Covid 19 -

[cs123]

Originally Posted by guzzis3

But this isn't theoretical mathematics, it's data analysis. His fits are curve smoothing not curve generation. If the real data produces no new cases then cases are zero.

If your aim is to eradicate the virus entirely in australia (for example) you have to achieve that through real world action.

Modelling predicts what might happen. Data analysis examines what has happened, and the data presentation makes understanding it easier. None of these drive reality.

Regarding Sweden, I'm not sure you understand the premise of their actions. They contend that other countries will get subsequent waves of virus, that public disobedience will increase and that overall others will see higher death rates. Others disagree. It is far too early to say if they are right or wrong.

What is more important ? that fewer people die this week or fewer people die overall ?

Did I mention Sweden?

[CoupeKing]

[PhilT2]

Originally Posted by CoupeKing

So when I look at that I see Sweden (no lockdown) 1,765 deaths Norway (lockdown) 182 deaths I think Norwegians did the smarter thing. We already know the testing is not giving us a true picture of the number of cases so we can't rely on that.

His comments on the immune system bother me. My immune system has been coping with whatever the workd throws at it for quite a number of years. Suddenly a few weeks of isolation will weaken it? How?

[CyberWasp]

So in the near future with the talk of easing restrictions we could also be in a unique position.
Other countries like Singapore have had a second wave after initially doing very well.
What are peoples thoughts on easing restrictions so as not to have a second wave and thus back into lock down again?
Should we ease different restrictions in different states, so any mistakes are identified and not multiplied across the whole country for example.

[FPV8U]

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

So in the near future with the talk of easing restrictions we could also be in a unique position.
Other countries like Singapore have had a second wave after initially doing very well.
What are peoples thoughts on easing restrictions so as not to have a second wave and thus back into lock down again?
Should we ease different restrictions in different states, so any mistakes are identified and not multiplied across the whole country for example.

A cautious system of stages starting with allowing people to visit family and friends in what are easy traceable movements would be a obvious inclusion.

It’s the random public interactions IMO we need to be cautious of so I’d rule out attending sports, sit down meals at cafe’s and restaurants, ect.

[russellw]

Two graphs - one for the countries on my list that have a peak daily new case rate below 10 cases per 100k population (Australia, Germany & Turkey) and those with a peak above 10.



Australia looks about what you'd expect with effective countermeasures to infection with a rise to a peak before a slight drop caused by the first set of restrictions which then went back up before the 2nd set of restrictions has led to the steady (if a little bumpy) fall in infection rates.

The German line isn't as successful and while the big bumps are a result of the lower weekend testing rates, their stated view of lowering restrictions from May 3rd might be a bit premature.

Turkey was a late starter with the first reported case about 10 days later than most countries but then they also waited a month before introducing restrictions only 11 days ago (12th April) and even that was only a weekend full lockdown. You can see that it did have a positive impact in the graph but it's probably a case of too little, too late.



A bit more of a mixed bag here.

Spain has had a couple of bites at restrictions, easing restrictions, tightening restrictions and you can see the spikes in the line caused by each change and at the moment it's heading in the wrong direction.

UK - despite having restrictions in place since 25th March and being in lockdown since early April, the signs aren't all that positive. Yes they are off their peak but have shown little improvement since implementing it.

Italy has made some good ground but they've been very restrictive (and enforced it) earlier than just about anywhere but their is anecdotal evidence that as the weather has warmed up, the adherence levels have dropped which might explain the recent upward trend. Either way, I suspect their planned May 3rd easing of restrictions might also be too soon.

Iran actually might be a good case study. You can see when they implemented their lockdown at the beginning of April and it's been trending in the right direction ever since. They significantly eased restrictions 5 days ago (20/4) so it will be interesting to see if the little kink at the end of the graph is a hint of worse to come.

France is another country that has had two bites at lockdown but which also isn't great at reporting timely data so it's hard to draw any real conclusions.

Cheers
Russ

[Cav]

Have you checked ya phone to see if you have this app installed?

