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



The state of this.


Despicable self publicising immoral cnuts. I hope they get paper cuts from their squalid rag and that become infected causing mild discomfort for days.
 
Last edited:
Todays the first day they will include deaths outside hospital. Will they give us a breakdown of the figures, i.e deaths in hospital, deaths at home, deaths in care homes?
 


The author of the Sunday Times story that the government responded to said the same about Cummings back in March, that he had been the most zealous advocate for lockdown. Though only after they had changed course from their initial strategy, during which time his attitude was characterised as "herd immunity, protect the economy and if that means some pensioners die, too bad."
 
Is anyone else getting really fecking bored of these sickly sweet feel good stories filling up the news at the moment? Well done you’ve got one leg and walked around your living room 1000 times and got 600 like on Facebook now feck off.
 
Is anyone else getting really fecking bored of these sickly sweet feel good stories filling up the news at the moment? Well done you’ve got one leg and walked around your living room 1000 times and got 600 like on Facebook now feck off.

Aye, every man and his dog doing pictures of that Tom fella.
 


If true, IFR could be much higher than the 0.5 to 1% often talked about.


Isn't that IFR based on countries who have been reasonably comprehensive in testing and reporting though? The UK numbers are wrong, but we know that - the number of cases is also a massive underestimate (I'd guess by an order of magnitude). But my understanding that the IFR of 0.5-1% was based on places like S Korea where they've been on top of testing and reporting from the start.
 
Todays the first day they will include deaths outside hospital. Will they give us a breakdown of the figures, i.e deaths in hospital, deaths at home, deaths in care homes?

Ah so because what we have been measuring is going down, we are now going to report it differently so it looks like we have gone backwards.

Hope they make it clear we haven't gone backwards, just now recording differently so expect the deaths to go up.

They've probably waited till it's at a low enough overall number to report it.
 
Todays the first day they will include deaths outside hospital. Will they give us a breakdown of the figures, i.e deaths in hospital, deaths at home, deaths in care homes?
For what it's worth (can't say they'll do the same in the UK), in Belgium it's broken down as:

Total deaths:
Deaths in hospitals:
Deaths in care homes:
% of deaths in care homes which is confirmed as Covid-19:

They're even speaking of it as "two separate epidemics going on simultaneously", one in society and one in the care homes. The % of confirmed cases in care homes is usually quite low as well.
 
Ah so because what we have been measuring is going down, we are now going to report it differently so it looks like we have gone backwards.

Hope they make it clear we haven't gone backwards, just now recording differently so expect the deaths to go up.

They've probably waited till it's at a low enough overall number to report it.
Think we still need to be looking at deaths in hospital and how many people are still being admitted to hospital. The lockdown was aimed at taking the pressure off the NHS. Think the government see the deaths in care homes as collateral damage unfortunately.
 
Ah so because what we have been measuring is going down, we are now going to report it differently so it looks like we have gone backwards.

Hope they make it clear we haven't gone backwards, just now recording differently so expect the deaths to go up.

They've probably waited till it's at a low enough overall number to report it.


I was wondering about this last night, in a few ways.

1) Our figures over the past 4-5 days, compared to the figures at the same time the week before, have been visibly lower suggesting we are indeed improving. Now that they're reporting the care-home figures etc from today, is this going to see a gigantic spike which is yet again going to completely demoralise everyone and as a side-effect, see even more people flouting lockdown because 'its clearly not working' (a lot of people just see a number, and don't imply any critical thinking such as comparing it to the previous week's numbers etc).

2) The cynic in me wonders why now? Is it because the pressure has become too much to keep ignoring the care home figures? Or is it a bit more sinister than that.......a care home scenario is, please don't take this as harshly as it sounds, a 'captive market' of sorts. It's not a never-ending scenario, there's only so many residents the virus can run through and therefore only so many deaths in that home. My aunt's home (that she manages) had 2 weeks of hell in which it ran riot and killed a good few residents and now they're all fine.....part of me wonders if they've waited until 'the worst is over' for care homes before they start reporting the numbers everyday so its a much lower figure?

Maybe I'm just being too cynical there.
 
For what it's worth (can't say they'll do the same in the UK), in Belgium it's broken down as:

Total deaths:
Deaths in hospitals:
Deaths in care homes:
% of deaths in care homes which is confirmed as Covid-19:

They're even speaking of it as "two separate epidemics going on simultaneously", one in society and one in the care homes. The % of confirmed cases in care homes is usually quite low as well.
That's how it should be reported here. Will every care home death just be claimed as a Covid-19 or have some of the poor souls just died of other things or old age?
 
Think we still need to be looking at deaths in hospital and how many people are still being admitted to hospital. The lockdown was aimed at taking the pressure off the NHS. Think the government see the deaths in care homes as collateral damage unfortunately.


Also this, the key figure is the hospital figures. The lockdown is to ensure the NHS doesn't collapse under the pressure of admittances, the general consenus was that the virus was going to run through the population either way but we needed to manage hospital admittances and intensive care cases. So the hospital deaths and cases will still be the main focus in terms of how the government manage lockdown.
 
Wow, good for Sweden if that's true. I haven't been paying as much attention to Sweden as I thought I would be, it's been quieter than I expected. Given their approach, you'd think media outlets would be all over this situation as they are basically being guinea pigs for a different approach.
When it comes to media silence is always good. If there was a hint of their approach backfiring the media (not to mention the scores of people dreaming of a Draconian lockdown needing whatever material they can find to support their wish) would be all over it.

