Squeaky bum time!

MK62

nicknameless said:

Lol re 50% of population already having had this.  Do the maths.  With the most conservative estimate of current mortality rate from COVID-19 being 0.6% (from South Korea) a 50% prevalence would have resulted in approx.  200k deaths.  200k deaths with bilateral pneumonia going unnoticed - how likely?

Straws - graspy, graspy.

I would tend to agree here, but the main issue is that we just don't know......all this "modelling" relies on making some assumptions, and if those assumptions are wrong, any conclusions drawn from that modelling will also be wrong.
There hasn't been enough testing to get accurate data, and so all these models are little more than guesswork, even if it's informed/educated guesswork.
Some reports are suggesting that there may actually be two strains, one more dangerous than the other.....if that was the case, and the UK was predominantly infected with the milder one back in Jan, then that might explain a low death rate and it going under the radar then, and if exposure to the milder strain gives some immunity to the more dangerous strain.........but this is all speculation at the moment.
As the WHO have said, governments need to test, test, test, so that a clearer picture might emerge of what exactly is going on.

Anonymous101

MK62 said:

nicknameless said:

Lol re 50% of population already having had this.  Do the maths.  With the most conservative estimate of current mortality rate from COVID-19 being 0.6% (from South Korea) a 50% prevalence would have resulted in approx.  200k deaths.  200k deaths with bilateral pneumonia going unnoticed - how likely?

Straws - graspy, graspy.

I would tend to agree here, but the main issue is that we just don't know......all this "modelling" relies on making some assumptions, and if those assumptions are wrong, any conclusions drawn from that modelling will also be wrong.
There hasn't been enough testing to get accurate data, and so all these models are little more than guesswork, even if it's informed/educated guesswork.
Some reports are suggesting that there may actually be two strains, one more dangerous than the other.....if that was the case, and the UK was predominantly infected with the milder one back in Jan, then that might explain a low death rate and it going under the radar then, and if exposure to the milder strain gives some immunity to the more dangerous strain.........but this is all speculation at the moment.
As the WHO have said, governments need to test, test, test, so that a clearer picture might emerge of what exactly is going on.

That's an issue here in the UK thought isn't it as the government has taken a stance on testing which is different to that of other countries.

MK62

Anonymous101 said:

MK62 said:

nicknameless said:

Lol re 50% of population already having had this.  Do the maths.  With the most conservative estimate of current mortality rate from COVID-19 being 0.6% (from South Korea) a 50% prevalence would have resulted in approx.  200k deaths.  200k deaths with bilateral pneumonia going unnoticed - how likely?

Straws - graspy, graspy.

I would tend to agree here, but the main issue is that we just don't know......all this "modelling" relies on making some assumptions, and if those assumptions are wrong, any conclusions drawn from that modelling will also be wrong.
There hasn't been enough testing to get accurate data, and so all these models are little more than guesswork, even if it's informed/educated guesswork.
Some reports are suggesting that there may actually be two strains, one more dangerous than the other.....if that was the case, and the UK was predominantly infected with the milder one back in Jan, then that might explain a low death rate and it going under the radar then, and if exposure to the milder strain gives some immunity to the more dangerous strain.........but this is all speculation at the moment.
As the WHO have said, governments need to test, test, test, so that a clearer picture might emerge of what exactly is going on.

That's an issue here in the UK thought isn't it as the government has taken a stance on testing which is different to that of other countries.

At the moment, that would appear to be the case, but it does look like HMG is getting onboard with testing now, with the promise to ramp up testing for current infection, and the ordering of 3M+ antibody test kits (though there is a difference between ordering and them being available on the front line)

LHW99

MK62 said:

Anonymous101 said:

MK62 said:

nicknameless said:

Lol re 50% of population already having had this.  Do the maths.  With the most conservative estimate of current mortality rate from COVID-19 being 0.6% (from South Korea) a 50% prevalence would have resulted in approx.  200k deaths.  200k deaths with bilateral pneumonia going unnoticed - how likely?

Straws - graspy, graspy.

I would tend to agree here, but the main issue is that we just don't know......all this "modelling" relies on making some assumptions, and if those assumptions are wrong, any conclusions drawn from that modelling will also be wrong.
There hasn't been enough testing to get accurate data, and so all these models are little more than guesswork, even if it's informed/educated guesswork.
Some reports are suggesting that there may actually be two strains, one more dangerous than the other.....if that was the case, and the UK was predominantly infected with the milder one back in Jan, then that might explain a low death rate and it going under the radar then, and if exposure to the milder strain gives some immunity to the more dangerous strain.........but this is all speculation at the moment.
As the WHO have said, governments need to test, test, test, so that a clearer picture might emerge of what exactly is going on.

That's an issue here in the UK thought isn't it as the government has taken a stance on testing which is different to that of other countries.

At the moment, that would appear to be the case, but it does look like HMG is getting onboard with testing now, with the promise to ramp up testing for current infection, and the ordering of 3M+ antibody test kits (though there is a difference between ordering and them being available on the front line)

It will be the antibody testing that confirms this or not IMO. In January there was still limited knowledge of any spread (perhaps from the possible earlier Chinese outbreak in September 19) and no available tests.

MK62

True, but it remains to be seen how quickly these antibody test kits can actually be deployed in sufficient numbers for the data to be truly representative......as I said, there could be a big difference between the govt saying they have been ordered, to them actually being available for immediate frontline deployment in the quantity required. 

Parking_Trouble

Thrugelmir said:

justme111 said:

Yes but why would our death count be so much lower than Italian or Chinese then ?🤔

Direct comparisons are meaningless for many reasons. 
Italy has the second oldest population in the world after Japan. In northern Italy over 23% are over 65. Then there's family living, families under one roof. Then religon i.e. regular church going. May explain rates in Spain and Iran. 
Probable also that people have died without being recorded in the official statistics. For example. Germany does not carry post mortems. France only records hospital deaths. China has to be viewed with suspicion, the State Party controls public information. 
Diabetes also ranks high amongst existing conditions. The UK is far from healthy in this regard. 

Kissing.
Italians (and French and Spanish) do a lot of it. Saying hello and goodbye involves a lot of face to face contact.

tigerspill

SeeMe said:

justme111 said:

Yes but why would our death count be so much lower than Italian or Chinese then ?🤔

Good Point.

You cant compare death counts between countries as they are all measuring them differently.
The Italians are including everyone who has CV19 symptoms.  For example if a patient died of cancer and had CV19, they are included.  They reckon only 12% of the reported CV19 deaths in Italy directly relate to the virus.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/have-many-coronavirus-patients-died-italy/

[Deleted User]

tigerspill said:

SeeMe said:

justme111 said:

Yes but why would our death count be so much lower than Italian or Chinese then ?🤔

Good Point.

You cant compare death counts between countries as they are all measuring them differently.
The Italians are including everyone who has CV19 symptoms.  For example if a patient died of cancer and had CV19, they are included.  They reckon only 12% of the reported CV19 deaths in Italy directly relate to the virus.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/have-many-coronavirus-patients-died-italy/

And the Chinese are not counting people who test positive among infected, unless they also display symptoms. 20% are asymptomatic and everywhere else they are counted. 

The key difference is in the number of tests between countries. And probably in the quality of tests

nicknameless

Testing shortage - what testing shortage?  Prince Charlie got one lol.

Thrugelmir

nicknameless said:

Testing shortage - what testing shortage?  Prince Charlie got one lol.

At 71 in the at risk category.