Has anyone in ED actually heard about the virus?

[dbboy]

Today's data

no. of confirmed covid - 19 cases, 17,089

no. of confirmed covid - 19 deaths, 1019

% of covid - 19 deaths 5.96%

The curve is beginning to increase dramatically, what's more worrying is that the UK Govt do not expect to see the peak before two to three weeks time.

And today the Government said that if the UK has 20,000 deaths (think how many confirmed cases that will require) the UK will have been lucky. Luck has nothing to do with this, they believe the number of deaths could, yes could reach a staggering 500,000. That is damn scary.

[Danineastdulwich]

Would not advise going into butchers right now- broke their own rules of max 2 people inside as people were being ?too slow?.Meant 4 people within touching distance bundled into a 1 meter space! People still aren?t getting it.

[tasha1]

https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/posting.php?20

This is something I wrote today in the lounge but also very relevant for this thread

[JohnL]

Sky News are pushing the 20,000 deaths thing and had someone from Imperial (not the official Imperial COVID team) to back them up and make the influenza comparison but he seemed strange - as if he was holding something back.

Then they started saying an economic dip causes deaths too - I do hope they are not heading towards pushing the Trump agenda of going back to work ASAP (i.e. before Easter). I notice the business secretary was doing todays government briefing.

[Ghlpc]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Today's data

>

> no. of confirmed covid - 19 cases, 17,089

> no. of confirmed covid - 19 deaths, 1019

>

> % of covid - 19 deaths 5.96%

>

> The curve is beginning to increase dramatically,

> what's more worrying is that the UK Govt do not

> expect to see the peak before two to three weeks

> time.

>

> And today the Government said that if the UK has

> 20,000 deaths (think how many confirmed cases that

> will require) the UK will have been lucky. Luck

> has nothing to do with this, they believe the

> number of deaths could, yes could reach a

> staggering 500,000. That is damn scary.

Just want to say, the 5.96% figure is a bit misleading.

This is only from confirmed, tested cases.

We have been told that it is likely much, much higher than this, which means the mortality rate is lower.

Not to downplay the seriousness of the situation of course, but I've

[Ghlpc]

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Today's data

>

> no. of confirmed covid - 19 cases, 17,089

> no. of confirmed covid - 19 deaths, 1019

>

> % of covid - 19 deaths 5.96%

>

> The curve is beginning to increase dramatically,

> what's more worrying is that the UK Govt do not

> expect to see the peak before two to three weeks

> time.

>

> And today the Government said that if the UK has

> 20,000 deaths (think how many confirmed cases that

> will require) the UK will have been lucky. Luck

> has nothing to do with this, they believe the

> number of deaths could, yes could reach a

> staggering 500,000. That is damn scary.

Just want to say, the 5.96% figure is a bit misleading.

This is only from confirmed, tested cases. As we all know not everyone is being tested.

We have been told that it is likely much, much higher than this, which means the mortality rate is lower.

I dont want to downplay the seriousness of the situation of course.

As it stood as of yesterday, the UK had a mortality rate of 15 per 1,000,000 of its population. This is unfortunately likely to increase however.

[fishbiscuits]

I agree. Actual cases could easily be 10x the official confirmed cases. The mortality rate is nothing like 6%.

[JohnL]

The mortality rate in places like London will depend how well the NHS copes and how flat the curve is - so mortality rate is not just dependent on the virus itself but how well we deal with it ?

[JohnL]

The depression from this is if we're already ill we have to hide, if we fall ill or have an accident - that things waiting for you too :(

another reason not to go out or take risks in any way.

[Penguin68]

I agree. Actual cases could easily be 10x the official confirmed cases. The mortality rate is nothing like 6%.

Well, the mortality rate for those testing positive on admission to hospital is around 6% - but this of course is not the overall mortality rate, which is unknown. Estimates of 1.0%-0.1% are based on guesses around the (probably 90%) of people with symptoms but who have not been hospitalised and the maybe many more entirely asymptomatic - which may include many children. What does seem clear is that those who become really ill are really, really ill - the death rate of those in intensive care is reported at 50% - seasonal flu intensive care mortality is reported at about 33%.

Of course many of those who do die may well have died if they had got flu, as opposed to Covid 19 - so it is quite possible that the overall 'death rate' over this time will broadly match the anticipated rate.

The other thing to say is that reports of e.g. sex bias in deaths need to be taken carefully. Although in China and Italy more men have died (proportionately) than women this correlation does not in and of itself imply causation. (Statistics 101). For instance Italian and Chinese men are reported to be heavier smokers than women, and in a respiratory disease this may be significant.

What I am saying is that unless and until we have properly sampled national statistics, where the sample is not skewed through sampling bias (as it clearly was when virtually only those reporting to hospital sick were being tested) we will not know either infection, or death or recovery rates. And although we will now be seeing NHS staff tested (which changes the sampling basis) we are of course now only testing those most likely to have been exposed (and exposed on a high frequency basis). So not 'national population' figures either.

It is good practice to challenge any published statistic to see how it was derived and what inherent errors are in it, but it is particularly important if 'headline' statistics seem scary (or indeed overly re-assuring - some countries are publishing 'death in hospital' figures but not deaths in other institutions such as care homes for the elderly).

