Coronavirus outbreak

[nickyboy]

And the second problem with this argument is a subtle rephrasing of the claim here. The claim was not that there were fewer individuals categorised by the government as "High Risk", but that those who were really most vulnerable to dying from it had already died.

So this argument does not really rebut the claim. It is an argument against a slightly different claim based on some questionable assumptions.

You said that the most obvious reason for a lower death rate now was because maybe the most vulnerable had already died

I've provided the best stats I can find (the 2.2m high risk shielded is an ONS number)

You're questioning that number

So go on, give us your alternative number (with source). Otherwise we have to use the ONS number, right?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

All I'm trying to do is provide some balance to the narrative here that UK response is rubbish and countries like Germany's is really good. The facts don't support this.

But the facts absolutely do support that.

As you point out, Germany has, to date, done much better in *both* waves.

Sure, the gap is smaller wave 2, but even so, it's substantial, considerably less than half the number of deaths per capita in wave 2 in Germany. "Really good"? I'd certainly say so, relative to us.

All provisional of course, we don't know the end game yet.

 

[nickyboy]

But the facts absolutely do support that.

As you point out, Germany has, to date, done much better in *both* waves.

Sure, the gap is smaller wave 2, but even so, it's substantial, considerably less than half the number of deaths per capita in wave 2 in Germany. "Really good"? I'd certainly say so, relative to us.

All provisional of course, we don't know the end game yet.

Didn't say Germany has done much better in both waves. Have a read of what I said again.

In the first wave I'd give Germany 9/10 for their response and UK 1/10. But in the second wave I'd give Germany at most 6/10 and UK I would give 4/10

This is purely subjective of course but it's based on daily death rates so there is some logic to it. For sure, Germany responded way better in the first wave. But it seems the German and UK responses during the second wave are much more similar as UK has upped it's game somewhat, relative to Germany. Same can be said of Spain and, to a lesser extent, France

 

[mjr]

I've provided the best stats I can find (the 2.2m high risk shielded is an ONS number)

You're questioning that number

So go on, give us your alternative number (with source). Otherwise we have to use the ONS number, right?

Wrong. We don't use the wrong number (high risk initial category size) just because we don't have the correct number (most vulnerable to dying of covid). We say we don't have the correct number and say the theory remains a possibility, for now.

In other news, Manchester businesses seem to be getting frustrated with the police and government about what's a substantial meal. https://metro.co.uk/2020/10/25/gian...tial-after-restaurant-told-to-close-13477808/

 

[classic33]

Wrong. We don't use the wrong number (high risk initial category size) just because we don't have the correct number (most vulnerable to dying of covid). We say we don't have the correct number and say the theory remains a possibility, for now.

In other news, Manchester businesses seem to be getting frustrated with the police and government about what's a substantial meal. https://metro.co.uk/2020/10/25/gian...tial-after-restaurant-told-to-close-13477808/

Where did you get the figures for the following idea from?
"...those who were really most vulnerable to dying from it had already died."

Did they die before or after, and what from?

 

[mjr]

Where did you get the figures for the following idea from?

I suggest His Grace checks what a theory (or more formally, a hypothesis) is, in any reputable dictionary.

 

[classic33]

I suggest His Grace checks what a theory is, in any reputable dictionary.

A dictionary won't supply the source asked for, will it.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Didn't say Germany has done much better in both waves. Have a read of what I said again.

In the first wave I'd give Germany 9/10 for their response and UK 1/10. But in the second wave I'd give Germany at most 6/10 and UK I would give 4/10

This is purely subjective of course but it's based on daily death rates so there is some logic to it. For sure, Germany responded way better in the first wave. But it seems the German and UK responses during the second wave are much more similar as UK has upped it's game somewhat, relative to Germany. Same can be said of Spain and, to a lesser extent, France

Agree with all that, though if Germany is 6/10, UK is 2.5/10, based on deaths in 2nd wave to date.

 

[Stephenite]

News from across the North Sea.
A health centre worker has been sent to jail for 24 days for not following quarantine rules. She visited the UK three times and, each time, on return continued to work at the GPs office. She met 153 patients during this time. She had been advising patients correctly re travel/quarantine rules it seems.

 

[nickyboy]

Wrong. We don't use the wrong number (high risk initial category size) just because we don't have the correct number (most vulnerable to dying of covid). We say we don't have the correct number and say the theory remains a possibility, for now.

Yup, I've given my hypothesis with ONS numbers to back it up and some basic maths to show the implications of the ONS numbers

You've given...well...err....your hypothesis. No numbers, no nothing

So I'll ask again. Show me evidence....any evidence at all, to back up your hypothesis that the reason for lower death rates in 2nd wave is because so many of the vulnerable died in 1st wave that they weren't around in the 2nd wave

 

[mjr]

Yup, I've given my hypothesis with ONS numbers to back it up and some basic maths to show the implications of the ONS numbers

No, the ONS numbers and maths don't back up your hypothesis. They don't back up mine either, of course, but that doesn't make it a choice between two things that we can't prove or disprove: we could both be wrong!

