Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,217
Likes: 2,669
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Aug 1, 2020 20:21:57 GMT
I would still like to know why the uk has had such a high number of fatalaties. The obvious explanation is people have simply not been complying with the restrictions. The pub near me seems to be packed and my neighbours are both at high risk and have decided to go on holiday to spain. I think The simple reality is some societies are going to be alot better at dealing with this than others. I keep an eye on the statistics and am constantly confused by what I see:
- In the USA New York, Florida, Texas and California have all had between 440k - 500k positive tests. Why is the death rate 5 times higher in NY than the other 3 states?
- We are told that black people in this country have a higher death rate than white people. So why do black countries around the world have far lower death rates than we do?
The numbers have such large variations there must be a reason for what is happening, but I don't think anyone has worked out exactly why.
There was a thing about vitamin D and Covid, black people in cool countries tend to have lower vitamin D levels because their dark skin reduces vitamin D absorption.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 1, 2020 21:17:09 GMT
I would still like to know why the uk has had such a high number of fatalaties. The obvious explanation is people have simply not been complying with the restrictions. The pub near me seems to be packed and my neighbours are both at high risk and have decided to go on holiday to spain. I think The simple reality is some societies are going to be alot better at dealing with this than others. There may well not be one reason, not least because a single reason could be at least partially counter balanced by a separate difference. However, given the very high %age of total deaths that are in care home settings (and yes the UK is not singularly alone in that), some combination of a) decanting elderly out of hospitals into care homes to make space for expected Covid influx (removing 'bed blockers) without testing requirement b) a care home industry with a big reliance on peripatetic care home staff c) a lack of testing available to test either care home occupants or staff (or indeed pretty much anyone else, testing being probably being the UKs single biggest failure) will likely to have been significant factors. Probably being a nation of fat b***********ds wont have helped either.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 1, 2020 21:28:20 GMT
I would still like to know why the uk has had such a high number of fatalaties. The obvious explanation is people have simply not been complying with the restrictions. The pub near me seems to be packed and my neighbours are both at high risk and have decided to go on holiday to spain. I think The simple reality is some societies are going to be alot better at dealing with this than others. I keep an eye on the statistics and am constantly confused by what I see:
- In the USA New York, Florida, Texas and California have all had between 440k - 500k positive tests. Why is the death rate 5 times higher in NY than the other 3 states?
- We are told that black people in this country have a higher death rate than white people. So why do black countries around the world have far lower death rates than we do?
The numbers have such large variations there must be a reason for what is happening, but I don't think anyone has worked out exactly why.
I don't know which set of numbers you are actually referring to, bit on the face of it, if we are talking all time, then as far as the US state comparison, I would have thought there is ittle mystery here ? New York was the first to be hit (rather like, and potentially interlinked with, London). Several things follow from that: a) They had their first major infections at a time where there was very limited testing. Therefore those being tested were those who were in hospital/heavily symptomatic etc. QED the population of +ve tests was heavily biased to those that were most sick, and therefore fatality rate would be that much higher than places that came later when there was more widespread testing. b) NY, being early int he firing line, found that its hospitals got overloaded/overrun, and suffered from the typical 'early adopter' issues of lack of PPE, reduced opportunity to learn from treatment experiences elsewhere etc.
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Aug 1, 2020 21:54:20 GMT
I would still like to know why the uk has had such a high number of fatalaties. The obvious explanation is people have simply not been complying with the restrictions. The pub near me seems to be packed and my neighbours are both at high risk and have decided to go on holiday to spain. I think The simple reality is some societies are going to be alot better at dealing with this than others. I'd be very surprised if there's no correlation between the timing (and severity) of "lockdown" and mortality rate. By timing I refer to in relation to infection rate but as we know infection rates were highly uncertain at the time of lockdown in the UK because we'd stopped testing in the community. Remember we were two weeks behind Italy in terms of deaths (a more reliable estimator of infections than the testing regimes at the time) and locked down two weeks later but our lockdown wasn't as strict. I use quotes on lockdown above because it's more to do with implementing the social distancing measures we're all now so familiar with. As a proxy (arguably a poor substitute - for academics to chew the cud over for decades to come ) for social distancing consider the following plots of mobility according to Citymapper - London on the left and Stockholm on the right. Given one locked down and the other didn't they are more similar than dissimilar - I suspect the differences may have as much to do with demographics, commuting, tourism (both national and international) than the fact we locked down and Sweden did not.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,661
Likes: 2,984
|
Post by IFISAcava on Aug 2, 2020 7:52:23 GMT
I would still like to know why the uk has had such a high number of fatalaties. The obvious explanation is people have simply not been complying with the restrictions. The pub near me seems to be packed and my neighbours are both at high risk and have decided to go on holiday to spain. I think The simple reality is some societies are going to be alot better at dealing with this than others. I'd be very surprised if there's no correlation between the timing (and severity) of "lockdown" and mortality rate. By timing I refer to in relation to infection rate but as we know infection rates were highly uncertain at the time of lockdown in the UK because we'd stopped testing in the community. Remember we were two weeks behind Italy in terms of deaths (a more reliable estimator of infections than the testing regimes at the time) and locked down two weeks later but our lockdown wasn't as strict. I use quotes on lockdown above because it's more to do with implementing the social distancing measures we're all now so familiar with. As a proxy (arguably a poor substitute - for academics to chew the cud over for decades to come ) for social distancing consider the following plots of mobility according to Citymapper - London on the left and Stockholm on the right. Given one locked down and the other didn't they are more similar than dissimilar - I suspect the differences may have as much to do with demographics, commuting, tourism (both national and international) than the fact we locked down and Sweden did not. I think it is because people largely change their behaviour when asked to for public health reasons and when they are scared. People changed their behaviour in the UK BEFORE "lockdown" was implemented. We also need to remember lockdown is simply a way to slow the spread of the virus, nothing more or less. This virus is now endemic and will never disappear. The Swedish approach was to recognise that behavioural change would need to persist for years, and that keeping people on board and co-operative was vital. In fact, in most places people's endurance has been greater than anticipated. But we are still at the beginning of all this - we will need to review next year to get a better picture.
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Aug 2, 2020 8:28:29 GMT
I'd be very surprised if there's no correlation between the timing (and severity) of "lockdown" and mortality rate. By timing I refer to in relation to infection rate but as we know infection rates were highly uncertain at the time of lockdown in the UK because we'd stopped testing in the community. Remember we were two weeks behind Italy in terms of deaths (a more reliable estimator of infections than the testing regimes at the time) and locked down two weeks later but our lockdown wasn't as strict. I use quotes on lockdown above because it's more to do with implementing the social distancing measures we're all now so familiar with. As a proxy (arguably a poor substitute - for academics to chew the cud over for decades to come ) for social distancing consider the following plots of mobility according to Citymapper - London on the left and Stockholm on the right. Given one locked down and the other didn't they are more similar than dissimilar - I suspect the differences may have as much to do with demographics, commuting, tourism (both national and international) than the fact we locked down and Sweden did not. I think it is because people largely change their behaviour when asked to for public health reasons and when they are scared. People changed their behaviour in the UK BEFORE "lockdown" was implemented. We also need to remember lockdown is simply a way to slow the spread of the virus, nothing more or less. This virus is now endemic and will never disappear. The Swedish approach was to recognise that behavioural change would need to persist for years, and that keeping people on board and co-operative was vital. In fact, in most places people's endurance has been greater than anticipated. But we are still at the beginning of all this - we will need to review next year to get a better picture. Indeed. It's for the same reasons that most people decide not to book holidays in war torn regions, we have a pretty good instinct for self-preservation! It also highlights just how appalling the public messaging was back in late Feb/Mar - remember that we were instructed to continue life as normal such a short time before full lockdown was implemented. As a nation, we've suffered greatly in part because we're a divided society with a large proportion of folk who believe Johnson is a God, the great deliverer, while an equally significant proportion believe he's a fool with questionable morals and ethics. The politicised public health messaging alienated large numbers of people. Just look across the pond at that other deeply divided nation, it's not a pretty sight but we'd do well to look in the mirror at times. In reference to the bold bit above, anticipated by whom? I ask because of the idea of "behavioural fatigue" introduced by Whitty doesn't feature in behavioural science, it didn't originate from SPI-B (Jesus, why don't they rename it!) but from the "nudge" unit. It seems Whitty was scammed. There's an excellent thread of tweets by the Newsight journo Lewis Goodall... I'll be watching the comparison between the two world leaders - China, who followed the zero-COVID approach, and the US who are following herd immunity (it's what Trump referred to when he said the virus would just go away). It's not looking pretty.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,550
Likes: 4,168
|
Post by agent69 on Aug 2, 2020 8:38:19 GMT
I keep an eye on the statistics and am constantly confused by what I see:
- In the USA New York, Florida, Texas and California have all had between 440k - 500k positive tests. Why is the death rate 5 times higher in NY than the other 3 states?
- We are told that black people in this country have a higher death rate than white people. So why do black countries around the world have far lower death rates than we do?
The numbers have such large variations there must be a reason for what is happening, but I don't think anyone has worked out exactly why.
I don't know which set of numbers you are actually referring to, bit on the face of it, if we are talking all time, then as far as the US state comparison, I would have thought there is ittle mystery here ? New York was the first to be hit (rather like, and potentially interlinked with, London). Several things follow from that: a) They had their first major infections at a time where there was very limited testing. Therefore those being tested were those who were in hospital/heavily symptomatic etc. QED the population of +ve tests was heavily biased to those that were most sick, and therefore fatality rate would be that much higher than places that came later when there was more widespread testing. b) NY, being early int he firing line, found that its hospitals got overloaded/overrun, and suffered from the typical 'early adopter' issues of lack of PPE, reduced opportunity to learn from treatment experiences elsewhere etc. I was looking at Worldometers site, currently showing NY and Texas with almost identical number of cases, but NY has 6 times the death rate.
So if what you're saying is correct then in a second wave of the virus we will be more prepared and death rates could be 20% of what we have seen too date?
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Aug 2, 2020 8:59:33 GMT
I don't know which set of numbers you are actually referring to, bit on the face of it, if we are talking all time, then as far as the US state comparison, I would have thought there is ittle mystery here ? New York was the first to be hit (rather like, and potentially interlinked with, London). Several things follow from that: a) They had their first major infections at a time where there was very limited testing. Therefore those being tested were those who were in hospital/heavily symptomatic etc. QED the population of +ve tests was heavily biased to those that were most sick, and therefore fatality rate would be that much higher than places that came later when there was more widespread testing. b) NY, being early int he firing line, found that its hospitals got overloaded/overrun, and suffered from the typical 'early adopter' issues of lack of PPE, reduced opportunity to learn from treatment experiences elsewhere etc. I was looking at Worldometers site, currently showing NY and Texas with almost identical number of cases, but NY has 6 times the death rate.
So if what you're saying is correct then in a second wave of the virus we will be more prepared and death rates could be 20% of what we have seen too date?
The vast majority of NY infections took place more than a month ago. In contrast, Texas has seen most infections within the last month. It takes something like 23 days to die but we know all too well from the UK there's a long tail of those who die after more than a month with infection. It will also depend on testing regimes and the age profile of those infected. Edit: it'll be interesting to see statistically stratified (for age profile, pre existing medical conditions etc) death rates of areas infected Mar-May to say May-Jul. i.e. how are evolving treatments (e.g. dexamethasone) improving death rates.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Aug 2, 2020 9:47:04 GMT
I'd be very surprised if there's no correlation between the timing (and severity) of "lockdown" and mortality rate. By timing I refer to in relation to infection rate but as we know infection rates were highly uncertain at the time of lockdown in the UK because we'd stopped testing in the community. Remember we were two weeks behind Italy in terms of deaths (a more reliable estimator of infections than the testing regimes at the time) and locked down two weeks later but our lockdown wasn't as strict. I use quotes on lockdown above because it's more to do with implementing the social distancing measures we're all now so familiar with. As a proxy (arguably a poor substitute - for academics to chew the cud over for decades to come ) for social distancing consider the following plots of mobility according to Citymapper - London on the left and Stockholm on the right. Given one locked down and the other didn't they are more similar than dissimilar - I suspect the differences may have as much to do with demographics, commuting, tourism (both national and international) than the fact we locked down and Sweden did not. I think it is because people largely change their behaviour when asked to for public health reasons and when they are scared. People changed their behaviour in the UK BEFORE "lockdown" was implemented. We also need to remember lockdown is simply a way to slow the spread of the virus, nothing more or less. This virus is now endemic and will never disappear. The Swedish approach was to recognise that behavioural change would need to persist for years, and that keeping people on board and co-operative was vital. In fact, in most places people's endurance has been greater than anticipated. But we are still at the beginning of all this - we will need to review next year to get a better picture. That genuinely surprises me. Is that a certainty, after all SARS1 and Spanish Flu both disappeared after a couple of years?
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Aug 2, 2020 11:11:00 GMT
I think it is because people largely change their behaviour when asked to for public health reasons and when they are scared. People changed their behaviour in the UK BEFORE "lockdown" was implemented. We also need to remember lockdown is simply a way to slow the spread of the virus, nothing more or less. This virus is now endemic and will never disappear. The Swedish approach was to recognise that behavioural change would need to persist for years, and that keeping people on board and co-operative was vital. In fact, in most places people's endurance has been greater than anticipated. But we are still at the beginning of all this - we will need to review next year to get a better picture. That genuinely surprises me. Is that a certainty, after all SARS1 and Spanish Flu both disappeared after a couple of years? I know little of these things but don't viruses constantly mutate? I understood that the 1918 flu was H1N1 as was the recent Swine flu epidemic of 2009, I assume their epidemiology can be traced. The MERS coronavirus is still in circulation. See the latest flu surveillance report from PHE for details of the current situation on flu in UK and overseas... assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/903195/National_Influenza_report_23_July_2020_week_30.pdfA useful explainer on different classes (A, B, C & D) of flu... www.cdc.gov/flu/about/viruses/types.htm
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 2, 2020 11:17:31 GMT
I don't know which set of numbers you are actually referring to, bit on the face of it, if we are talking all time, then as far as the US state comparison, I would have thought there is ittle mystery here ? New York was the first to be hit (rather like, and potentially interlinked with, London). Several things follow from that: a) They had their first major infections at a time where there was very limited testing. Therefore those being tested were those who were in hospital/heavily symptomatic etc. QED the population of +ve tests was heavily biased to those that were most sick, and therefore fatality rate would be that much higher than places that came later when there was more widespread testing. b) NY, being early int he firing line, found that its hospitals got overloaded/overrun, and suffered from the typical 'early adopter' issues of lack of PPE, reduced opportunity to learn from treatment experiences elsewhere etc. I was looking at Worldometers site, currently showing NY and Texas with almost identical number of cases, but NY has 6 times the death rate.
So if what you're saying is correct then in a second wave of the virus we will be more prepared and death rates could be 20% of what we have seen too date?
Another factor that might be in play is interaction between population density and viral load. If level of initial viral load exposure is a significant factor in outcomes (which there is at least some suspicion it is), then a densely packed metropolis with high reliance on urban mass transit systems could result not just in higher infection rates but also higher fatality rates amongst those affected. Something which might be significantly reduced if you are latecomer to the party rather than an early arrival, when social distancing,mask wearing etc. was better establishled. Nonetheless, I expect the main factors are to do with NY being early, with much reduced numbers of tests and hence tests being much more biased to already significantly ill people for much of its outbreak plus PPE plus hospital overload plus immaturity of treatment plans.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,832
Likes: 1,586
|
Post by benaj on Aug 2, 2020 11:37:52 GMT
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,163
Likes: 5,976
|
Post by registerme on Aug 2, 2020 11:58:09 GMT
Interesting read, thanks for the link.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,661
Likes: 2,984
|
Post by IFISAcava on Aug 2, 2020 15:41:17 GMT
I think it is because people largely change their behaviour when asked to for public health reasons and when they are scared. People changed their behaviour in the UK BEFORE "lockdown" was implemented. We also need to remember lockdown is simply a way to slow the spread of the virus, nothing more or less. This virus is now endemic and will never disappear. The Swedish approach was to recognise that behavioural change would need to persist for years, and that keeping people on board and co-operative was vital. In fact, in most places people's endurance has been greater than anticipated. But we are still at the beginning of all this - we will need to review next year to get a better picture. That genuinely surprises me. Is that a certainty, after all SARS1 and Spanish Flu both disappeared after a couple of years? Spanish flu variant (H1N1) still in circulation as seasonal flu (and still killing people).
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,550
Likes: 4,168
|
Post by agent69 on Aug 2, 2020 18:23:11 GMT
That genuinely surprises me. Is that a certainty, after all SARS1 and Spanish Flu both disappeared after a couple of years? Spanish flu variant (H1N1) still in circulation as seasonal flu (and still killing people). But not killing 50m a year, and having mutated / died out without the need for vacination or fancy drugs (just wait 2 years and it will sort itself out?)
|
|