[falcon_bandit]

Talking about CMR's is not reflective on how potent it is. I bet a lot of the people who died, were heading that way regardless of the virus. Eg, poor Jude was in palliative care for months, then dies testing positive for covid 19. Anyone who dies right now, and tests positive, will have their death wholly attributed to covid 19, and that's simply not the case

[russellw]

Originally Posted by falcon_bandit

Talking about CMR's is not reflective on how potent it is. I bet a lot of the people who died, were heading that way regardless of the virus. Eg, poor Jude was in palliative care for months, then dies testing positive for covid 19. Anyone who dies right now, and tests positive, will have their death wholly attributed to covid 19, and that's simply not the case

Not true. Underlying health issues are being counted as part of the statistical analysis but it doesn't matter if they were 'heading that way' - if the virus is the cause of their premature death, then it's a valid count.

You do realise we're all 'heading that way' don't you?

Originally Posted by zipping

You realise you are betting a depression on eradication, something you admit is unlikely.

A depression is going to have an even greater impact on mortality rates but wont be seen till until 50-90 years down the track.

I guess that depends on how long you think it will take to reach the 28 day zero new case mark. I would have said it should be less than 6 months to achieve that but then you get cluster outbreaks like the NSW nursing home that then screws with the stats.

[Citroënbender]

I would have said it should be less than 6 months to achieve that but then you get cluster outbreaks like the NSW nursing home that then screws with the stats.

Therein lies a related problem, care workers are often “casuals” and not tethered to a particular facility or group of patients. I further maintain genuine suspicion that some who provide home care could be doing the Uber thing and loaning their credentials to friends or family.

Ironing out these two items would be a good start, but I’ve seen personally only one spot check on home care in four years (and ironically, it was on a bloke whose blood should be bottled).

[falcon_bandit]

Originally Posted by russellw

Not true. Underlying health issues are being counted as part of the statistical analysis but it doesn't matter if they were 'heading that way' - if the virus is the cause of their premature death, then it's a valid count.

You do realise we're all 'heading that way' don't you?.

Was wondering the point of u posting CMR figures?

If someone dies from poor health, and tested positive from covid 19, I guess it helps inflate numbers for a better story?

[FPV8U]

Originally Posted by falcon_bandit

Talking about CMR's is not reflective on how potent it is. I bet a lot of the people who died, were heading that way regardless of the virus. Eg, poor Jude was in palliative care for months, then dies testing positive for covid 19. Anyone who dies right now, and tests positive, will have their death wholly attributed to covid 19, and that's simply not the case

Completely agree, if someone is terminal or managing a very poor health situation then while Covid may be the final contributor that results in their passing, it has hardly the root cause of their death.

Attributing thousands of deaths based on suspicion or instruction as is being exposed by many doctors in the US is also inflating the numbers.

[russellw]

Speaking of which.

Australia recorded 20 new cases yesterday (12 in NSW), 1 new death and the CMR rises to 1.1954%. From what we saw on the media reports last night, the locals aren't learning much about isolation and social distancing. I'm going to start graphing the States but I can already tell you that NSW has the worst looking curve.

NZ recorded 5 new cases, 1 death and the CMR rises to 1.232% (*passing Australia).

The UK was under 5,000 new cases but still over 800 deaths and the CMR rose to 13.694%.

The US had another almost 39,000 cases but less than 2,000 deaths but the CMR still increased to 5.663%.

Elsewhere, Russia, which had been doing really well, recorded almost 6,000 new cases.

[CyberWasp]

My dumb question of the day is how do people who do not know they have the virus or show any symptoms pass the virus on?
Wouldn't the main way to pass it on to be coughing onto other people or your hands and touching things others will touch.
If you are not coughing then how are people still spreading it?

[PhilT2]

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

My dumb question of the day is how do people who do not know they have the virus or show any symptoms pass the virus on?
Wouldn't the main way to pass it on to be coughing onto other people or your hands and touching things others will touch.
If you are not coughing then how are people still spreading it?