[dbboy]

Today's data - 29/03/2020

no. of those who tested positive for covid 19 cases, 19,522

no. of deaths of those who tested positive for covid - 1228

% of deaths of those who had tested positive for covid - 19, 6.29%

[worldwiser]

I really don't think that's a helpful figure. There are going to be thousands of people who were never tested or never developed symptoms. The real fatality rate is extremely likely to be much less than 1%, perhaps even as little as 0.1.

[dbboy]

This is where the official data is reported from;

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public#number-of-cases

If you do not believe the data, that's your choice, but the data is what it is.

The fatality rate is the number of deaths as a percentage of the number of tested positive covid - 19 cases

[AylwardS]

The number of deaths to those tested is going to change - the government has said tests will increase to 10,000 and then 25,000 by the end of April.

I?ve been checking the BBC number of cases in your area https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274. Again this is based on official figures (the number of cases reported by health authority) and gives the population. So maybe not the full picture but at least a like for like comparison.

To me more relevant - the only way the death rate can be kept down is to keep down the number getting infected which is something we can all play our part in keeping down.

I?ve not checked every day but the first I checked was 15 March and there were 28 cases for the population of 317,256 (0.009% of the population). Today there are 319 cases (0.1% of the population).

[Blah Blah]

Sorry Worldwiser, but that is just not how mortality rates are measured. Comparing mortality to cases presenting themselves for treatment however, IS, how mortality is calculated. So if 3% are fatalities, that is 30 times more than the 0.1% for seasonal flu. It is frustrating to see the playing down of the seriousness of this by the argument around non-diagnosed and therefore, uncounted for, cases. 3% (and the global average may well get closer to 10% by the time this is over) is millions of people. This SARS virus sees 18% (from data so far) of those developing symptoms, needing ICU care. And some people, with no underlying conditions are dying. So let's just accept that this is a serious global pandemic, and that until we have effective antiviral treatment, and/or a working vaccine, this is something we need to keep under control as far as we can. Let's hope the virus doesn't mutate between waves too.

[Penguin68]

If you do not believe the data, that's your choice, but the data is what it is.

And the data is statistically so flawed - if you are trying to derive an overall mortality rate - as to be completely useless. The data you show are most close to the mortality rate of those presenting to hospital (i.e. already very ill) and who are shown to be infected with Covid-19. That could be as few as 10% of those with symptoms, and possibly 5% or less of those who are both with, and without symptoms, but who have the infection. We know there are symptomless individuals from many other studies.

What you are doing is intentionally scaring people by quoting flawed figures - HMG publish both 'tested positive' and 'death' figures but DO NOT then produce a mortality rate from that - because they know it wouldn't be true or accurate. You are doing, quite statistically wrongly, that last bit of maths on your own, and your constant need to post this scary and inaccurate analysis of HMG figures does suggest a desire to troll this thread.

[Penguin68]

Comparing mortality to cases presenting themselves for treatment however, IS, how mortality is calculated.

This is not what is happening - only the most serious cases, those needing hospitalisation, are being let through the 111 net - so this is not a measure of cases but of very serious cases. Flu figures are not in fact kept by anyone, it's not a notifiable disease unlike Covid-19 - and flu is rarely given as a cause of death, more frequently pneumonia. Flu and Covid-19 figures are generated using entirely different criteria, the flu 'totals' tend to be statistical assessments following the end of a flu season. Running flu totals are not given (or even available). Because Covid-19 is known to be symptomless in number of cases, particularly the young, these would never be 'presented' for treatment anyway. The mortality rates are accurate as regards very serious cases (hospitalised) - by definition, but if these are running at what many consider to be 10% or less of all cases a very different pattern emerges.

[siousxiesue]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Buying icecream, takeaway coffee- both witnessed

> today- madness.

Ice cream isn't essential!! Where on earth?

[micromacromonkey]

Below is a link to an excellent stats-based coronavirus post. Generally it's an excellent article, and specifically (near halfway) it addresses mortality/fatality rates in the context of the points raised above, explaining how these can be extrapolated to give a meaningful figure.

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca

[dbboy]

Penguin - No I am NOT trolling, and find you suggesting that quite offensive.

[Blah Blah]

Penguin, I know all of that. But some kind of measurement does exist, with all its flaws, because without it, there would be no recognition of what constitutes a pandemic vs just a very bad flu season. And a person can be tested for influenza A virus just as easily as any other virus if a medical measurement needs to be made of that.

I also disagree that referring to present data is meaningless. It is what enables a measure of the risk level of the virus. It also enables a comparison of how different responses and resources compare.

Where I would agree with you is in that only once antibody tests can be done widely, will we get an essence of the true spread of the virus before the lock down measures came in. But for now, it is enough to know that it spreads easily and sends too many people to hospital needing intensive treatment.

[[email protected]]

.

[worldwiser]

-- moved topic --

[Sue]

Beat96uk, that sounds horrendous.

Thanks for sharing, and hope you make a full recovery xx

[Dulwich handy]

se22cat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Teenagers & workmen hacking up phlegm & spitting

> it everywhere, a disgusting bald white guy walking

> down Frogley road with Marks bags yesterday openly

> sneezing onto people without a care in his scumbag

> mind, people from all backgrounds coughing into

> their hands or just openly on the bus then using

> the same hand to hold onto the rail & press the

> button...

>

> Despite the supposedly major increase of ABC1's

> into the area post-90s, the behaviour on show

> daily makes it clear why the figures are high.

F*** the circumstances

Slightly racist.....

Or is it me ?!