totally asymptomatic then we have to conclude that only less than one percent of all cases provide a nasty illness. However due to the infectiousness, half a percent of a LOT can potentially overwhelm health systems. Imagine everyone in Manchester getting influenza at the same time and the impact on health systems as a result
Is there any evidence of long-term damage to those who have had the virus without symptoms?
That's one thing I'm not clear about. Bret's podcast indicated there wasn't adequate data.
By long-term, I suppose I mean bodily function, fitness or general health. Obviously, there hasn't been much time to assess.
Last edited by AlphaOmega; 21st April 2020 at 10:07.
Getting a little off track here as its the "Promising news thread"...
Just saying :0)
Whoops, you're so right. Thanks RM.
Good news for most then.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
Based upon a study using 1971-2012 Data, produced in 2015. Fair enough.
I wonder what it looks like in 2020.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52370042
This is good to see, lets just hope and pray something positive comes out of it...
Also good to see N.I saying something positive from their initial concerns...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-52375614
Last edited by Martylaa; 22nd April 2020 at 06:29.
Two interesting items thanks. At least the vaccine item shows the government is putting money into the research and is positive news for once.
And it looks as though NI have had some success with the lockdown which would be good news as well.
Here’s hoping for both.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
It is scientific data though, rather than something you’ve made up.
Doubt things will have changed much.
Potential good news for the smokers here.
https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/artic...7365_3244.html
Seems that smoking might provide some protection against severe Covid disease progression (although to be fair is very bad for your health in pretty much every other area).
In the same vein as the suggestion that the BCG might confer some protection [see above], Cambridge scientists are now wondering whether the MMR does:
https://www.firstpost.com/health/mmr...0-8287361.html
Interesting, but not peer reviewed yet.
Sure. Virtually nothing can be in this time-frame; hence my care with the language ('suggestion', 'might', 'wondering').
Noted and agreed 👍
Err, I never made anything up. I simply responded to a statement you made, which you did not support. And now it seems this was based on a pretty thin study using old data written 5 years ago.
The problem however is that BAME communities appear to be more vulnerable to Covid19, which begs the question why, given their “morbidity advantage”.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
It appears possible that not only are children not getting Covid-19, at least in a serious form, but that they also may be not be spreading the disease.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...n-170-contacts
Just a straw in the wind, of course but with implications for reopening primary and junior schools.
This was all in response to your initial comment that: -
“you have to consider ethnicity, simply because many people who migrated to the UK in the past 30 years might not have benefited from the same standard of living, health care, etc as those born in the UK”
The study I quoted (not sure why you think it’s thin BTW) will certainly include your 30 year time scale.
Serology Tests show that 22% of New York City residents have Covid antibodies and 14% across New York State. Bear in mind it takes around 2 weeks to generate antibodies then we could argue the real number to be double or more. That's awesome news as it means A infection fatality is fractions of one percent and B they will be closer to herd immunity and in fact with anything between 22% and 40% of your population with antibodies the R0 of the virus will be materially lower as there are a lot less people to infect. Further evidence that this virus is far more widespread than the official infections data show. You have to think similar will be seen in London, perhaps not as high as New York.
The New York tests excluded children and symptomatic subjects so IFR will be even lower than this indicates and we could be talking about 0.34% fatality rate AGAIN, as per the Danish and German studies.
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/loca...reaks/2386556/
As per my above post whilst the overall fatality rate is 0.5% it is <0.1% for people under 50. This is corroborated by an Italian study also. If the level of prevalence is this high combined with a low death rate for under 50s I cannot see how you can continue to crash the economy by locking down low risk groups in New York as long as measures are put in place to minimise them transmitting it to higher risk groups.
Just watching this, really interesting - chap on the right has some fancy dive watch on as well if you get bored of what they are saying!
https://youtu.be/xfLVxx_lBLU
I've been puzzled to understand the thinking in Sweden. This explains it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY&t=10s
Someone who knows what they're talking about telling it as it probably is.
Just another opinion really and a very blunt one with few facts, his comment about it will turn out 50% of people had already had it may end up being right or wrong but it really is pure speculation. Flattening the curve in reference to C19 normally refers to the number of infections not deaths and Sweden actually had its highest number of new cases yesterday. Not sure what the definition of mild disease is but the problem is that there aren’t any treatments for it whereas I would guess that if it fits into the mild disease category most of those are treatable.
That was interesting jdh, thanks for posting the link, the expert did I think tbf rather gloss over how the disease also doesn't seem to spare those in the middle years especially if they're obese, diabetic, pulmonary conditions or have other issues...pretty hard to make the case such folks would have died in a couple of months anyway which is the crux of his argument/rationale as regards the elderly and frail victims.
Talking of few facts, I was interested to hear that the report which precipitated our panic move into lockdown wasn't peer reviewed, and in his opinion at least, was severely flawed in its methodology, assumptions and conclusions. As you say, just another opinion, but one that makes some sense to me in the light of what we see happening.
I don't think he was suggesting that the Swedish approach will result in less cases and deaths, but rather that they would happen at different times. If he is right that most countries will end up in the same place casualty-wise a year from now, then you have to question the overall effect of the lockdown which already appears to be creating a significant number of casualties in its own right.
Put bluntly, if the lockdown is only going to delay some deaths by a few months, its overall effect will be negative because of the colateral damage.
Really fascinating, thanks for posting. Very factual and honest as well, and like the original UK strategy, appears logical to me. Whether he is correct I can’t know. But basically he is saying:
1) Accept that maybe 0.1% of the population at large are going to die from this and there is nothing we can do about it unless we lock everyone up like China until a vaccine is widely available.
2) Protect the old and vulnerable so that they don’t get it, until there is a vaccine or herd immunity.
3) Take moderate measures to reduce the initial rate of infection while building up the capacity of the health service - washing hands, avoiding large gatherings, opting to stay in generally (but not a lockdown).
To be fair to him, on point 1 it’s hard to see what the alternative is. On point 2 he said Sweden hadn’t done enough and I would say neither have the UK. On point 3 I think time has shown we have passed that stage now - Nightingales largely empty, plenty of ventilators and alternatives etc. Even our PPE pandemic stockpile has not been exhausted yet (even if we have been poor at distribution in some cases).
Wonderful news that West London must be out of lockdown. Just came out of a rammed Waitrose, people everywhere in Kingston town centre, coffee shops open for takeaway and even an ice cream van with kids merrily munching away on a Mr Whippy. I must have missed the memo....
Problem is there isn’t time to peer review and argue about what you should do and it’s a situation where you can’t draw ‘definite’ conclusions based purely from previous similar pandemics as there haven’t been any recent ones like this.
Just been hearing similar near us, someone saying traffic going into town is like a normal Saturday, don’t understand it most
of the actual shops are shut and can’t imagine anywhere I would rather not be than a town centre full of people just milling
around outside.
Am guessing the masses have decided it is over due to being sunny
Mm, The COVID-19 Promising News thread you say?
It has actually had some positive moments ! I largely ignore the news on the radio and don’t watch any tv,so come here for the alternative/positive spin compared to the scare stories in the mainstream media.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote