|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Feb 14, 2020 15:05:39 GMT
Well, I just received a text message from my GP practice telling me not to go there if I had flu like symptoms and had recently visited SE Asia. Sensible, if... stark. just die in a corner, all for the greater good.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,384
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Feb 14, 2020 15:10:01 GMT
The population of Wuhan is about 11 million, so a very small percentage of the population has actually been infected and the rate of infection seems to be levelling off. Is that natural resistance; not very contagious; a huge number of mild cases not reported; successful self quarantining; or what?
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528 
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Feb 14, 2020 15:58:10 GMT
BBC reports "Health officials have contacted hundreds of conference attendees in London, after it emerged one of them was later diagnosed with coronavirus. The person, who has not been identified, was at the UK Bus Summit at the QEII Conference Centre last week. Two Labour MPs who were also at the conference said they were well but cancelling public engagements until 20 February as a precaution."
---
Telegraph reports "A passenger fell ill with suspected coronavirus on a United Airlines flight from San Francisco to Heathrow this morning."
---
Might be about to see a jump in the number of cases in the UK.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 14, 2020 16:13:08 GMT
Defining a case outcome as "died" or "recovered", we've reached the point where Covid-19 has now produced as many case outcomes as SARS did. So it ought to be valid to compare the two:-
The 8,098 outcomes from SARS resulted in 774 deaths, and the authorities therefore recorded a death rate of 9.6% (calculated as 774/8098).
The 8,566 outcomes (so far) from Covid-19 resulted in 1,384 deaths. The same calculation would give 1384/8566 = 16.2%.
The same authorities haven't yet budged from <2%.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,608
Likes: 1,738
|
Post by benaj on Feb 14, 2020 18:21:48 GMT
Well, I just received a text message from my GP practice telling me not to go there if I had flu like symptoms and had recently visited SE Asia. Sensible, if... stark. Dos and Don'ts from NHS Call 111 now if you've been:
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,692
Likes: 3,018
|
Post by IFISAcava on Feb 14, 2020 18:39:41 GMT
Defining a case outcome as "died" or "recovered", we've reached the point where Covid-19 has now produced as many case outcomes as SARS did. So it ought to be valid to compare the two:- The 8,098 outcomes from SARS resulted in 774 deaths, and the authorities therefore recorded a death rate of 9.6% (calculated as 774/8098). The 8,566 outcomes (so far) from Covid-19 resulted in 1,384 deaths. The same calculation would give 1384/8566 = 16.2%. The same authorities haven't yet budged from <2%. IF you make a lot of assumptions, whereas - many cases of coronavirus mild so may not be diagnosed as diligenty as SARS, where cases appear to have been generally more serious - the test seems to underdiagnose - the numbers from China have many unreliabilities, and some have suggested could even be made up. - coronavirus seems to be less fatal outside China (3 death so far), and less fatal outside Wuhan, where cases probably overwhelmed the hospital facilities that would otherwise have saved them and where it is likely only the more severe could be dealt with and counted. We will see what the final outcome is, but I am not sure why there is a need to cast such doubt on experts' estimates (accepting that there is a range of uncertainty around the estimates). Or have people in this country STILL had enough of experts?
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 14, 2020 22:37:23 GMT
Experts have their place, and we absolutely need them, no question, but they should expect to be probed from time to time, especially if something doesn’t quite look or feel right. We have an example this week. All our lives, experts have told us with great authority that our planets were formed by immense violent collisions in space. Up until this week, any one of them would still be arguing from that immutable viewpoint, with the greatest of conviction. This week, however, they’re suddenly forced to think again. Science evolves and even the experts are sometimes found wanting. |
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Feb 14, 2020 22:57:07 GMT
Defining a case outcome as "died" or "recovered", we've reached the point where Covid-19 has now produced as many case outcomes as SARS did. So it ought to be valid to compare the two:- The 8,098 outcomes from SARS resulted in 774 deaths, and the authorities therefore recorded a death rate of 9.6% (calculated as 774/8098). The 8,566 outcomes (so far) from Covid-19 resulted in 1,384 deaths. The same calculation would give 1384/8566 = 16.2%. The same authorities haven't yet budged from <2%. .... - the numbers from China have many unreliabilities, and some have suggested could even be made up........ We will see what the final outcome is, but I am not sure why there is a need to cast such doubt on experts' estimates (accepting that there is a range of uncertainty around the estimates). ... Isn’t the first part of the above a reason of itself to apply a fair degree of critical analysis with regard to the second point ? Most of the experts seem to be making their media prouncements based on the supplied data - which is not surprising since there isn’t anything else to go on.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 14, 2020 23:46:38 GMT
Defining a case outcome as "died" or "recovered", we've reached the point where Covid-19 has now produced as many case outcomes as SARS did. So it ought to be valid to compare the two:- The 8,098 outcomes from SARS resulted in 774 deaths, and the authorities therefore recorded a death rate of 9.6% (calculated as 774/8098). The 8,566 outcomes (so far) from Covid-19 resulted in 1,384 deaths. The same calculation would give 1384/8566 = 16.2%. The same authorities haven't yet budged from <2%. IF you make a lot of assumptions, whereas - many cases of coronavirus mild so may not be diagnosed as diligenty as SARS, where cases appear to have been generally more serious - the test seems to underdiagnose - the numbers from China have many unreliabilities, and some have suggested could even be made up. - coronavirus seems to be less fatal outside China (3 death so far), and less fatal outside Wuhan, where cases probably overwhelmed the hospital facilities that would otherwise have saved them and where it is likely only the more severe could be dealt with and counted. We will see what the final outcome is, but I am not sure why there is a need to cast such doubt on experts' estimates (accepting that there is a range of uncertainty around the estimates). Or have people in this country STILL had enough of experts? It's worth noting that while the 2003 SARS epidemic was still ongoing, these WHO 'experts' reported a fatality rate of 4% (and even 3%), whereas the final case fatality rate ended up being 9.6%. Do you still trust their <2% for Covid-19? If you were unlucky enough to be amongst those first 8,566 Covid-19 cases in China, your probability of recovering was 84%. No assumptions, mathematical fact. It strikes me that WHO was implying at the time... and they still are… that your probability of recovering was 98% or better. That's how most people would interpret their mortality figure of 2%.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,043
Likes: 4,437
Member is Online
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 15, 2020 13:21:10 GMT
According to Sky news, 8 of the 9 infected people in the UK have been released from hospital.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,608
Likes: 1,738
|
Post by benaj on Feb 15, 2020 13:51:41 GMT
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Feb 16, 2020 9:24:20 GMT
Well, I just received a text message from my GP practice telling me not to go there if I had flu like symptoms and had recently visited SE Asia. Sensible, if... stark. just die in a corner, all for the greater good. Might become NHS policy according to The Express (from an original story in the Telegraph) "Millions to be told ’stay home’ if coronavirus spreads ... Those who have cold or flu-like symptoms might have to stay indoors for up to two weeks if the number of coronavirus cases in the UK hits the hundreds"
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,692
Likes: 3,018
|
Post by IFISAcava on Feb 16, 2020 9:41:02 GMT
just die in a corner, all for the greater good. Might become NHS policy according to The Express (from an original story in the Telegraph) "Millions to be told ’stay home’ if coronavirus spreads ... Those who have cold or flu-like symptoms might have to stay indoors for up to two weeks if the number of coronavirus cases in the UK hits the hundreds" to be fair the advice is stay home and contact NHS for advice by phone as to what to do. If you are properly ill then there will be provision away from GP surgery in designated centres. Makes sense.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Feb 16, 2020 10:16:12 GMT
Just to be clear, I wasn't complaining. In the circumstances I think it's a) sensible advice and b) a sensible approach.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2020 11:51:01 GMT
|
|
