comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 49 minutes ago
Reading about estimates for deaths in the UK. They initially thought up to 260,000, but have now revised that to 50,000 and anything below 20,000 would be a good result.
We’re sitting at 71 in the UK just now, and 8,012 worldwide.
That seems quite a leap to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because unchecked it'll spread exponentially until it reaches saturation point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 50,000 figure wasn’t it being left unchecked though. That’s with the current measures in place.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 1 minute ago
We’re taking measures though based on estimates, and comparing what’s happened in other countries?!
It doesn’t sit right with me that we’ve went from an initial estimate of 250,000 (and I know that was based on the doing nothing scenario) to 50,000, with anything below 20,000 being a good result. We’re at 71 just now, with just over 8,000 dead worldwide.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you suggesting it won’t be as bad as is being made out? I’m confused with what you’re saying here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not trying to downplay how serious the consequences of contracting it could be, but looking at the numbers then it doesn’t look as if we’ll get anywhere near that. Partly due to the measures we’re taking now.
These are government estimates though based on the measures now in place. They look well wide of the mark. Do you not think so?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On a purely mathematical basis I agree with you. Many hundreds of scientists don’t however so I’d be extremely cautious that they’ve overestimated this by such a huge margin.
I hope you’re right
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right now, it doesn’t look like we’ll be anywhere near the 20,000 number never mind the 50,000 though-so where are they getting this from and why does it seem so out of kilter?!
Aye I'm assuming they're going by the fact less than 1% of the population will snuff it, along with measures put in place to control the spread of it so that they can treat as many people as possible.
UK deaths will start rising rapidly pretty soon. Our problem is that we haven't been tracking the spread of it at all, and aren't testing nearly enough people to make informed decisions on.
This is the early stages.
As soon as the virus starts to really spread and infects much more people, the number of deaths will also rise and rapidly.
At the moment, very few people have caught the virus in terms of total population.
If anyone has any investments in property funds, they've all suspended dealing until further notice.
We're heading towards a worldwide market closure i suspect.
The next 3 weeks will be the test.
I can again only guess and suggest that figures will soar during this time.
I totally agree the figures will increase dramatically in the next few weeks, but to anywhere near 50,000?! I have serious reservations about that.
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
I totally agree the figures will increase dramatically in the next few weeks, but to anywhere near 50,000?! I have serious reservations about that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I’ve said, I sincerely hope you’re right.
comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 15 minutes ago
Aye I'm assuming they're going by the fact less than 1% of the population will snuff it, along with measures put in place to control the spread of it so that they can treat as many people as possible.
UK deaths will start rising rapidly pretty soon. Our problem is that we haven't been tracking the spread of it at all, and aren't testing nearly enough people to make informed decisions on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Completely agree. The WHO have said you need to ‘test, test, test’-so what are we not doing that?! We’re actively encouraging people to not get tested. It might make the infected figures a lot higher, but would give a greater indication of the actual mortality rate from this.
It would also allow us to trace the spread of the epidemic here.. which could aid us in stopping it spreading further, or at least trying to isolate and contain flare ups that occur in areas.
Really irresponsible from our Government not to be doing this.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Few pages back but I agree with magnum on not believing the Chinese. They'll be manipulating the figures. Report death as the underlying health issue or not at all.
comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 49 minutes ago
Reading about estimates for deaths in the UK. They initially thought up to 260,000, but have now revised that to 50,000 and anything below 20,000 would be a good result.
We’re sitting at 71 in the UK just now, and 8,012 worldwide.
That seems quite a leap to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because unchecked it'll spread exponentially until it reaches saturation point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like a bear
comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 15 minutes ago
It would also allow us to trace the spread of the epidemic here.. which could aid us in stopping it spreading further, or at least trying to isolate and contain flare ups that occur in areas.
Really irresponsible from our Government not to be doing this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
What’s irresponsible?
How on earth is anyone meant to measure flare ups whilst it’s still going on and changing on practically an hourly basis?
It’s a virus. It’s airborne and can be transmitted by touch.
Any measuring will be done after the main event and will undoubtedly show areas with larger populations will have more cases and there may well be age and health risk assessments which we are part the way through.
Even then that doesn’t tell you where it will or could strike next as immunity builds in certain areas faster than others.
This constant blaming of a government is pathetic. Everyone’s an expert on a previously unknown virus which still baffles us even now as POV has already indicated by the wild estimates on death rates.
I get not trusting fully the figures from China, but what is it we’re suggesting they’re manipulating? That there were more cases than they’ve stated, or more deaths than they’re recording?
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 11 seconds ago
I get not trusting fully the figures from China, but what is it we’re suggesting they’re manipulating? That there were more cases than they’ve stated, or more deaths than they’re recording?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s pretty much the accusation. Based on what I don’t know.
Because they’re Chinese I suppose.
That it's very easy to control the story when you have a state media known to cover it up. I'd suggest that there are more cases and deaths and they have just controlled the story
https://twitter.com/michellexzv/status/1240052258148147201?s=21
Is it definitely airborne?
I’ve seen conflicting reports on that part.
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is it definitely airborne?
I’ve seen conflicting reports on that part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it’s not been classed as airborne.
Also, it is irresponsible to not ‘test, test, test’ as you can’t measure after the event. You don’t know who will have had the virus and who hasn’t.
We need to be able to track this, and be on top of it-being proactive rather than reactive.
comment by Miller (U9310)
posted 5 minutes ago
That it's very easy to control the story when you have a state media known to cover it up. I'd suggest that there are more cases and deaths and they have just controlled the story
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about all the other countries then? Do we think they’re suppressing this?
I’m relaxed about the testing. Do we want resources hugely diverted to telling people ‘today you don’t have it come back again tomorrow’? These resources are needed to help treat people not just with corona but all the other medical problems folk live with. In the meantime assume everyone you meet is infectious even though the targeted testing of symptomised suspects shows only 1.4% of them actually have it!
It becomes scientifically irrelevant to know if that is really 1.3% or 1.5% or with 90, 95 or 99% confidence level in that precision. Of course, people will stress that some other country has better resolution. It does not make it bad data.
As scientists the WHO of course would like more data. It is their job. It is also a money spinner for the test manufacturers and test labs.
If and when they have a test to tell whether you’ve had it in the past that might be useful. In the meantime if you have the symptoms assume you have it and isolate.
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is it definitely airborne?
I’ve seen conflicting reports on that part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it’s not been classed as airborne.
Also, it is irresponsible to not ‘test, test, test’ as you can’t measure after the event. You don’t know who will have had the virus and who hasn’t.
We need to be able to track this, and be on top of it-being proactive rather than reactive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe a test is available that can tell if you’ve had it.
No, don’t ask me for proof.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is it definitely airborne?
I’ve seen conflicting reports on that part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it’s not been classed as airborne.
Also, it is irresponsible to not ‘test, test, test’ as you can’t measure after the event. You don’t know who will have had the virus and who hasn’t.
We need to be able to track this, and be on top of it-being proactive rather than reactive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe a test is available that can tell if you’ve had it.
No, don’t ask me for proof.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We won’t be doing testing after this has calmed down. How would that work, without testing everyone in the country?
South Korea has tested more than 250,000 people. I'm all for testing as many as we can.
Also...if we don't know how many people have it, we dont know how likely people catch it twice or whether immunity is building.
Sign in if you want to comment
League season ending at 50%
Page 5 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 18/3/20
comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 49 minutes ago
Reading about estimates for deaths in the UK. They initially thought up to 260,000, but have now revised that to 50,000 and anything below 20,000 would be a good result.
We’re sitting at 71 in the UK just now, and 8,012 worldwide.
That seems quite a leap to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because unchecked it'll spread exponentially until it reaches saturation point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 50,000 figure wasn’t it being left unchecked though. That’s with the current measures in place.
posted on 18/3/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 55 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 1 minute ago
We’re taking measures though based on estimates, and comparing what’s happened in other countries?!
It doesn’t sit right with me that we’ve went from an initial estimate of 250,000 (and I know that was based on the doing nothing scenario) to 50,000, with anything below 20,000 being a good result. We’re at 71 just now, with just over 8,000 dead worldwide.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you suggesting it won’t be as bad as is being made out? I’m confused with what you’re saying here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not trying to downplay how serious the consequences of contracting it could be, but looking at the numbers then it doesn’t look as if we’ll get anywhere near that. Partly due to the measures we’re taking now.
These are government estimates though based on the measures now in place. They look well wide of the mark. Do you not think so?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On a purely mathematical basis I agree with you. Many hundreds of scientists don’t however so I’d be extremely cautious that they’ve overestimated this by such a huge margin.
I hope you’re right
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Right now, it doesn’t look like we’ll be anywhere near the 20,000 number never mind the 50,000 though-so where are they getting this from and why does it seem so out of kilter?!
posted on 18/3/20
Aye I'm assuming they're going by the fact less than 1% of the population will snuff it, along with measures put in place to control the spread of it so that they can treat as many people as possible.
UK deaths will start rising rapidly pretty soon. Our problem is that we haven't been tracking the spread of it at all, and aren't testing nearly enough people to make informed decisions on.
posted on 18/3/20
This is the early stages.
As soon as the virus starts to really spread and infects much more people, the number of deaths will also rise and rapidly.
At the moment, very few people have caught the virus in terms of total population.
posted on 18/3/20
If anyone has any investments in property funds, they've all suspended dealing until further notice.
We're heading towards a worldwide market closure i suspect.
posted on 18/3/20
The next 3 weeks will be the test.
I can again only guess and suggest that figures will soar during this time.
posted on 18/3/20
I totally agree the figures will increase dramatically in the next few weeks, but to anywhere near 50,000?! I have serious reservations about that.
posted on 18/3/20
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 4 minutes ago
I totally agree the figures will increase dramatically in the next few weeks, but to anywhere near 50,000?! I have serious reservations about that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As I’ve said, I sincerely hope you’re right.
posted on 18/3/20
comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 15 minutes ago
Aye I'm assuming they're going by the fact less than 1% of the population will snuff it, along with measures put in place to control the spread of it so that they can treat as many people as possible.
UK deaths will start rising rapidly pretty soon. Our problem is that we haven't been tracking the spread of it at all, and aren't testing nearly enough people to make informed decisions on.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Completely agree. The WHO have said you need to ‘test, test, test’-so what are we not doing that?! We’re actively encouraging people to not get tested. It might make the infected figures a lot higher, but would give a greater indication of the actual mortality rate from this.
posted on 18/3/20
It would also allow us to trace the spread of the epidemic here.. which could aid us in stopping it spreading further, or at least trying to isolate and contain flare ups that occur in areas.
Really irresponsible from our Government not to be doing this.
posted on 18/3/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 18/3/20
Few pages back but I agree with magnum on not believing the Chinese. They'll be manipulating the figures. Report death as the underlying health issue or not at all.
posted on 18/3/20
comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 44 minutes ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 49 minutes ago
Reading about estimates for deaths in the UK. They initially thought up to 260,000, but have now revised that to 50,000 and anything below 20,000 would be a good result.
We’re sitting at 71 in the UK just now, and 8,012 worldwide.
That seems quite a leap to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because unchecked it'll spread exponentially until it reaches saturation point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like a bear
posted on 18/3/20
comment by JukeboxJunkie (U10162)
posted 15 minutes ago
It would also allow us to trace the spread of the epidemic here.. which could aid us in stopping it spreading further, or at least trying to isolate and contain flare ups that occur in areas.
Really irresponsible from our Government not to be doing this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?
What’s irresponsible?
How on earth is anyone meant to measure flare ups whilst it’s still going on and changing on practically an hourly basis?
It’s a virus. It’s airborne and can be transmitted by touch.
Any measuring will be done after the main event and will undoubtedly show areas with larger populations will have more cases and there may well be age and health risk assessments which we are part the way through.
Even then that doesn’t tell you where it will or could strike next as immunity builds in certain areas faster than others.
This constant blaming of a government is pathetic. Everyone’s an expert on a previously unknown virus which still baffles us even now as POV has already indicated by the wild estimates on death rates.
posted on 18/3/20
I get not trusting fully the figures from China, but what is it we’re suggesting they’re manipulating? That there were more cases than they’ve stated, or more deaths than they’re recording?
posted on 18/3/20
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 11 seconds ago
I get not trusting fully the figures from China, but what is it we’re suggesting they’re manipulating? That there were more cases than they’ve stated, or more deaths than they’re recording?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s pretty much the accusation. Based on what I don’t know.
Because they’re Chinese I suppose.
posted on 18/3/20
That it's very easy to control the story when you have a state media known to cover it up. I'd suggest that there are more cases and deaths and they have just controlled the story
posted on 18/3/20
https://twitter.com/michellexzv/status/1240052258148147201?s=21
posted on 18/3/20
Is it definitely airborne?
I’ve seen conflicting reports on that part.
posted on 18/3/20
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is it definitely airborne?
I’ve seen conflicting reports on that part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it’s not been classed as airborne.
Also, it is irresponsible to not ‘test, test, test’ as you can’t measure after the event. You don’t know who will have had the virus and who hasn’t.
We need to be able to track this, and be on top of it-being proactive rather than reactive.
posted on 18/3/20
comment by Miller (U9310)
posted 5 minutes ago
That it's very easy to control the story when you have a state media known to cover it up. I'd suggest that there are more cases and deaths and they have just controlled the story
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What about all the other countries then? Do we think they’re suppressing this?
posted on 18/3/20
I’m relaxed about the testing. Do we want resources hugely diverted to telling people ‘today you don’t have it come back again tomorrow’? These resources are needed to help treat people not just with corona but all the other medical problems folk live with. In the meantime assume everyone you meet is infectious even though the targeted testing of symptomised suspects shows only 1.4% of them actually have it!
It becomes scientifically irrelevant to know if that is really 1.3% or 1.5% or with 90, 95 or 99% confidence level in that precision. Of course, people will stress that some other country has better resolution. It does not make it bad data.
As scientists the WHO of course would like more data. It is their job. It is also a money spinner for the test manufacturers and test labs.
If and when they have a test to tell whether you’ve had it in the past that might be useful. In the meantime if you have the symptoms assume you have it and isolate.
posted on 18/3/20
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is it definitely airborne?
I’ve seen conflicting reports on that part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it’s not been classed as airborne.
Also, it is irresponsible to not ‘test, test, test’ as you can’t measure after the event. You don’t know who will have had the virus and who hasn’t.
We need to be able to track this, and be on top of it-being proactive rather than reactive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe a test is available that can tell if you’ve had it.
No, don’t ask me for proof.
posted on 18/3/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by NNH (U10730)
posted 2 minutes ago
Is it definitely airborne?
I’ve seen conflicting reports on that part.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it’s not been classed as airborne.
Also, it is irresponsible to not ‘test, test, test’ as you can’t measure after the event. You don’t know who will have had the virus and who hasn’t.
We need to be able to track this, and be on top of it-being proactive rather than reactive.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe a test is available that can tell if you’ve had it.
No, don’t ask me for proof.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We won’t be doing testing after this has calmed down. How would that work, without testing everyone in the country?
posted on 18/3/20
South Korea has tested more than 250,000 people. I'm all for testing as many as we can.
Also...if we don't know how many people have it, we dont know how likely people catch it twice or whether immunity is building.
Page 5 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10