SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

Smores said:
Crisis of our lifetime and yet some don't think there should be any political debate around it :wenger:

I'm sorry but the correlation between political opinion expressed within the current event forums over the last couple of years and those who don't want any governmental scrutiny seems to paint a very clear picture of intention.
Click to expand...
The implications for football are being discussed in a separate thread.

Leave the football out of this thread.

Also the politics.
 
BootsyCollins said:


So what so you guys think of this? Suggest that smoking actually protect you against Covid-19. Says its not a case closed ofcourse but still...
Click to expand...

Did you read the first reply?
its from somebody at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Spring_Harbor_Laboratory

Which seems to raise some issues with the study

Review of: Smoking, vaping and hospitalization for COVID-19
The reviewer(s) rated it 2/5




Jason Sheltzer1

Author(s) details
This preprint contrasts two statistics: according to a survey conducted by the WHO, ~27% of people in China are smokers. If you look at coronavirus hospital admissions in China, fewer than 27% are smokers. Ergo, the paper suggests, smoking may protect against COVID19.

This comparison assumes that the definition of smoker is constant. But, that assumption is wrong. One paper included in this analysis (Chen et al.) actually uses a cut-off of 30 pack-years (219,000 cigarettes!) to identify smokers. They aren’t recording all smokers, just heavy smokers. This 30 pack-year threshold was not used in the WHO national survey that produced the 27% estimate, so it’s absolutely wrong to directly compare these two values as if they’re measuring the same thing.

In order to further investigate, I emailed the authors of some of the studies on COVID-19 in China. One doctor (on this manuscript: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3543584) replied that their smoking frequency was so low because some patients were literally too sick to ask: “In our paper on COVID-19 characteristics, many patients cannot answer questions about whether to smoke because of their older age and serious illness. Therefore, the proportion of smoking in patients with COVID-19 is low.”

These two examples highlight the first problem with this preprint: it’s clear that in these studies, the definition of a smoker is neither consistent nor consistently applied. You can’t throw them all on a graph and call it a meta-analysis.

The second problem is that it’s absolutely wrong to assume that “27%” is an appropriate base rate for comparisons. To see this, take a look at Table 3 of Guan et al. (Eur Respir J.) from this preprint. They report the frequency of various comorbidities among Chinese patients, broken out between ever-smokers and never-smokers. In their analysis, only 13% of COPD patients, 8% of hypertensives, and 10% of people with cardiovascular disease are ever-smokers. Assuming a base rate of 27% smokers in China, this analysis would falsely suggest that smoking protects against lung and heart disease!

The best approach would be to look at the frequency of smoking in a defined cohort of patients who are tested and found to be either positive or negative for COVID-19. That way you can apply a consistent definition of “smoker” and get an accurate base frequency. So far, I can find one published example that directly compares COVID-positive and COVID-negative patients: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jmv.25763. In this study (not cited by the preprint), 19% of COVID-positive patients were smokers and 15% of COVID-negative patients were smokers. This data argues that smoking does not actually protect against coronavirus infections. Additionally, it shows that when hospitals are directly recording smoking statuses, they observe the prevalence of smoking to be below 27%.

Similarly, if you compare patients with critical and mild COVID-19, multiple studies indicate that smoking is strongly associated with severe infections. In one recent cohort, 62% of severe cases were smokers, compared to only 10% of mild cases: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.01.20029397v1.full.pdf.

So, I think that the analysis in this preprint is severely flawed. They’re comparing statistics that shouldn’t be compared. The Chen et al. study should be removed and the Zhu et al. study should be added and addressed. In short, I don’t think that there’s any convincing evidence to suggest that smoking protects against coronavirus.
Click to expand...
 
Full bodied red said:
Yes we did...

We woke up to fact that almost 700 have now tested positive - a bit of a jump from the 50-something announced last week.

Maybe we just don't read the same papers or watch the same TV channels and so we missed updates.

I didn't know about the Theodore Roosevelt though, but then again I wasn't looking for news about the effects of COVID on the military.
Click to expand...

Well, it's a small place where 1700 crew members are very close from eachothers, the vast majority will be positive.
 
sun_tzu said:
Did you read the first reply?
its from somebody at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Spring_Harbor_Laboratory

Which seems to raise some issues with the study
Click to expand...
thanks for the link.
i dont belive smoking protects against Covid-19, but then again i know nothing about this at all, as most of us.
But ive heard someone mentioned before so though i shared the tweet.
the first reply for me is this guy :


i have no idea who he is btw.
 
Okay, im probably gonna get flamed for this but ive been watching this thread since the start and its been very informative. One downside for me though has been the constant politicising by various posters along the lines of 'tory cuts, austerity, clapping supports tory rhetoric etc etc.'

Now i may be blinkered, blind, deaf to the truth etc. But genuinly i dont see how any governments nhs policy past or present has hindered our response to this pandemic. From all reports im hearing, we have not at any point so far been over capacity in our hospitals, other countries with better equipped health services per capita have been overwhelmed {italy and america spring to mind}
It seems lack of ppe has been a worldwide issue as has logistics and supply chain.

Could anyone enlighten me how the 'underfunding' of the nhs has led to any more deaths in this crisis.
@FeedMe you seem to have been very vocal about underfunding in this thread but ive not seen you post anything about sorting out the in efficiency as part of sorting out the problems.

No doubt crash helmet will be needed for the response.
 
So we had a video message from our smug CEO this morning basically just assuming that everything will be back to normal in three weeks time.

Nothing is going to be back to normal until a vaccine is mass produced. How can the CEO of a multi billion pound company be so fecking stupid?
 
Garethw said:
So we had a video message from our smug CEO this morning basically just assuming that everything will be back to normal in three weeks time.

Nothing is going to be back to normal until a vaccine is mass produced. How can the CEO of a multi billion pound company be so fecking stupid?
Click to expand...
he almost certainly isnt stupid if hes CEO of a multi billion pound company ... but rather than giving you an individual running commentary on what his spreadsheet says about when he sacks you and everybody else figured it would be better to send a jaunty little message because somebody piped up about moral when the shareholders were deciding who to cut and when and he agreed to shut them up
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
Looks like the lockdown will be relaxed in Wales after this three weeks

"First Minister Mark Drakeford hopes to lift some of lockdown restrictions when the three-week extension ends on 7 May." (BBC)
Click to expand...


Hopefully that's true, some mild removal of restrictiosn would be a great step in the right direction.
 
worldgonemad said:
Okay, im probably gonna get flamed for this but ive been watching this thread since the start and its been very informative. One downside for me though has been the constant politicising by various posters along the lines of 'tory cuts, austerity, clapping supports tory rhetoric etc etc.'

Now i may be blinkered, blind, deaf to the truth etc. But genuinly i dont see how any governments nhs policy past or present has hindered our response to this pandemic. From all reports im hearing, we have not at any point so far been over capacity in our hospitals, other countries with better equipped health services per capita have been overwhelmed {italy and america spring to mind}
It seems lack of ppe has been a worldwide issue as has logistics and supply chain.

Could anyone enlighten me how the 'underfunding' of the nhs has led to any more deaths in this crisis.
@FeedMe you seem to have been very vocal about underfunding in this thread but ive not seen you post anything about sorting out the in efficiency as part of sorting out the problems.

No doubt crash helmet will be needed for the response.
Click to expand...

Nothing controversial about this post. In my mind, personally, there is an acceptable level of challenge to the government of the day for our situation. I don't expect every hospital to be stocked year round with tens of thousands of units of PPE with a shelf life just in case we are hit by a viral pandemic. However, I don't accept some areas of the NHS having absolutely nothing suitable immediately available. I've seen some blame go to procurement for individual trusts, which may be true, but if they're being faced with budgetary issues to the point they're neglecting PPE then that points to funding issues in some form.

I think it's bad for everyone if the default response is to just accept things as they are. A lot of social media is rampant with people that are too far the other way and I think that desire to do good has the opposite effect as everyone else then digs their heels in.
 
Dante said:
The implications for football are being discussed in a separate thread.

Leave the football out of this thread.

Also the politics.
Click to expand...

Does football have any influence on the handling of this crisis?

Sorry but the ones who are politicising this are the ones trying to artificially remove government from the equation because it makes them uncomfortable to have their world view challenged.
 
BootsyCollins said:


So what so you guys think of this? Suggest that smoking actually protect you against Covid-19. Says its not a case closed ofcourse but still...
Click to expand...


Me right now
V0j52_rTTSMnWCQ0uWK2l_QkYhS_Tsh54kYQDBr824I.jpg
 
Garethw said:
So we had a video message from our smug CEO this morning basically just assuming that everything will be back to normal in three weeks time.

Nothing is going to be back to normal until a vaccine is mass produced. How can the CEO of a multi billion pound company be so fecking stupid?
Click to expand...
sun_tzu said:
he almost certainly isnt stupid if hes CEO of a multi billion pound company ... but rather than giving you an individual running commentary on what his spreadsheet says about when he sacks you and everybody else figured it would be better to send a jaunty little message because somebody piped up about moral when the shareholders were deciding who to cut and when and he agreed to shut them up
Click to expand...

Every CEO sending out the same message! :lol:

 
sun_tzu said:
he almost certainly isnt stupid if hes CEO of a multi billion pound company ... but rather than giving you an individual running commentary on what his spreadsheet says about when he sacks you and everybody else figured it would be better to send a jaunty little message because somebody piped up about moral when the shareholders were deciding who to cut and when and he agreed to shut them up
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. Ours is being quite realistic about things in his weekly updates, he today was highlighting the Chancellors comments that the Government cannot protect every business and every household”. Preparing people for the possible downsizing.
 
worldgonemad said:
Okay, im probably gonna get flamed for this but ive been watching this thread since the start and its been very informative. One downside for me though has been the constant politicising by various posters along the lines of 'tory cuts, austerity, clapping supports tory rhetoric etc etc.'

Now i may be blinkered, blind, deaf to the truth etc. But genuinly i dont see how any governments nhs policy past or present has hindered our response to this pandemic. From all reports im hearing, we have not at any point so far been over capacity in our hospitals, other countries with better equipped health services per capita have been overwhelmed {italy and america spring to mind}
It seems lack of ppe has been a worldwide issue as has logistics and supply chain.

Could anyone enlighten me how the 'underfunding' of the nhs has led to any more deaths in this crisis.
@FeedMe you seem to have been very vocal about underfunding in this thread but ive not seen you post anything about sorting out the in efficiency as part of sorting out the problems.

No doubt crash helmet will be needed for the response.
Click to expand...
Old post by me

Sweet Square said:
Ok just some quick examples.

  • Policies made by other countries before Britain

France

Spain

Denmark

Sweden


Why has it took Britain so long ? Another example, Germany closed it's bars, pubs etc on Monday why did Britain need until today to do the same ?

  • Lack of planning


Government documents show no planning for ventilators in the event of a pandemic



Lack of policy for Renters, self employed and unemployed





And just look at some of the responses by people on here, who have just been fecked over by the latest government statement.


NHS Workers



Testing, Testing Testing



and

Coronavirus: WHO calls for countries to test every case after British government says move 'no longer necessary



  • Boris
Click to expand...


And we've known about lack of ventilators for some time now



Despite the severe failings exposed by Exercise Cygnus, the government’s planning for a future pandemic did not change after December 2016 – at least not formally. The government’s roadmap for how to respond to a coronavirus-like pandemic has long been available online, and the three key documents – the 70-page “Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy”, 78-page “Health and Social Care Influenza Pandemic Preparedness and Response” and 88-page “Pandemic Influenza Response Plan” – were published in 2011, 2012 and 2014 respectively. These plans were tested and failed, yet these documents were not rewritten or revised.

They share a glaring shortcoming: not one of them mentions ventilators, which are now in such high demand that Matthew Hancock, the Health Secretary, told British manufacturers on 14 March, “If you produce a ventilator, we will buy it. No number [you produce] is too high.” He urged firms from Rolls-Royce to JCB to stop what they do and to begin making ventilators.

The government does not have a stockpile of ventilators, as the documents made clear and Hancock has confirmed. All three of the plans refer to stockpiles, but only of antivirals, antibiotics and personal protective equipment for NHS staff. Aside from face masks, the only mention of equipment in Public Health England’s Pandemic Response Plan is to do with IT staff being trained to use smart boards. Medical devices are not mentioned in any of the documents.
Click to expand...




Also

The death of neoliberalism
The global financial crisis laid bare the underlying weaknesses of the neoliberal form of capitalism that has dominated policymaking in the West since the 1980s. But without a clear alternative to take its place, the response was to double down on a broken model. The impact of the crisis, and the austerity policies that followed, fractured the political argument in many countries, and contributed to a series of political earthquakes including Brexit, the election of Donald Trump, and the rise of nativist parties across Europe and beyond.

At the same time, the economics profession has entered a period of intellectual upheaval. Stagnant living standards, sharply rising inequality and environmental breakdown have led growing numbers of economists and commentators – including those in mainstream institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) – to acknowledge the shortcomings of free-market orthodoxy.

If neoliberalism was already on life support, then the coronavirus has administered the lethal blow. The pandemic has laid bare the disastrous consequences of decades of privatisation, deregulation and outsourcing in countries like the US and UK, and highlighted the critical importance of strong public services and a well-resourced state bureaucracy. In order to contain the economic fallout from the pandemic, Western countries have ripped up the neoliberal playbook. Market forces have been shunned in favour of economic planning, industrial policy and regulatory controls. Even the IMF, for decades the standard bearer of neoliberal orthodoxy, has floated policy responses that have more in common with the Chinese model of capitalism. In a recent blog, four senior researchers wrote that: “If the crisis worsens, one could imagine the establishment or expansion of large state holding companies to take over distressed private firms.”

But those who have spent years dreaming about a world beyond neoliberalism should think twice before popping the champagne. While some may celebrate the arrival of policies that, on the surface at least, involve a greater role for the state in the economy, there remains one problem: there is no evidence that state action inherently leads to progressive social outcomes.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ou...west-the-spectre-of-authoritarian-capitalism/
Click to expand...
 
BootsyCollins said:


So what so you guys think of this? Suggest that smoking actually protect you against Covid-19. Says its not a case closed ofcourse but still...
Click to expand...


Early studies here (Italy) said smokers who were hospitalised were more than twice as likely to need ventilators as non smokers. That's saying something slightly different than smoking reduces the likelihood of hospitalisation, but still.
 
The Israelis are saying that US intelligence informed them and NATO end of November that something big is happening in China and this could get out of control. The Israelis discussed this with their own health minister but nothing came out of it.
So Europe and USA knew that something big was happening and their own intelligence advised that this could become a pandemic in November. But no action was taken because China and WHO didn't declare a pandemic in November?
Absolutely crazy.
 
worldgonemad said:
Okay, im probably gonna get flamed for this but ive been watching this thread since the start and its been very informative. One downside for me though has been the constant politicising by various posters along the lines of 'tory cuts, austerity, clapping supports tory rhetoric etc etc.'

Now i may be blinkered, blind, deaf to the truth etc. But genuinly i dont see how any governments nhs policy past or present has hindered our response to this pandemic. From all reports im hearing, we have not at any point so far been over capacity in our hospitals, other countries with better equipped health services per capita have been overwhelmed {italy and america spring to mind}
It seems lack of ppe has been a worldwide issue as has logistics and supply chain.

Could anyone enlighten me how the 'underfunding' of the nhs has led to any more deaths in this crisis.
@FeedMe you seem to have been very vocal about underfunding in this thread but ive not seen you post anything about sorting out the in efficiency as part of sorting out the problems.

No doubt crash helmet will be needed for the response.
Click to expand...

Can you please explain a scenario in which a policy of deliberately underfunding the NHS for almost a decade does not leave it in a worsened position to deal with a virus pandemic? I don’t see why you need this explaining to you and are acting as if people lamenting Tory cuts are part of some conspiracy.
 
BobbyManc said:
Can you please explain a scenario in which a policy of deliberately underfunding the NHS for almost a decade does not leave it in a worsened position to deal with a virus pandemic? I don’t see why you need this explaining to you and are acting as if people lamenting Tory cuts are part of some conspiracy.
Click to expand...

You sure about that?

bn201_fig1.jpg


The NHS does not have a problem with it's overall budget.
 