The best example of asymptomatic transmission I can think of is the choir from the church in the US. Although nobody had symptoms and they all observed some degree of reduced contact eg not shaking hands, after choir practice 45 of the 60 members contracted the virus

[prydey]

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

My dumb question of the day is how do people who do not know they have the virus or show any symptoms pass the virus on?
Wouldn't the main way to pass it on to be coughing onto other people or your hands and touching things others will touch.
If you are not coughing then how are people still spreading it?

asymptomatic people is one of the main reasons for social distancing. That is why restrictions won't be eased straight away as its likely there are still many people with the virus who are unaware.

Every time you touch your nose or mouth and then touch something else there is the potential to transfer the virus.

sneezing and coughing are natural body reactions to foreign particles in the nose or throat. People sneeze and cough all the time.

[cheap]

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by prydey

.

sneezing and coughing are natural body reactions to foreign particles in the nose or throat. People sneeze and cough all the time.

Yeah, it’s a great time to be a hay fever sufferer haha, I get looked at like I’m a leper when I have a sneezing fit.

[russellw]

Originally Posted by FPV8U

Completely agree, if someone is terminal or managing a very poor health situation then while Covid may be the final contributor that results in their passing, it has hardly the root cause of their death.

Attributing thousands of deaths based on suspicion or instruction as is being exposed by many doctors in the US is also inflating the numbers.

If we follow your (flawed) logic then the actual root cause of death is being born.

You are talking about two entirely different things. Terminal illnesses will (in Australia at least) be recorded as a cause of death even where Coronavirus is present based on the guidelines issued to health practitioners.

However, we aren't talking about people with terminal illness, we are talking about those who have some underlying medical condition that makes them more likely to die from the virus if they contract it.

Those underlying medical conditions include asthma (11% of the population); cardiovascular disease (18.3% of the population) and CRD (23.2% - although that includes some of the asthma patients) all of which people can (and do) live with for decades.

If they then contract the virus and die earlier than they otherwise would have then the virus is the cause of death not their pre-existing condition.

Originally Posted by falcon_bandit

If someone dies from poor health, and tested positive from covid 19, I guess it helps inflate numbers for a better story?

As above.

Based on earlier comments about thinning out the weak from the herd (which I don't endorse), perhaps we should just euthanise anyone with an underlying medical condition that might increase their chance of dying if they contract Coronavirus so that we can improve the statistics. By the best estimates I can get that would be roughly:

7.4M who have a diagnosed CRD;
1.5M living with cancers;
4.2M with Cardiovascular diseases: and
4.2M who are immunocompromised.

Some of the cancer patients will be in the immunocompromised group but certainly not all as there are other reasons for that condition.

Let's round it out an even 15M (which will include children) or a nice round 60% of the population.

[FPV8U]

Originally Posted by russellw

If we follow your (flawed) logic then the actual root cause of death is being born.

You are talking about two entirely different things. Terminal illnesses will (in Australia at least) be recorded as a cause of death even where Coronavirus is present based on the guidelines issued to health practitioners.

However, we aren't talking about people with terminal illness, we are talking about those who have some underlying medical condition that makes them more likely to die from the virus if they contract it.

Those underlying medical conditions include asthma (11% of the population); cardiovascular disease (18.3% of the population) and CRD (23.2% - although that includes some of the asthma patients) all of which people can (and do) live with for decades.

As I said in a terminal or very poor health situation, I’m happy to be criticised but comparing that to being born, unless born with a life threatening condition is beyond a stretch.

I’m not suggesting we return to situation normal or do nothing to prevent the spread, but in my opinion (I understand you don’t agree here, that’s ok) we need to start relax some restrictions as I’ve posed before to return to some normality for the majority of the population.

Those who are diagnosed with those conditions that put them in the vulnerable arena should continue to isolate and take precautions inline with current policy.

We could take this isolation and shut borders method with the seasonal flu (I’m not saying Covid 19 is the flu) and likely safe hundreds of vulnerable people’s lives, but we balance it out like many other risks in life and balance it off lifestyle and freedoms.

I respect where your coming from Russ, life is precious and these are difficult things to balance, I don’t envy our PM or any world leader in this situation as the review of how this was handled will never be fair to the weight of the decisions made at the time.

