'Worst-case' UK winter could see 120,000 COVID deaths in second wave

[hotandsticky]

3 minutes ago, drizzel said:

it is not a killer virus, and the house arrest has not been proven to work,

it makes people unhappy, depressive, suicidal, people with cancer were not helped and so can I go on,

for what this killer virus'?

 

 

 

 

So the 569,000 attributed deaths were a figment of someone's imagination?

 

 

Get back to the village, they are missing an idiot.

[jcsmith]

@Drizzel: That's one of the most deceptive and ridiculous stats I've ever seen. Claiming a 99.99% survival rate in stage 1 of a virus is nonsense. 

So 0.172% of the world has been diagnosed with Covid... Okay that much is true. Yet over 581,000 people are dead. Do you know what that number would be if 100% of people had the virus? Nearly 337 million people. Realistically speaking the actual number of people who have the virus is probably significantly higher than the numbers shown, but even if we allow them to be 10x the known numbers and we estimate that half the global population would contract the virus you'd still be talking about 17 million dead. That's why people take it seriously. The fact that right now it's affected such a small percentage of the population is the result of the restrictions and countries taking it seriously. 

Edited July 15, 2020 by jcsmith

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/14/2020 at 11:05 PM, puipuitom said:

I do not know the thickness of the "hears breadth" you mean, but wiser to look to more recent publications. 

Sweden exists of a few cities and a LOT of social distancing in between. Still: 75.826 cases confirmed and 5.536 deaths with a population of 10,2 mln. Compared with Norway: 8.984 confirmed casualties and 253 deaths, with 5,3 mln inhabitants, Denmark: 13.147 resp 609 and population 5,8 million. A disaster in Sweden.

 

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/coronavirus-swedens-herd-immunity-approach-backfires-with-low-antibody-rate/news-story/5417a20f4f3298d981968d897965c403

https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/coronavirus-sweden-how-anders-tegnells-unique-approach-to-battling-the-covid19-pandemic-backfired/news-story/3989556c1eb049024c53244e5d3b236a

Wait till Denmark and Norway get hit by the second wave. That's the situation to be looking at. IMO Sweden will do far, far better than them.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, jcsmith said:

@Drizzel: That's one of the most deceptive and ridiculous stats I've ever seen. Claiming a 99.99% survival rate in stage 1 of a virus is nonsense. 

So 0.172% of the world has been diagnosed with Covid... Okay that much is true. Yet over 581,000 people are dead. Do you know what that number would be if 100% of people had the virus? Nearly 337 million people. Realistically speaking the actual number of people who have the virus is probably significantly higher than the numbers shown, but even if we allow them to be 10x the known numbers and we estimate that half the global population would contract the virus you'd still be talking about 17 million dead. That's why people take it seriously. The fact that right now it's affected such a small percentage of the population is the result of the restrictions and countries taking it seriously. 

337 million out of 7 1/2 billion is statistically not very significant. The numbers will be replaced in a few weeks. Also as it mainly kills those with serious underlying health problems most of them, IMO, would probably have died by year's end.

It this was only happening in Africa it would get as much attention as Ebola does.

[thaibeachlovers]

9 hours ago, drizzel said:

You sheep lie under your table and shiver with fear, shut yourself up,
go to your sheep stable.

You belong there.

Scared people like you are the most dangerous. They cry and cry. Open your eyes or close yourself up nicely.

What annoys me about all this is that they want everyone to be scared like them. They are miserable, so they want everyone else to be miserable too.

[BritManToo]

8 hours ago, jcsmith said:

The fact that right now it's affected such a small percentage of the population is the result of the restrictions and countries taking it seriously. 

How do you know such a small percentage have been affected?

Some people claim 60% of the world population have already been infected.

[BritManToo]

10 hours ago, hotandsticky said:

So the 569,000 attributed deaths were a figment of someone's imagination?

None of them were related to me, I have never met any of them .....

Why would I care about people I've never encountered?

Edited July 15, 2020 by BritManToo

[furburglar]

15 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

How do you know such a small percentage have been affected?

Some people claim 60% of the world population have already been infected.

Some people will claim anything.

[jcsmith]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

337 million out of 7 1/2 billion is statistically not very significant. The numbers will be replaced in a few weeks. Also as it mainly kills those with serious underlying health problems most of them, IMO, would probably have died by year's end.

It this was only happening in Africa it would get as much attention as Ebola does.