Foxbatt said:
The Israelis are saying that US intelligence informed them and NATO end of November that something big is happening in China and this could get out of control. The Israelis discussed this with their own health minister but nothing came out of it.
So Europe and USA knew that something big was happening and their own intelligence advised that this could become a pandemic in November. But no action was taken because China and WHO didn't declare a pandemic in November?
Absolutely crazy.
Click to expand...

It wasn’t a pandemic in November. That’s a fact.

All this finger pointing at China also misses the point. One of the biggest challenges dealing with this has been making sure medical and technical supplies getting to where they’re needed. It’s highlighted how incredibly fragile all our global supply chains are. How do you think shutting all the boarders, all over the world, (presumably what you’re suggesting should have happened?) would have done to those supply chain? And what do you think it would have done to the global economy?
 
Garethw said:
So we had a video message from our smug CEO this morning basically just assuming that everything will be back to normal in three weeks time.

Nothing is going to be back to normal until a vaccine is mass produced. How can the CEO of a multi billion pound company be so fecking stupid?
Click to expand...

Always glorious to see the spin from the big boys isn't it.
In fairness, there's nothing they could write that'd have most people pleased.
So all they can do is try and keep the "Morale" up with some positives.
 
BobbyManc said:
Can you please explain a scenario in which a policy of deliberately underfunding the NHS for almost a decade does not leave it in a worsened position to deal with a virus pandemic? I don’t see why you need this explaining to you and are acting as if people lamenting Tory cuts are part of some conspiracy.
Click to expand...

The problem with politics, is that you'll instantly get Tories refuting that this happened. They'll produce some stats that apparently prove you wrong.

EDIT - I actually note someone immediately picked you up on it, and did exactly this!! :lol:
 
BobbyManc said:
Can you please explain a scenario in which a policy of deliberately underfunding the NHS for almost a decade does not leave it in a worsened position to deal with a virus pandemic? I don’t see why you need this explaining to you and are acting as if people lamenting Tory cuts are part of some conspiracy.
Click to expand...
in 2005 (inflation adjusted) we spend the 22nd highest amount per capita in the world on health care
in 2010 (inflation adjusted) we spent the 21st highest amount per capita in the world on health care
in 2015 (inflation adjusted) we spent the 17th highest amount per capita in the world on health care

so yeah...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_per_capita

also if you look at GDP spend on healthcare
Germany spends 11.25%
France spends 11.31%
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.CHEX.GD.ZS?most_recent_value_desc=true
look at the outcomes in both countries and clearly there is far more than a simple % spend to be taken into account as to how to get the best results

we should probably be focusing on what we could have done better - and procurement, planning, reacting quicker and having tests available being key ones that jump out... would having had extra funds available for the last 10 years have helped - probably a bit it might - would having reacted a few weeks quicker to the crisis have helped more - probably a lot
 
11101 said:
Early studies here (Italy) said smokers who were hospitalised were more than twice as likely to need ventilators as non smokers. That's saying something slightly different than smoking reduces the likelihood of hospitalisation, but still.
Click to expand...

In the Nordic countries a lot of people, me included, use Snus instead of smoking. Maybe there are some benefits to that preference then. Snus is something akin to snuff, putting up under the lip. I use one box every day so constantly have nicotine going into the blood stream. Thought of stopping to save money since it is quite expensive but I might just wait a bit longer I think.
 
Cardboard elk said:
In the Nordic countries a lot of people, me included, use Snus instead of smoking. Maybe there are some benefits to that preference then. Snus is something akin to snuff, putting up under the lip. I use one box every day so constantly have nicotine going into the blood stream. Thought of stopping to save money since it is quite expensive but I might just wait a bit longer I think.
Click to expand...
Unrelated to the coronavirus, but doesn't that horrifically ruin your gums?
 
Belgium death numbers looking horrific and the worst in the world given size of population.

Apr 17, 2020

1. USA : 34,641 (population: 328.2 million)
2. Italy: 22,170 (pop: 60.3 million)
3. Spain: 19,351 (pop: 47 million)
4. France: 17,920 (pop: 67 million)
5. Britain: 13,729 (pop: 66.6 million)
6.Iran: 4,869 (pop: 83 million)
7. Belgium: 4,857 (pop: 11.6 million)
8. China: 4,632 (pop: 1.4 billion).
9. Germany: 4,093 ( pop: 83 million)
10. Netherlands: 3,315 ( pop: 17.2 million)
 
Pogue Mahone said:
It wasn’t a pandemic in November. That’s a fact.