Sweden have found the perfect balance in my opinion and that will become increasingly evident the longer this goes on (and beyond).
 
When it comes to media silence is always good. If there was a hint of their approach backfiring the media (not to mention the scores of people dreaming of a Draconian lockdown needing whatever material they can find to support their wish) would be all over it.

Sweden have found the perfect balance in my opinion and that will become increasingly evident the longer this goes on (and beyond).

I would never ever take sweeden for a barometer of anything.

They're on a very unique culture. Have you even seen their prison? If that's the prison in here many would love go there voluntarily.

Whatever they're doing if working is part due to them being swedish.
 
That's how it should be reported here. Will every care home death just be claimed as a Covid-19 or have some of the poor souls just died of other things or old age?
All claimed as Covid-19 but will be adjusted once they're confirmed as infected/not infected, so the numbers will still be adjusted quite a bit I'd imagine.
 
Wow, good for Sweden if that's true. I haven't been paying as much attention to Sweden as I thought I would be, it's been quieter than I expected. Given their approach, you'd think media outlets would be all over this situation as they are basically being guinea pigs for a different approach.
The jury is still out on whether they've taken the right approach. As the article says, they have 2194 deaths to Denmark's 422.

As per https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/ they also have a 70% death rate in their closed cases (as in only 30% of people who've been tested have recovered, 70% have died) vs the global average of 18%. This can be explained away in part by each country recording figures differently, some testing more than others, etc. but regardless, that doesn't look great whichever way you look at it.

They might come out the other side quicker than most, but they're going to have higher death rates than those countries who imposed strict lock downs.
 
When it comes to media silence is always good. If there was a hint of their approach backfiring the media (not to mention the scores of people dreaming of a Draconian lockdown needing whatever material they can find to support their wish) would be all over it.

Sweden have found the perfect balance in my opinion and that will become increasingly evident the longer this goes on (and beyond).



You're definitely right. If it was going tits up there, the media would be all over it as an example of why 'we're doing it the right way'. So the fact we're not hearing much about it shows it's going better than expected.
 
You're definitely right. If it was going tits up there, the media would be all over it as an example of why 'we're doing it the right way'. So the fact we're not hearing much about it shows it's going better than expected.

Good article on Sweden in the NY Times yesterday: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/28/world/europe/sweden-coronavirus-herd-immunity.html

"A compilation of mortality figures by The New York Times found that many countries were undercounting Covid-19 deaths by the thousands, while Sweden reported just 400 more deaths than expected between March 9 and April 19. "
 
Good article on Sweden in the NY Times yesterday: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/28/world/europe/sweden-coronavirus-herd-immunity.html

"A compilation of mortality figures by The New York Times found that many countries were undercounting Covid-19 deaths by the thousands, while Sweden reported just 400 more deaths than expected between March 9 and April 19. "


I don't believe any country's covid19 deaths is 100% accurate, some more than others. I suspect Sweden will get somewhat worse, but I need to remember to keep a closer eye on them because it's an interesting situation and they seem very confident about this herd immunity date for Stockholm.
 
Boris's fiancée has had her baby, a boy. I thought it was due in the summer, but there you go. Lots of distractions for Boris right now.

(edit - old news :))
 
Boris's fiancée has had her baby, a boy. I thought it was due in the summer, but there you go. Lots of distractions for Boris right now.

(edit - old news :))



Good for them, I'm glad he pulled through the illness to see his baby born and I'm glad they're well.

But please, let's not have a fecking sickly media circus about how great this is when there are far more important matters at hand. If I see one suggestion of 'clapping for baby Boris' I'm gonna go postal, I swear.
 
Isn't that IFR based on countries who have been reasonably comprehensive in testing and reporting though? The UK numbers are wrong, but we know that - the number of cases is also a massive underestimate (I'd guess by an order of magnitude). But my understanding that the IFR of 0.5-1% was based on places like S Korea where they've been on top of testing and reporting from the start.

It’s estimated everywhere (and IFR can only ever be an estimate) by working out what total number of infections might be, then dividing total deaths by that number. The more extensive the community testing (e.g. South Korea, Iceland) the more accurate the estimated number of infections. I don’t know if Korea is any better than anywhere else at getting the number of deaths correct but this article seems to imply they’re being under-reported across the board.

The big worry here is that we’ve always assumed/hoped that estimates for number of infections are being conservative, so true prevalence is higher. Which would push IFR down. However, if true number of deaths is higher that will cause an even bigger shift, in the opposite direction.
 
As per https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/ they also have a 70% death rate in their closed cases (as in only 30% of people who've been tested have recovered, 70% have died) vs the global average of 18%. This can be explained away in part by each country recording figures differently, some testing more than others, etc. but regardless, that doesn't look great whichever way you look at it.

70%... don’t be bloody daft man.

It’s timed you binned worldometres man and it’s time people started realising Sweden’s approach for Sweden, was bang on here.
• 5 full weeks of ICU patient numbers not increasing.
• Field hospitals not used.
• Gothenburg and Malmö with just 176 & 68 deaths respectively.
• Stockholm County (2.4m) expecting a 28% infected rate by 1st May.

I’m still awaiting the Italy & Spain situation that was bound to happen according to so many on here. People have been beating this drum since mid-March, many you felt were desperate for Sweden to fail.
Let’s see if post lockdown countries can do as well, I expect now the hygiene & social distancing message and importance of it is out there for all to understand, all of Europe will learn to live with this virus and keep the curve flat.
Many countries just got hit so unexpectedly hard after half term, but it’ll be much better next time around I’m sure.
 
Last edited: