This is my 100th blog of self-isolation, and what better way to celebrate a century than a trip to the pub?
Non-Brits won't understand the significance of this. It's not the fact that it's "Benedict Arnold Day" (in the USA they also celebrate the attempt by the patriot Arnold to foil the dastardly plot by the traitor Washington). It's the pubs.
The pub is the quintessence of Britain. It's not just a place to get drunk. It's a place where you meet your friends, have a meal, and maybe a glass or two. The closing of the pubs told us that this pandemic is serious; the announcement of the reopening was greeted in parliament by "Hallelujah!"
As I predicted, the social distancing rule is reduced to one meter. But that has to be together with a "mitigation", which might be a screen or a face covering. I suspect that the "mitigation" will be widely ignored. Restaurants are also to open, table service only (no crowds at buffets). Hairdressers will also open. There will be new "health and safety" restrictions, to accommodate the additional dangers of Covid-19.
How can we do this? It's because Covid-19 cases are down and falling. They aren't as low as I would like, but we need to balance the health issue with the economic issue.
Deaths are also down and still falling.From a peak of 1000 per day, to about 100. Again, still too many, far to many, but hopefully they will continue to fall.
I hope the Oxford University Vaccine works, and is available in September.
You are conflating cases with deaths. Dying with the Covid antibody in your system is NOT the same as dying of Covid.ReplyDelete
Going into hospital, whilst Covid-free and dying from something else anyway. The only reason Covid- antibodies in the bloodstream because it was contracted from their filthy wards after admission.
At the end of the day, these inflated numbers only bumped it up to 65 cases per 100,000 of the general population. A 0.06% death rate. Far less than some years' seasonal flu. If the government hadn't put the kibosh on Superdrug's £69 antibody tests, it would have been come apparent that most of the population probably contracted it in January/ February but had symptoms which were too mild to notice.
.... I thought you are supposed to be some kind of STEM graduate???
I am not conflating anything. I am reporting cases and I am reporting deaths.ReplyDelete
The latest reported numbers are (for the UK) 461 cases per 100,000 population, deaths are 65 per 100,000. Perhaps your figure of 65 cases refer to some other country? Or possibly you muddled up deaths and cases?
65 deaths per 100,000 population means that 0.065% of the population have died so far. Remember, there are only 313,000 cases out of a total population of 63 million. This implies that more than 99% of the population haven't been infected yet. That, of course isn't correct, because there are many more cases that haven't been detected; perhaps ten times as many, which would mean that 90% of the population are not yet infected.
"If the government hadn't put the kibosh on Superdrug's £69 antibody tests" You mean the tests that wasn't designed to be a home test? That they sold for one morning, and then announced they didn't have any more? That the manufacturer of the test told Superdrug to cease and desist?
"most of the population probably contracted it in January/ February" We have absolutely no evidence that your opinion is correct.
When someone has an underlying heart condition, and diabetes, and has Covid-19 and dies - the cause of death is, of course, all three. But Covid-19 is infectious, the other two are not. And without the Covid-19, the patient would have lived.
You libel the NHS when you say "filthy wards". Modern medicine is fully aware of the need for hygiene.
The IFR (infection fatality rate) cannot be deduced from the numbers here. You cannot just divide 44k deaths by 313k cases and announce an IFR of 14%, because there are many more cases (as of July 1) than those tested, and the IFR is a LOT less than 14%. I did a separate post on that. The IFR is 0.7% (plus or minus 0.3%) which is about ten times the rate you're giving.
I suggest that you also read my post on "excess deaths". This is clearly a LOT worse than seasonal flu.
Yes, I am supposed to be some sort of STEM graduate.
If you want to report honestly ... well accurately at least , then I suggest that you look at the source material directly. It is all there catalogued by age and other factors in convenient CSV data format on the NHS site.ReplyDelete
Go and do a refresher course too on the difference between correlation and rank correlation.
I have read your post on excess deaths. Good job for you that it was never submitted for publication in a proper scientific journal - peer review would have ripped it to shreds. Its nothing but assertion and supposition.
By the way, what is your explanation for Sweden? No lockdown at all but fewer deaths per million and a much faster recovery rate.
"...When someone has an underlying heart condition, and diabetes, and has Covid-19 and dies - the cause of death is, of course, all three. But Covid-19 is infectious, the other two are not. And without the Covid-19, the patient would have lived...."ReplyDelete
So, one goes into hospital. Picks up Covid on the day of admission but is entirely asymptomatic and dies on the table the next day with the antibodies in the bloodstream... you are saying that without the Covid, the patient would have lived.
Propositional logic, syllogisms ... do these mean *anything^ to you?