Coronavirus outbreak

[Ming the Merciless]

In today’s Metro

NHS England said a five-year-old child is among 637 people who tested positive for Covid-19 and have died, bringing the total number of confirmed reported deaths in English hospitals to 3,939.

Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2020/04/04/uk-coronavirus-death-toll-passes-4000-708-die-12508338/?ito=cbshare

 

[Eziemnaik]

In other new USA is breaking it's own sanctions...
https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN21L243?__twitter_impression=true

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Meanwhile in Glasgow:
yesterday, for the first time since I started my radiotherapy sessions 2 weeks ago, the nurses had masks on.
Diplomatically, the nurses said it was a new policy in view of the virus.
I said, well, everybody knows you didn't have them to wear them: they confirmed this, still very diplomatically, of course.
News of 13 deaths in a Glasgow care home, suspected corona virus.

 

[BoldonLad]

The source is raw data form the government.

No idea if this is true, but, according to online Guardian, today, daily figures for deaths are not, the number who actually died in last 24 hours, some of the deaths may have occurred days or even weeks earlier. Guardian claims that no-one knows the daily deaths figure. IF this is true, aren’t graphs meaningless?

 

[numbnuts]

Meanwhile in Dover
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-52167277
Poor people never got the memo

 

[roubaixtuesday]

No idea if this is true, but, according to online Guardian, today, daily figures for deaths are not, the number who actually died in last 24 hours, some of the deaths may have occurred days or even weeks earlier. Guardian claims that no-one knows the daily deaths figure. IF this is true, aren’t graphs meaningless?

No, they're not "meaningless". They just should not be over interpreted.

 

[marinyork]

No idea if this is true, but, according to online Guardian, today, daily figures for deaths are not, the number who actually died in last 24 hours, some of the deaths may have occurred days or even weeks earlier. Guardian claims that no-one knows the daily deaths figure. IF this is true, aren’t graphs meaningless?

Deaths are reported in batches sometimes.

If you're interested what it might mean in a more analytical way see this post https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/coronavirus-outbreak.256913/post-5940600 with a graphic.

 

[kingrollo]

No idea if this is true, but, according to online Guardian, today, daily figures for deaths are not, the number who actually died in last 24 hours, some of the deaths may have occurred days or even weeks earlier. Guardian claims that no-one knows the daily deaths figure. IF this is true, aren’t graphs meaningless?

A single days figures are more or less meaningless - some hospitals will miss the cut off point - others may not have staff or systems available to run reports to get the stats - especially of a weekend. Also as hospitals hit capacity the number of deaths in hospital will hit an artificial ceiling.

but in general a hospital reporting late deceased cases - won't skew the overall trend.

 

[BoldonLad]

A single days figures are more or less meaningless - some hospitals will miss the cut off point - others may not have staff or systems available to run reports to get the stats - especially of a weekend. Also as hospitals hit capacity the number of deaths in hospital will hit an artificial ceiling.

but in general a hospital reporting late deceased cases - won't skew the overall trend.

If you say so, but, I don’t see it. It may not change the total, but, it will, surely, change the shape of the graph? Isn’t that what we are looking for, a levelling off of deaths and/or infections. Since infections figure is already screwed, since it is “self declared”, IMHO the graphs would be better employed as toilet paper.

 

[Unkraut]

Source? [The infection rate has almost got to R = 1 which indicates the 'curve' is flattening.]

Seems contradicted by the info I've seen:

Prof Wieler during a Robert Koch institute briefing on the current situation. He is president of the institute and does the updates on the situation. He was very careful not to give the impression the current measures could be relaxed, but a trend over the last few days is clearly discernible giving at least some grounds for qualified optimism. The rate of doubling of infection has gone up from 3 days to 9 days, but 14 days is the target of the measures. The rate of infection of course needs to get below 1 before the pandemic could be said to be under control.

The federal government and state governments will meet on the 14th April, by which time the trend will be clear. Only then will it be possible to consider relaxing the lockdown from 20th April before which it remains in place. They keep asking the press not to speculate on this because until then no-one knows.

 

[Rusty Nails]

If you say so, but, I don’t see it. It may not change the total, but, it will, surely, change the shape of the graph? Isn’t that what we are looking for, a levelling off of deaths and/or infections. Since infections figure is already screwed, since it is “self declared”, IMHO the graphs would be better employed as toilet paper.

If you are looking for meaningful daily changes to the rates of death/infections then you will be disappointed. Changes will be more accurately measured over a rolling period by which time the daily errors in over/under reporting will smooth themselves out.

 

[kingrollo]

If you say so, but, I don’t see it. It may not change the total, but, it will, surely, change the shape of the graph? Isn’t that what we are looking for, a levelling off of deaths and/or infections. Since infections figure is already screwed, since it is “self declared”, IMHO the graphs would be better employed as toilet paper.

it would change the shape of the graph on a given day.
very approx last weekend we were reporting 150 deaths per day - now we are reporting 700 per day - so sadly you can see which way it is going. if by next weekend were are reporting 200 - 250 - per day you can read something into that.

Personally I have stopped looking at infections - due to low level of testing in relative terms.

 

[cookiemonster]

https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong...37/mask-or-not-mask-who-makes-u-turn-while-us

Thought this might be interesting re mask use.

 

[marinyork]

https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong...37/mask-or-not-mask-who-makes-u-turn-while-us

Thought this might be interesting re mask use.

I don't believe the article is accurate. It says the Czech republic and Slovakia 'bucked' the trend in wearing masks. This is simply nonsense. It's not even wrong. Masks have been extremely widely worn in Italy for a very substantial amount of time, even though it wasn't government advice or mandated. There is large and hysterical commentary in Italy along the lines of you're likely to die unless you wear a mask if you go outside, although curiously enough the idea of wearing visors in Italy is widely scoffed at. Why the virus has run wildly out of control in Italy despite many lockdowns and obsessive mask wearing in public is a red hot debate that no one really knows the answer to.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

NHS England’s national medical director Stephen Powis quoted by Graun at today's press conference:

It is too early to outline what the exit strategy will be – the priority and critical objective now is to reduce transmission in order to get on top of it. Only then can we discuss what the next steps are

This really grinds my gears!

How can we possibly be ready for what comes next if we don't even discuss it?

Surely we should be looking at the options, discussing as a nation the pros and cons, and putting in place plans to implement whatever we decide to do?