Coronavirus outbreak

[Unkraut]

The feeling amongst the actual experts ( epidemiologists and the like ) is that this isn’t a particularly lethal pathogen, it’s just that an extremely unusual large number of people have it.

Quite. But this does not take into account healthcare system overload, and the knock-on effect of lack of capacity to treat patients who otherwise could be treated. The eventual number of deaths from the virus, if it does actually overload the system, will include many who were never infected by it but couldn't be treated properly for their own life-threatening illnesses.

I can't understand why those moaning about the lockdown never seem to be able to understand this crucial point, but constantly compare it to the flu and have an attitude of carrying on as usual as though it were flu. (Hitchens & Co are at it again.)

 

[mjr]

The figures follow population density as would be expected, but the North West stands out.

I would expect that region to give a similar number to London and the Midlands, rather than about half.

Any ideas why that should be?

Number of metropolises, working on the theory that this spreads easier/faster there with all the associated rapid transport gubbins? The North West may contain Liverpool-Birkenhead (5th biggest metro area in UK) and Manchester (3rd) metro areas, both about 2.5m, but that's all in the top 20. The Midlands contains Birmingham (2nd, 3.7m), Nottingham-Derby (9th), Leicester (16th) and Stoke (20th). It's not a perfect explanation because NE&Yorks contains more but has fewer deaths than the NW.

 

[mjr]

There seems to be a new "Stay At Home" TV advert, using images from the NHS. Annoyingly, it says you can only go out for essential shopping, health and work - no mention of exercise, although there is video of someone exercising. It's like they're making up a new message for each broadcast

At least it's better than the one with Chris Whitty staring unblinkingly out at you, telling you how not to catch what he caught.

 

[Wobblers]

My point was puzzlement that a 'web master' would seemingly decry an internet technology. Without any context it seemed a bit Luddite, or Gerald Ratner-esque.

I do agree with being very cautious before surrendering data-privacy; most of my career has been cyber security and penetration testing, so I'm well aware that v bad things happen when sensitive data falls into the wrong hands.

However, the right data in the right hands can bring benefits both to the individual and the wider community.

You ought to take a look at theregister.co.uk. That website's dedicated to IT news - and as you might expect, its forums are populated by various IT types (the sort of people who develop software, run databases, administrate computers and networks and so on). You'll struggle to find any of them who don't hold similar opinions to @mjr. In fact, many of them hold even stronger opinions on the topic of privacy and IT.

There is good reason for this: these are the people who appreciate the power of this data. And, more importantly, the consequences. They understand that this word "anonymisation" refers to something that isn't possible. What one person can anonymise, another can undo. For instance, combining location data with, say, the electoral register it becomes possible to unambiguously identify many people's identity. Combining publically accessible data sources it is possible to determine peoples' religion, sexual orientation and political beliefs. (Both Facebook and Google do exactly this: it's their very business model.) In just the last century, hundreds of millions of people were persecuted for these three things. Millions died as a result. It's still happening - ask any Muslim in Myanmar for instance.

To use the example of the Luddites to fail to understand them. They weren't anti-technology, as is so often portrayed. They were against the uses of technology to deskill the workforce, and by doing so concentrate wealth and power into one small cadre. And that is something which is very much relevant today.

(My apologies for going rather Off Topic)

 

[glasgowcyclist]

these are the people who appreciate the power of this data. And, more importantly, the consequences. They understand that this word "anonymisation" refers to something that isn't possible. What one person can anonymise, another can undo

It's a bit like "Who keeps the fish". At least, that's how I finally managed to convince my daughter how seemingly random pieces of unconnected data could lead you to build an accurate picture of people's lives. She's now very privacy conscious.

 

[Dave Davenport]

Well I had my fill of Covidiots getting their comeuppance today. I was riding down to Romsey from Southampton today, and I ( yet again ) passed a group of 4 cyclists who clearly thought the rules didn’t apply to them. The police on the mountain bikes who appeared from a side road had other ideas. Then a couple of minutes later I happened across what initially looked like a RTC, on Millbrook road West ( a couple of emergency vehicles with the blues lit up ) just past the railway station at the lights. As I got closer I could see that it was in fact a stop, involving a fun bus, and an area car. They were busily shoving one of the occupants of the car into the cage, and bollocking the other 3 . This is a fun game. It’s just a shame the group of 5 cyclists I passed in the New Forest didn’t get caught ( whilst I was there ). So far, the majority of the blatant rule breakers that I’ve seen and have been obvious, have been Lycra clad knobbers on road bikes. They really are not doing any cyclists any favours ( for a change)

I've been out for a ride a few times in the last week (alone or with Mrs D) and haven't seen any 'groups' of cyclists at all (lycra clad roadies or otherwise).

 

[Wobblers]

No we’re not. The balllistic trajectory model had us closer to 1000 deaths a day by now. We are not Italy, it’s a nonsense to compare the U.K. to Italy, our social demographic is completely different to Italy, and we have reacted accordingly, Italy didn’t react according to its demographic, and is now seeing the result. Unless our government changes the counting rules again ( I don’t doubt they’ll try ) we should see a flat line in rates of increase of deaths or even a decrease. Forget using Italy as any sort of yard stick, it’s a case apart.

This is simply nonsense:

The UK has been experiencing exponential growth in CV-19 deaths for over the last week. The straight line that the UK numbers plot in the graph above is absolutely typical of exponential growth in a log plot. And, unlike Italy or France, it's showing no sign of flattening out. We, in fact, have been doing worse than Italy in every single day. This is not "scaremongering": these are the facts.

PS: this is from the published data from PHE, not "The Daily Mail".

 

[Wobblers]

Quite right. Until there is blanket mass testing ( both antigen and antibody ) the true picture won’t be apparent. The feeling amongst the actual experts ( epidemiologists and the like ) is that this isn’t a particularly lethal pathogen, it’s just that an extremely unusual large number of people have it. Until we know exactly how many, and those people’s outcomes, the numbers are largely meaningless.

Another unattributed assertion. I trust you can back that up with actual quotations, from actual epidemiologists?

 

[Rezillo]

14 coronavirus deaths at Ipswich Hospital were not reported due to ‘admin error’

https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/ipswich-hospital-coronavirus-deaths-suffolk-1-6592809

Almost beggars belief.

 

[kingrollo]

14 coronavirus deaths at Ipswich Hospital were not reported due to ‘admin error’

https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/ipswich-hospital-coronavirus-deaths-suffolk-1-6592809

Almost beggars belief.

Not if you work for the NHS

 

[Rezillo]

Not if you work for the NHS

True.

In years gone by, the NHS used to send its failed hospital managers/CEs to the Strategic Health Authority, a kind of gulag of NHS incompetence, where they used to spend a year or two in nothing that was public facing or harmful to anyone. When hopefully the public had forgotten about them, they were booted out into another NHS region as a hospital manager there. This process started to fall down when simply googling the manager's name revealed just what their failings were at their last hospital and made for some great press conferences that did not go the way the NHS intended.

The Strategic Health Authorities were abolished some years ago. I wonder where the useless managers that they are afraid to dismiss go now?

 

[Mike_P]

14 coronavirus deaths at Ipswich Hospital were not reported due to ‘admin error’

https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/ipswich-hospital-coronavirus-deaths-suffolk-1-6592809

Almost beggars belief.

How many CV19 deaths are of people who sadly would have died anyway. Could well be many are terminally unwell and that was put down of the cause of death.

 

[winjim]

How many CV19 deaths are of people who sadly would have died anyway. Could well be many are terminally unwell and that was put down of the cause of death.

Somebody somewhere calculated that for the over 80s, the chance of dying within a year is about 10%. If you factor in COVID19 that rises to about 19%. It seems to work for all age groups, C19 doubles the chance of dying.

 

[tom73]

True.

In years gone by, the NHS used to send its failed hospital managers/CEs to the Strategic Health Authority, a kind of gulag of NHS incompetence, where they used to spend a year or two in nothing that was public facing or harmful to anyone. When hopefully the public had forgotten about them, they were booted out into another NHS region as a hospital manager there. This process started to fall down when simply googling the manager's name revealed just what their failings were at their last hospital and made for some great press conferences that did not go the way the NHS intended.

The Strategic Health Authorities were abolished some years ago. I wonder where the useless managers that they are afraid to dismiss go now?

CCG's more than likely.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I realise that each death from Covid19 is a tragedy but I must confess to having had to make a real effort not to cry when I heard the news on the radio as I drove home that two nurses, only in their 30s and each with three children, had died with the virus.

Both worked in their respective hospitals’ acute medical units and had been caring for Covid19 patients.

Areema Nasreen was 36.
Aimee O'Rourke was 39.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-51952607