Cont: 2019-nCoV / Corona virus Pt 3

[Doghouse Reilly]

You made the claim, so you supply the evidence. If you can't...

I stated a verifiable fact. The information is in this thread. If you haven't been keeping up with the thread, it's not my job to go back and read it for you. Simply checking my post history will lead you to the relevant information.

 

[Belz...]

What's the rationale behind countries talking of reducing lockdown restrictions? Are there models suggesting it's a good plan? Isn't it likely to result in a resurgence of cases?

Yes, but at some point it's inevitable.

The lockdown isn't to get rid of the virus, but to reduce the number of cases for a certain period of time. However, the lockdown itself can't last for longer than a certain period if we want to avoid an economic catastrophe. So it'll become a question of where's the point of balance: when do we consider that we'll just have to weather the rest of the storm as it comes?

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Economy in crap will also kill a lot of people. So it is balancing act.

But it doesn't have to be one or the other. Trying to 'save' the economy by balancing it against Covide-19 deaths could just put it more 'in the crap'. Countries in lockdown are proving that we can stop people from dying and still have a viable economy.

What will go down the crapper is an economy that relies on more and more on unnecessary consumption. Things like international tourism, long commutes just to sit in an office all day, excessive waste and over-eating have large costs that we have ignored when talking about economic 'growth'. Until now.

They say every cloud has a silver lining. Covid-19 is giving us a unique opportunity to rethink how we run our economies. Ideas that were unthinkable a few months ago are now a reality - and they are working! Pity it took thousands of deaths to make us start seeing it, but that's humans for you...

 

[Roger Ramjets]

However, the lockdown itself can't last for longer than a certain period if we want to avoid an economic catastrophe.

Nonsense. There's no theoretical reason we can't stay in lockdown forever. We have the technology, only the will is wanting.

 

[Steve]

Nonsense. There's no theoretical reason we can't stay in lockdown forever. We have the technology, only the will is wanting.

You need to be specific. Currently there are many different versions of lockdown. Which do you see as practical on a permanent basis?

 

[Samson]

Nonsense. There's no theoretical reason we can't stay in lockdown forever. We have the technology, only the will is wanting.

I have the will to not attend gatherings where a crowd are shouting to make themselves heard

 

[novaphile]

I have the will to not attend gatherings where a crowd are shouting to make themselves heard

Hear hear!

 

[abaddon]

Just to emphasize for our foreign readers, I have some swampland in florida for sale as well as a bridge in brooklyn

In case that's actually true and not just politically true, that would be a wonder for humanity.

You think it odd that the PM of the UK would be prioritised for treatment?

 

[pipelineaudio]

You think it odd that the PM of the UK would be prioritised for treatment?

No, in fact that is exactly the opposite of what I was saying

 

[eerok]

Canada has approved a new rapid test.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-health-canada-approves-new-rapid-covid-testing-kits/

Until now, all COVID-19 tests have been processed through large polymerase chain reaction machines. But Spartan’s test is processed through a handheld DNA analyzer, which allows hospitals and other institutions to test patients and receive results without having to send samples away to a provincial lab.

 

[Bob001]

Bad news:

The novel coronavirus is killing about 1 in 10 hospitalized middle-aged patients and 4 in 10 who are older than 85 in the United States, and it is particularly lethal to men even when taking into account common chronic diseases that exacerbate risk, according to previously unpublished data from a company that aggregates real-time patient data from 1,000 hospitals and 180,000 health-care providers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...4485a2-7bfe-11ea-b6ff-597f170df8f8_story.html

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

Iceland has tested 10% of its entire population, finding that half of all people who get it don't even have symptoms, with an overall fatality rate so far of 0.4%.

I, for one, am not surprised that when real testing of a populationis done, the death rate is far lowerthan what has been claimed.

ETA: number correction and removed incorrect statement about flu death rates.

 

[ProBonoShill]

Healthcare workers are a bit different to everyone else, working very closely with highly infectious patients.

I have to say, the number of health professionals being infected bothers the hell out of me - if they had the right PPE and conditions, they wouldn't get it.

Like this bloke: https://www.ilfordrecorder.co.uk/news/health/nurse-dies-of-suspected-covid-19-1-6587770



Count me in on China's position being pretty accurate right now.



Financial Times independent enough for you?

https://www.ft.com/content/f47a39ea-6a66-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcca75

There is no question China is back at work - their problem right now is nobody ordering anything, because the rest of the world is shut down. I've gone from receiving one quote a week from China pre-Covid to three or four a day now as they desperately try to find markets for their products.

If the epidemic was ongoing, they'd still be shut down and they're not.

Well thankfully, unlike the rubes here, most health officials around the planet are highly skeptical of China's ridiculous numbers.

From earlier in this thread:

Those numbers are "pretty accurate"? They seem to be entirely made up.

Hmmm death numbers in Toronto still below those stated in the post I responded to, Math is hard.

Might as well quote this one as any other "skeptical of the numbers from China" post ...


Up until 15 March, the WHO's daily situation report had a "Table 1. Confirmed and suspected cases of COVID-19 acute respiratory disease reported by provinces, regions and cities in China".

The last column is "Cumulative Deaths". Ranked these are (for "Data as of 15 March 2020")*:
Hubei 3085
Henan 22
Heilongjiang 13
Guangdong, Beijing 8 (each)
Shandong 7
Anhui, Chongqing, Hebei, Hainan 6 (each)
Hunan, Hong Kong 4 (each)
Sichuan, Shanghai, Tianjin, Xinjiang 3 (each)
Guangxi, Shaanxi, Yunnan, Guizhou, Gansu 2 (each)
Zhejiang, Jiangxi, Fujian, Liaoning, Jilin, Inner Mongolia, Taiwan 1 (each)
Jiangsu, Shanxi, Ningxia, Qinghai, Macau, Tibet 0 (each)

There certainly are good reasons for doubting the accuracy of the number for Hubei; the SCMP, for example, has articles/anecdotes about people dying and being cremated without any testing being done, especially in the early days.

But the fact that the numbers for three independent places (Hong Kong, Taiwan, Macau) are consistent with those for most provinces (other than Hubei) suggests that it's only Hubei where the numbers might be wonky.

More: Henan borders on Hubei, leaving Heilongjiang as the only apparent possible outlier.

*I hope I didn't make any transcription errors

Believing stats from the Chineses government on a Skeptic site, thanks for the free comedy.

 

[rjh01]

This does not look good. Only hope the next few days numbers do not go back to what they were before the Easter long weekend. Any new cases would be from after the lockdown. We have been locked down for three weeks. I would hate to think it has been a waste.

Australia's Chief Medical Officer Brendan Murphy said this morning that only 33 new cases of the virus were confirmed across the country overnight. However, Professor Murphy cautioned this was likely due to a downtrend in testing over the Easter weekend.

Mr Andrews said Victoria's number of coronavirus cases was stabilising as fewer people returned from overseas and suspected cases of community transmission were now the main concern.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...ronavirus-cases-as-numbers-stabilise/12144060

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

Suppose the global death toll, today (31 March 2020) is 40k.

Suppose it's doubling every four days*.

On 4 April, it will be 80k.

8 April, 160k.

12 April, 320k.

Looks like we won't have to wait for long.

*From the WHO situation reports, Grand Total :
19 March: 8,778
23 March: 14,509
27 March: 23,335

Today is the 12th of April and we're not even close to being on pace with your forecast. Looks like we're waiting longer than you thought. Or was your "supposing" not meant to be taken seriously, as it was simply "supposing"? It certainly felt as though your intention was to show me, through "supposing" in simple exponential fashion (since apparently you, as so many others,
thought I was too simpleminded to comprehend the premise) just how foolish I was to doubt the claims of massive impending doom and death.

 

[The Atheist]

Well thankfully, unlike the rubes here, most health officials around the planet are highly skeptical of China's ridiculous numbers.

Being skeptical of them is sensible.

Dismissing independent evidence that they're back at work is stupid.

Iceland has tested 10% of its entire population, finding that half of all people who get it don't even have symptoms, with an overall fatality rate so far of 0.004%.

I, for one, am not surprised that when real testing of a population is done, it turns out this is no deadlier than a flu.

Abject maths fail. You forgot to count 90% of the population, as well as all the negative tests.

Iceland's mortality rate is a very low 0.5% of cases, but still much worse than seasonal 'flu. Or did you think maybe that people who have tested negative can't catch it in the future?

 

[marting]

Iceland has tested 10% of its entire population, finding that half of all people who get it don't even have symptoms, with an overall fatality rate so far of 0.004%.

I, for one, am not surprised that when real testing of a population is done, it turns out this is no deadlier than a flu.

No idea where you get .004%

From their report to WHO, fatality rate in Iceland is currently .47% 100*(8/1689)

Of course if they aren't counting people testing positive but asymptomatic like China had until recently, the rate would be .24% if half those infected are asymptomatic.

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

Being skeptical of them is sensible.

Dismissing independent evidence that they're back at work is stupid.



Abject maths fail. You forgot to count 90% of the population, as well as all the negative tests.

Iceland's mortality rate is a very low 0.5% of cases, but still much worse than seasonal 'flu. Or did you think maybe that people who have tested negative can't catch it in the future?

No, I understand everything you say, it was a typo. I meant 0.4%, but we can go with your .5% instead. And you are correct, for a moment I was thinking flu was 0.5% but I realize it's lower than that.

 

[Doghouse Reilly]

No idea where you get .004%

From their report to WHO, fatality rate in Iceland is currently .47% 100*(8/1689)

Of course if they aren't counting people testing positive but asymptomatic like China had until recently, the rate would be .24% if half those infected are asymptomatic.

Agreed, it was a phone typo.

 

[ProBonoShill]

If you realized that up-front why did you continue typing?

Show I could show the absurdity of your anecdotal evidence.

You can’t take the number of people in ICU and compare it to the number of deaths and estimate death rates among people that end up in ICU.

No but you can get a rough idea. Trying to cause hysteria by posting the tripe you did isn't helpful to anyone.

The numbers ARE easily accessible, so why didn't you do so?

You first.

What Toronto hospital does "your friend" work at where "2/3 of patients on ICU die"??? Toronto has 25 hospitals, as I type this Toronto has 77 deaths. Not all patients died while in ICU at a Toronto hospital. How many people died at your friends hospital while in ICU?

As of April 1 in the Province of Ontario there are 89 people on ventilators in ICU. (This represents 27% of those hospitalized for COVID.)

I said above, however, you can't just take those 89 people add in the 37 dead and use in to calculate the death rate because those 89 cases have yet to be decided one way or another. if 6 of these 89 people die per day over the next 10 days and the remainder recover the death rate is 67%.

Province of Ontario?

Math is hard.

A detailed report on ICU admissions in Ontario obtained by the National Post hints at a positive trend. It includes both confirmed and suspected coronavirus cases and shows a peak on April 2 of 538 possible COVID-19 sufferers in critical care. The number has remained at between about 500 and 535 since then – out of a total number of ICU patients that stood at 1,321 on Thursday.

1321 x .66 = 871 deaths in Ontario, not even close. But please disclose the name of the hospital where your friend works so we can expose what an incompetent boob he is.

Oh and please stop posting reckless nonsense, creating unnecessary hysteria helps no one.