So I'll ask again. Show me evidence....any evidence at all, to back up your hypothesis that the reason for lower death rates in 2nd wave is because so many of the vulnerable died in 1st wave that they weren't around in the 2nd wave

And I'll tell you again that the evidence isn't available yet.

Reflecting it back at you: show me evidence.... any evidence at all, to back up your hypothesis "that UK is doing better 2nd wave v 1st wave and the opposite is true of Germany".

The UK death rate peaking at a lower number in the 2nd wave (assuming it has actually peaked now) doesn't support the first part of the statement because the growth phase of the 2nd wave has so far killed about 18,000 people, whereas the growth phase of the 1st wave killed about 13,000 people - a smaller total death toll because the 1st wave's rise was shorter in time, lasting only about a month, instead of between two and two and a half months this wave. If only Mr Dither had locked down earlier, or the first Tiers had contained measures that worked...

The UK 2nd wave could still end up less deadly overall if death rates fall on a similar trajectory because we're starting from a lower peak, but the "Merry Christmas and a Happy New Covid" plan seems likely to prevent that.

 

[nickyboy]

No, the ONS numbers and maths don't back up your hypothesis. They don't back up mine either, of course, but that doesn't make it a choice between two things that we can't prove or disprove: we could both be wrong!


And I'll tell you again that the evidence isn't available yet.

Reflecting it back at you: show me evidence.... any evidence at all, to back up your hypothesis "that UK is doing better 2nd wave v 1st wave and the opposite is true of Germany".

The UK death rate peaking at a lower number in the 2nd wave (assuming it has actually peaked now) doesn't support the first part of the statement because the growth phase of the 2nd wave has so far killed about 18,000 people, whereas the growth phase of the 1st wave killed about 13,000 people - a smaller total death toll because the 1st wave's rise was shorter in time, lasting only about a month, instead of between two and two and a half months this wave. If only Mr Dither had locked down earlier, or the first Tiers had contained measures that worked...

The UK 2nd wave could still end up less deadly overall if death rates fall on a similar trajectory because we're starting from a lower peak, but the "Merry Christmas and a Happy New Covid" plan seems likely to prevent that.

Science and maths ain't your strong suit. All I'll say is that sometimes it pays to look at the facts clearly, rather than through the rather opaque lens of political dogma

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

During the No.10 Coronafest Conference this afternoon, 2 journalists asked the same question (the 2nd, apparently because he hadn't heard the first): is this British first to get the vaccine a Brexit bonus. Twice Johnson said the credit was elsewhere. This was after that Hot Mancack liar claimed Brexit helped get the vaccine approved early. Nadine Dorries, a junior health minister, also attempted to perpetuate this lie.

I would never expect Hancock to avoid a propaganda lie - I don't think he's capable of that - but it does feel strange to have Johnson telling the truth.

 

[mjr]

Science and maths ain't your strong suit. All I'll say is that sometimes it pays to look at the facts clearly, rather than through the rather opaque lens of political dogma

I'm a former maths lecturer and member of no political party, but that was a pretty good sidestepping of the request for any evidence for your hypothesis that the UK has done better in the second wave despite somehow killing about 40% more people in the pre-peak phase.

 

[Wobblers]

Interesting that the daily death rates in the second wave in UK and Spain are significantly lower than in the first wave. They're a bit lower in France, about the same in Italy, and much higher in Germany

I'm not sure what conclusion to draw from these facts. Have UK, Spain and France done a much better job 2nd wave compared to 1st wave in stopping people becoming infected and/or treating those infected? Or has Germany got much worse at stopping its citizens becoming infected and/or treating them?

Can't compare case numbers 1st to 2nd wave as the testing regime is so different. But for sure fewer UK citizens are dying 2nd wave v 1st wave and the opposite is true of Germany

There seems to be two factors behind the lower deaths in the UK and Spain this time round. The first is that we're getting better at treating people with Covid, so survival is more likely. The good Doctor behind Medcram looked at this a while ago: his video does an excellent job of covering the issue by discussing the medical papers published on CV19 survival rates.

The second factor is demographics. The first wave affected older and more vulnerable people particularly badly - with the obvious appalling results. This time round, it's been a younger demographic that have been catching the illness, especially those aged 20-35. Infection rates in the old have remained lower. Again, there's a Medcram video on this very topic, where they look at the data from the European Centre for Disease Control. (I make absolutely no apologies for adding two links to the same channel: a youtube channel where they actually have links to proper published data and clinical journals? It's unheard of!) Probably we've got better at shielding the more vulnerable, having learned from what happened in too many care homes back in spring.