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by russellw

Let's round it out an even 15M (which will include children) or a nice round 60% of the population.

Would save everyone having to social distance I guess....

[superyob]

Originally Posted by russellw

If we follow your (flawed) logic then the actual root cause of death is being born.

You are talking about two entirely different things. Terminal illnesses will (in Australia at least) be recorded as a cause of death even where Coronavirus is present based on the guidelines issued to health practitioners.

However, we aren't talking about people with terminal illness, we are talking about those who have some underlying medical condition that makes them more likely to die from the virus if they contract it.

Those underlying medical conditions include asthma (11% of the population); cardiovascular disease (18.3% of the population) and CRD (23.2% - although that includes some of the asthma patients) all of which people can (and do) live with for decades.

If they then contract the virus and die earlier than they otherwise would have then the virus is the cause of death not their pre-existing condition.



As above.

Based on earlier comments about thinning out the weak from the herd (which I don't endorse), perhaps we should just euthanise anyone with an underlying medical condition that might increase their chance of dying if they contract Coronavirus so that we can improve the statistics. By the best estimates I can get that would be roughly:

7.4M who have a diagnosed CRD;
1.5M living with cancers;
4.2M with Cardiovascular diseases: and
4.2M who are immunocompromised.

Some of the cancer patients will be in the immunocompromised group but certainly not all as there are other reasons for that condition.

Let's round it out an even 15M (which will include children) or a nice round 60% of the population.

So if someone has a serious but non fatal gunshot wound which gets a toxic infection and that person dies, what is the cause of death???

[Citroënbender]

Originally Posted by superyob

So if someone has a serious but non fatal gunshot wound which gets a toxic infection and that person dies, what is the cause of death???

Doesn’t that vary by jurisdiction? I think it’s got to happen within a year in NSW.

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by superyob

So if someone has a serious but non fatal gunshot wound which gets a toxic infection and that person dies, what is the cause of death???

Stupidity, because should have gone to hospital?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by FairmontGS

Stupidity, because should have gone to hospital?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It'll be recorded as a Covid-19 death. Hospital administrators are telling staff to record almost every death associated with CV19 as a CV19 death.

[CoupeKing]

Originally Posted by superyob

So if someone has a serious but non fatal gunshot wound which gets a toxic infection and that person dies, what is the cause of death???

Could read something like this..

CNN BREAKING NEWS
Man falls into active volcano dies from coronavirus.

[russellw]

Originally Posted by superyob

So if someone has a serious but non fatal gunshot wound which gets a toxic infection and that person dies, what is the cause of death???

I think you are starting to troll.

It will depend on the period of time that has elapsed between the wound and the death which is no different to (for example) the road fatality statistics where a road accident fatality is only recorded if death occurs within 30 days of the accident.

Statistical data isn't actually designed to establish root cause. There is an internationally recognised standard coding set (ICD-10) that we use a slightly modified form of in Australia which allows for multiple causes of death to be recorded where appropriate and sets the definitions as to causal periods.

[russellw]

As mentioned earlier, I've had a look at the Australian State by State data and while the longer term view is not dissimilar to the overall pattern for Australia, the shorter terms has quite a bit of variation.

The first two charts are new cases reported by State for the last 14 days (divided into the 2 larger and four smaller States excluding ACT / NT where there aren't enough cases to draw a pattern.





Finally the 2nd order trend lines for the larger States - this time these have been extrapolated for the next 3 days based on the current trend but as a modelling tool that's not a whole lot of use except as a rough indicator of which way it will head based on the past trend.

[CoupeKing]

https://vitalitymagazine.com/article...aviolet-light/


Trumps uncle, John, was an accomplished scientist. He was also close to Nikola Tesla.

[cs123]

Originally Posted by CoupeKing

https://vitalitymagazine.com/article...aviolet-light/


Trumps uncle, John, was an accomplished scientist. He was also close to Nikola Tesla.

After that presser the other day I thought to myself "This is it, this is the moment that his followers finally see that he is a complete moron"

But no.... That hasn't happened.....