All this finger pointing at China also misses the point. One of the biggest challenges dealing with this has been making sure medical and technical supplies getting to where they’re needed. It’s highlighted how incredibly fragile all our global supply chains are. How do you think shutting all the boarders, all over the world, (presumably what you’re suggesting should have happened?) would have done to those supply chain? And what do you think it would have done to the global economy?
Click to expand...

It would not be a pandemic unless it becomes a pandemic. But the intelligence was there that this could be a pandemic in the future and the purpose of intelligence is to find out in advance and then be prepared for it when it happens down the line.
No one took the intelligence seriously. Especially Trump who kept calling it a hoax. Shutting the borders is not possible because all citizens have a right to return to their countries. But testing could have been improved a lot and supply chains and distancing improved.
Most importantly good leadership in this time was needed. None of the countries had a good leader who could handle it. Not even Putin who seems to have messed it up too.
The Americans refused to accept the testing kit design by who and did their own thing which was found faulty and it delayed testing by at least more than a week.
No I don't blame the central government of China much. 6 days seems to be a reasonable and acceptable time to make such a huge decision.
 
Not looking good for the end of the 4th week of lockdown. Time for a mass gathering on Mancunian way.




​
United Kingdom
Dates​
UK
Deaths​
Italy Dates​
Italy Deaths​
Spain Dates​
Spain Deaths​
France Dates​
France Deaths​
Germany
Dates​
Germany
Deaths​
USA Dates​
USA Deaths​
Mar 8th​
3​
Feb-23rd​
3​
Mar 5th​
3​
Mar 2nd​
3​
Mar 11th​
3​
Mar 1st​
2​
Mar 9th​
5​
Feb 24th​
7​
Mar 6th​
8​
Mar 3rd​
4​
Mar 12th​
5​
Mar 2nd​
6​
Mar 10th​
6​
Feb 25th​
11​
Mar 7th​
10​
Mar 4th​
4​
Mar 13th​
8​
Mar 3rd​
9​
Mar 11th​
8​
Feb 26th​
12​
Mar 8th​
17​
Mar 5th​
7​
Mar 14th​
8​
Mar 4th​
11​
Mar 12th​
10​
Feb 27th​
17​
Mar 9th​
30​
Mar 6th​
9​
Mar 15th​
12​
Mar 5th​
11​
Mar 13th​
11​
Feb 28th​
21​
Mar 10th​
36​
Mar 7th​
16​
Mar 16th​
12​
Mar 6th​
14​
Mar 14th​
21​
Feb 29th​
29​
Mar 11th​
55​
Mar 8th​
19​
Mar 17th​
12​
Mar 7th​
19​
Mar 15th​
35​
Mar 1st​
41​
Mar 12th​
86​
Mar 9th​
30​
Mar 18th​
12​
Mar 8th​
21​
Mar 16th​
55​
Mar 2nd​
52​
Mar 13th​
133​
Mar 10th​
33​
Mar 19th​
20​
Mar 9th​
26​
Mar 17th​
71​
Mar 3rd​
79​
Mar 14th​
196​
Mar 11th​
48​
Mar 20th​
31​
Mar 10th​
31​
Mar 18th​
104​
Mar 4th​
107​
Mar 15th​
294​
Mar 12th​
61​
Mar 21st​
47​
Mar 11th​
37​
Mar 19th​
144​
Mar 5th​
148​
Mar 16th​
342​
Mar 13th​
79​
Mar-22nd​
55​
Mar 12th​
41​
Mar 20th​
177​
Mar 6th​
197​
Mar 17th​
533​
Mar 14th​
91​
Mar 23rd​
86​
Mar 13th​
49​
Mar 21st​
233​
Mar 7th​
233​
Mar 18th​
638​
Mar 15th​
127​
Mar 24th​
114​
Mar 14th​
55​
Mar 22nd​
281​
Mar 8th​
366​
Mar 19th​
833​
Mar 16th​
148​
Mar 25th​
149​
Mar 15th​
62​
Mar 23rd​
335​
Mar 9th​
463​
Mar 20th​
1,093​
Mar 17th​
175​
Mar 26th​
198​
Mar 16th​
76​
Mar 24th​
422​
Mar 10th​
631​
Mar 21st​
1,381​
Mar 18th​
244​
Mar 27th​
253​
Mar 17th​
97​
Mar 25th​
468​
Mar 11th​
827​
Mar 22nd​
1,813​
Mar 19th​
372​
Mar 28th​
325​
Mar 18th​
123​
Mar 26th​
578​
Mar 12th​
1,016​
Mar 23rd​
2,207​
Mar 20th​
450​
Mar 29th​
389​
Mar19th​
175​
Mar 27th​
759​
Mar 13th​
1,266​
Mar 24th​
2,696​
Mar 21st​
562​
Mar 30th​
455​
Mar 20th​
230​
Mar 28th​
1,019​
Mar 14th​
1,441​
Mar 25th​
3,434​
Mar 22nd​
674​
Mar 31st​
600​
Mar 21st​
298​
Mar 29th​
1,228​
Mar 15th​
1,809​
Mar 26th​
4,145​
Mar 23rd​
860​
Apr 1st​
732​
Mar 22nd​
408​
Mar 30th​
1,408​
Mar 16th​
2,158​
Mar 27th​
4,858​
Mar 24th​
1100​
Apr 2nd​
872​
Mar 23rd​
519​
Mar 31st​
1,789​
Mar 17th​
2,503​
Mar 28th​
5,690​
Mar 25th​
1331​
Apr 3rd​
1,017​
Mar 24th​
681​
Apr 1st​
2,352​
Mar 18th​
2,978​
Mar 29th​
6,528​
Mar 26th​
1,696​
Apr 4th​
1,158​
Mar 25th​
906​
Apr 2nd​
2,921​
Mar 19th​
3,405​
Mar 30th​
7,340​
Mar 27th​
1,995​
Apr 5th​
1,342​
Mar 26th​
1,159​
Apr 3rd​
3,605​
Mar 20th​
4,032​
Mar 31st​
8,189​
Mar 28th​
2,314​
Apr 6th​
1,434​
Mar 27th​
1,592​
Apr 4th​
4,313​
Mar 21st​
4,825​
Apr 1st​
9,053​
Mar 29th​
2,606​
Apr 7th​
1,607​
Mar 28th​
2,039​
Apr 5th​
4,934​
Mar 22nd​
5,475​
Apr 2nd​
10,003​
Mar 30th​
3,024​
Apr 8th​
1,861​
Mar 29th​
2,431​
Apr 6th​
5,373​
Mar 23rd​
6,077​
Apr 3rd​
10,935​
Mar 31st​
3,523​
Apr 9th​
2,107​
Mar 30th​
2,985​
Apr 7th​
6,159​
Mar 24th​
6,820​
Apr 4th​
11,744​
Apr 1st​
4,032​
Apr 10th​
2,373​
Mar 31st​
3,806​
Apr 8th​
7,097​
Mar 25th​
7,503​
Apr 5th​
12,418​
Apr 2nd​
4,503​
Apr 11th​
2,544​
Apr 1st​
4,746​
Apr 9th​
7,978​
Mar 26th​
8,215​
Apr 6th​
13,055​
Apr 3rd​
5,091​
Apr 12th​
2,673​
Apr 2nd​
5,821​
Apr 10th​
8,958​
Mar 27th​
9,134​
Apr 7th​
13,798​
Apr 4th​
5,532​
Apr 13th​
2,799​
Apr 3rd​
7,007​
Apr 11th​
9,875​
Mar 28th​
10,023​
Apr 8th​
14,555​
Apr 5th​
5,889​
Apr 14th​
2,969​
Apr 4th​
8,359​
Apr 12th​
10,612​
Mar 29th​
10,779​
Apr 9th​
15,238​
Apr 6th​
6,494​
Apr 15th​
3,254​
Apr 5th​
9,534​
Apr 13th​
11,329​
Mar 30th​
11,591​
Apr 10th​
15,843​
Apr 7th​
7,091​
Apr 16th​
3,569​
Apr 6th​
10,748​
Apr 14th​
12,107​
Mar 31st​
12,428​
Apr 11th​
16,353​
Apr 8th​
7,632​
Apr 17th​
3,868​
Apr 7th​
12,674​
Apr 15th​
12,868​
Apr 1st​
13,155​
Apr 12th​
16,972​
Apr 9th​
8,044​
Apr 18th​
​
Apr 8th​
14,610​
Apr 16th​
13,729​
Apr 2nd​
13,915​
Apr 13th​
17,489​
Apr 10th​
8,598​
Apr 19th​
​
Apr 9th​
16,466​
Apr 17th​
14,576​
Apr 3rd​
14,681​
Apr 14th​
18,056​
Apr 11th​
8,943​
Apr 20th​
​
Apr 10th​
18,544​
Apr 18th​
​
Apr 4th​
15,362​
Apr 15th​
18,579​
Apr 12th​
9,258​
Apr 21st​
​
Apr 11th​
20,454​
Apr 19th​
​
Apr 5th​
15,887​
Apr 16th​
19,130​
Apr 13th​
9,588​
Apr 22nd​
​
Apr 12th​
21,936​
Apr 20th​
​
Apr 6th​
16,523​
Apr 17th​
​
Apr 14th​
10,129​
Apr 23rd​
​
Apr 13th​
23,398​
Apr 21st​
​
Apr 7th​
17,127​
Apr 18th​
​
Apr 15th​
10,643​
Apr 24th​
​
Apr 14th​
25,776​
​
​
Apr 8th​
17,669​
Apr 19th​
​
Apr 16th​
11,060​
Apr 25th​
​
Apr 15th​
28,214​
​
​
Apr 9th​
18,279​
Apr 20th​
​
Apr 17th​
​
​
​
Apr 16th​
30,355​

​

Should pass Italy soon and we have already with the shift to 5pm cut off.

Note France is hospital death figures only
 
Last edited:
11101 said:
You sure about that?

bn201_fig1.jpg


The NHS does not have a problem with it's overall budget.
Click to expand...

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ou...o-to-the-nhs-and-how-has-he-got-away-with-it/

BMA website - “The NHS is overstretched and underfunded, putting health services under unsustainable pressure. The BMA is calling on the government to close the NHS funding gap and bring the UK’s health spend in line with that of other European nations”

The NHS will no longer be financially sustainable and patients will continue to face “dangerously” long waiting times for cancer treatment and emergency care under the government’s plans for the health service, Boris Johnson has been warned.

A decade of underfunding has resulted in a “dire situation”: hospital bed numbers are at a record low, waiting lists are the longest since records began and staff are working in an “intolerable climate of stress”.

The stark warning was issued in a two-page memo sent to the prime minister by Dr Chaand Nagpaul, chairman of the British Medical Association (BMA)

You seriously want to argue overall funding for the NHS has not been a problem?
 
sammsky1 said:
Belgium death numbers looking horrific and the worst in the world given size of population.

Apr 17, 2020

1. USA : 34,641 (population: 328.2 million)
2. Italy: 22,170 (pop: 60.3 million)
3. Spain: 19,351 (pop: 47 million)
4. France: 17,920 (pop: 67 million)
5. Britain: 13,729 (pop: 66.6 million)
6.Iran: 4,869 (pop: 83 million)
7. Belgium: 4,857 (pop: 11.6 million)
8. China: 4,632 (pop: 1.4 billion).
9. Germany: 4,093 ( pop: 83 million)
10. Netherlands: 3,315 ( pop: 17.2 million)
Click to expand...

Again, this has been explained tons of times. Belgium counts a different way from most of it's neighbors. People who die in nursing homes and show a sympton, but aren't tested; are counted as a Covid-19 death too. So there are a lot of deaths in nursing homes that aren't actually confirmed as Covid-19 deaths, but nonetheless counted. Deaths in nursing homes are more than 70% of all Covid 19 deaths here.

If we wouldn't count them, as say the Netherlands do, we'd have a smaller amount of Covid 19 deaths per capita than them.

I posted this a while ago (numbers have changed):

Current deaths
BE: 3600
NL: 2740

IF both countries would have the same way of registring COVID-19 deaths:

BE: 1900
NL: 2740

The expert groups in Belgium say that they rather exagerate the number than take it too lighthearted.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.