To put that in perspective about 60 million people die a year normally. 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, jcsmith said:

To put that in perspective about 60 million people die a year normally. 

Yes, but in abnormal times it's lots more eg Black Death, Spanish flu. This is an abnormal time. The danger is that by trying to save a lot of people that likely would die soon anyway they are going to kill far more through poverty brought on by economic collapse.

[bannork]

37 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

None of them were related to me, I have never met any of them .....

Why would I care about people I've never encountered?

Empathy. The deaths of strangers is unlikely to make us grieve but we can relate to their suffering, and hence care 

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, bannork said:

Empathy. The deaths of strangers is unlikely to make us grieve but we can relate to their suffering, and hence care 

Hundreds of thousands of people I don't know are dying as I write. Should I have empathy for all of them?

[furburglar]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

337 million out of 7 1/2 billion is statistically not very significant. The numbers will be replaced in a few weeks. Also as it mainly kills those with serious underlying health problems most of them, IMO, would probably have died by year's end.

It this was only happening in Africa it would get as much attention as Ebola does.

IMO = Licence To Bloviate

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, furburglar said:

IMO = Licence To Bloviate

[japanese]

On 7/14/2020 at 9:53 PM, Patts said:

Have you actually read the paper they are quote to back up their 17% HIT number? 

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081893v1.full.pdf

 

It's full of assumptions and estimates, nothing concrete at all.

 

From Nottingham Uni:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200623111329.htm

 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/198238/declines-covid-19-cases-herd-immunity-says/

 

The papers I have read from Oxford university suggest Herd immunity is reached once 90 to 95% of people are vaccinated

You mean the research and analysis with documented references prepared by 8 different academic organisations including The University of Oxford, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and The University of Edinburgh?

 

And as opposed to the shoddy New York Times article that apparently debunks everything with no proper references?  And in fact supports that the Swedish economy was not suffering until it hit the brick wall of the world economy slowing down due to bad policies?

 

And the other articles you reference completely support what I am saying.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200623111329.htm

 

"Summary:

Herd immunity to COVID-19 could be achieved with fewer people being infected than previously estimated, according to new research."

It suggests a figure of 43% although with no certainty, and there calculations are based on immunity through people catching the disease.  I see nothing here regarding when a percentage of the population is already immune, either through having contracted a different corona virus, or having T cell immunity.  These 2 things would drive down the required percentage for herd immunity down even further.

 

And this one:

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/198238/declines-covid-19-cases-herd-immunity-says/

 

Has been checking for antibodies and not finding them in significant numbers in Europe and Asian countries where infection rates have fallen...because they have just been delaying the epidemic, in the words of the author:

 

“Unfortunately we must conclude that herd immunity has not been reached and the virus can still spread substantially unless we continue to take measures against it.” Dr Lucy OkellStudy author

 

ie, leaving these countries to play whack-a-mole as I said.

 

Whilst Sweden on the other hand has just let the virus run.  No long term psychological and health issues there, and look at their curve.  Looks similar to anywhere as that is what viruses do:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

 

And to those that say Sweden has relatively high rates, I would answer not as high as some, and that is only currently where other countries are at. They may have a way to go as Dr Lucy above says. And they have all the other problems they have created with the reaction to the virus too. Sweden has almost beaten it already.

 

Further, as societies, we takes risks.  We do not ban driving due to deaths.  We do not close down a country for flu.  We have to consider the relative risk/benefits. Sweden has accepted 5,500 deaths to remain open and not screw up the prospects for people with other health issues, nor decimate peoples livelihoods, not psychologically damage kids etc etc etc.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/15/2020 at 12:53 AM, Patts said:

Have you actually read the paper they are quote to back up their 17% HIT number? 

 

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081893v1.full.pdf

 

It's full of assumptions and estimates, nothing concrete at all.

 

From Nottingham Uni:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200623111329.htm

 

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/198238/declines-covid-19-cases-herd-immunity-says/

 

The papers I have read from Oxford university suggest Herd immunity is reached once 90 to 95% of people are vaccinated

Dreaming if anyone thinks 90% of 8 billion people are going to be vaccinated

[bannork]

30 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Hundreds of thousands of people I don't know are dying as I write. Should I have empathy for all of them?

 In my experience, something/ someone that we can relate to, affects us. For instance, the death of a child, young person.

