Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. A similar prediction was also made for Sweden. |
#82
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate. If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing, because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive. On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only measure the latter. |
#83
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate. If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing, because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive. On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only measure the latter. As often mentioned, it's best to look at excess deaths, to avoid arguments about whether death certificates are consistent or accurate. The BBC web site has an interactive map that lets you compare the excess deaths per capita in any chosen area with the national average: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274 In most of the country, the excess deaths are now running at a low rate, but I find that in some parts of the country that were hit hard and early, the excess deaths are now negative. In other words, the virus claimed the lives of some of the frail people who would have died in June a couple of months early. Ealing and Hounslow, boroughs adjacent to Heathrow, are examples where the current death rate is below their norm. But, to pick a purely random example, County Durham, still has a high CV-19 death rate, so excess deaths are still significant. |
#85
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 09:12:22 on Mon, 22 Jun
2020, remarked: On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. A similar prediction was also made for Sweden. Who had social distancing and PPE policies. But a lack of lockdown has meant their infection rate has merely plateaued, and is stuck at around 50 per million, UK is currently regarded as disastrous at 40 (down from a peak of 80), most of the rest of Europe is now below 10. -- Roland Perry |
#86
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:03:38 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 09:12:22 on Mon, 22 Jun 2020, remarked: On Fri, 19 Jun 2020 17:59:47 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. A similar prediction was also made for Sweden. Who had social distancing and PPE policies. But a lack of lockdown has Voluntary policies. They treated their population as adults, not naughty children who needed to be coralled at home. |
#87
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Recliner" wrote in message ... wrote: On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate. If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing, because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive. On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only measure the latter. As often mentioned, it's best to look at excess deaths, to avoid arguments about whether death certificates are consistent or accurate. The BBC web site has an interactive map that lets you compare the excess deaths per capita in any chosen area with the national average: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274 but only UK not for comparison with ROW |
#88
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 09:13:34 on Mon, 22 Jun 2020, remarked: On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate. If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing, because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive. On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only measure the latter. How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence of the virus? Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all) other countries. The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the forms, thus it counts as a COVID death some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death even if the patient has tested positive That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID, completely undiagnosed and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get the necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full tim |
#89
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
tim... wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message ... wrote: On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate. If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing, because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive. On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only measure the latter. As often mentioned, it's best to look at excess deaths, to avoid arguments about whether death certificates are consistent or accurate. The BBC web site has an interactive map that lets you compare the excess deaths per capita in any chosen area with the national average: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274 but only UK not for comparison with ROW True. But it's useful to compare different UK areas. There are other sites that compare the UK with other countries. |
#90
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
tim... wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 09:13:34 on Mon, 22 Jun 2020, remarked: On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 06:49:03 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 21:07:18 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 14:55:38 on Fri, 19 Jun 2020, remarked: given Ferguson was prediction 500K deaths I think we can say that the model needed a bit of tweaking. Wasn't that if we "did nothing". But we did 'something'. Yes, it was the most pessimistic, worst-case scenario. Even without the official measures, that wouldn't have come to pass, as the public would have adopted their own informal versions if people were dying at that rate. If they knew how bad it was. Reports today say that the death rate at Easter was significantly higher than the government were briefing, because they only included hospital deaths which also tested positive. On the flip side , the coronavirus death list also includes people who died WITH the virus, not just those of died OF the virus. Other countries only measure the latter. How do they know that the thing the person died of, wasn't a consequence of the virus? Well they don't, and that's "they" generally, both them and us the point is the UK are more "honest" about this than some (not all) other countries. The UK puts primary cause = pneumonia, secondary cause = COVID on the forms, thus it counts as a COVID death some countries put cause = pneumonia and it doesn't count as a COVID death even if the patient has tested positive That's all separate from the problem of people dying with COVID, completely undiagnosed and people dying of something else completely because they couldn't get the necessary hospital treatment as all the beds are full That's why it's best to use the excess deaths estimate when doing comparisons. Of course, it may not be possible with countries that don't keep the daily death statistics. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Slam door carriage torn apart on BBC South Today | London Transport | |||
A13 Beckton (w/bound) flyover open today | London Transport | |||
West London today, how was it for you? | London Transport | |||
West London today, how was it for you? | London Transport |