We imagine losing our young loved ones, and our hearts go out to those grieving  It could be someone who embodies our hopes, dreams, a person who has been important in our lives. I never met John Lennon but I miss him to this day.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, bannork said:

 In my experience, something/ someone that we can relate to, affects us. For instance, the death of a child, young person.

We imagine losing our young loved ones, and our hearts go out to those grieving  It could be someone who embodies our hopes, dreams, a person who has been important in our lives. I never met John Lennon but I miss him to this day.

?????????????

As you wrote that, children all over the world are starving to death, dying of easily treatable diseases, being exploited, being beaten, fossicking on garbage dumps to survive, but almost nothing is being done about it.

Seems to me not many agree with you.

 

Edited July 15, 2020 by thaibeachlovers

[bannork]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

?????????????

As you wrote that, children all over the world are starving to death, dying of easily treatable diseases, being exploited, being beaten, fossicking on garbage dumps to survive, but almost nothing is being done about it.

Seems to me not many agree with you.

 

The deaths you mention are only statistics to us, but when one of those statistics becomes personal, by whatever means, a blog, a documentary, a public appeal, then people often feel moved to take action. 

A common example in Thailand is when a child living a life of hardship, taking care alone of disabled parents for instance, is featured in a TV documentary, then offers of financial help pour in. 

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, bannork said:

The deaths you mention are only statistics to us, but when one of those statistics becomes personal, by whatever means, a blog, a documentary, a public appeal, then people often feel moved to take action. 

A common example in Thailand is when a child living a life of hardship, taking care alone of disabled parents for instance, is featured in a TV documentary, then offers of financial help pour in. 

I'm aware of all that. Yes the offers of help pour in FOR THAT CHILD. How about the THOUSANDS of other children that also need help? Most live lives of despair and die young and unloved.

[bannork]

44 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm aware of all that. Yes the offers of help pour in FOR THAT CHILD. How about the THOUSANDS of other children that also need help? Most live lives of despair and die young and unloved.

Absolutely, but what is your point? I was simply offering a theory about human empathy, personalisation.

[thaibeachlovers]

52 minutes ago, bannork said:

Absolutely, but what is your point? I was simply offering a theory about human empathy, personalisation.

I understand that, but I don't think there is much empathy around. It's lovely to talk about, but I see little of it in reality.

[BritManToo]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

?????????????

As you wrote that, children all over the world are starving to death, dying of easily treatable diseases, being exploited, being beaten, fossicking on garbage dumps to survive, but almost nothing is being done about it.

Seems to me not many agree with you.

 

Are they white children?

[japanese]

  

On ‎7‎/‎14‎/‎2020 at 7:06 PM, Patts said:

This one article pretty much debunks everything you have just said about Sweden:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/business/sweden-economy-coronavirus.html

 

You haven't factored in that different geographical location have wildly varying outcomes which could be due to environmental conditions or differing strains of the virus but without lockdown some European countries could have seen millions of confirmed cases and hundreds of thousands if not millions of deaths.  

 

Where the hell did you get 17% from for heard immunity, utter nonsense. Every single paper I've looked at suggest figures of 40% to 70% to reach immunity and most papers say that you need 90 to 95% to stop a virus spreading entirely. 

And a good response here to that NY Times article:

https://fee.org/articles/why-sweden-succeeded-in-flattening-the

 

Yes, Sweden flattened the curve.  NY didn't.  In fact most places didn't.  Sweden did.  Or I wonder whether they did, or that it was just the natural course of the virus, whilst lockdowns actually front loaded and may have increased deaths.  The rules regarding car homes in NY certainly caused more deaths, and infections that added to the numbers at the front end of the curve.

 

The divide in approach has become political with people who are fans of big govt threatened by Sweden's individual responsibility approach.  The 'establishment' is in danger of having the finger pointed at it as countries like Sweden did not destroy the lives of millions of people.

 

Sweden lost roughly 0.0005% of its population.  And even they could have done better if they had better protected its elderly population.

 

If the world had taken Sweden's approach we would be mourning a very bad flu-like season worldwide, rather than a destroyed world economy, people suffering from lack of treatment for other medical issues, psychological disorders and all the lives that will be lost as a consequence.

 

 

 

This one article pretty much debunks everything you have just said about Sweden:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/business/sweden-economy-coronavirus.html

 

You haven't factored in that different geographical location have wildly varying outcomes which could be due to environmental conditions or differing strains of the virus but without lockdown some European countries could have seen millions of confirmed cases and hundreds of thousands if not millions of deaths.  

 

Where the hell did you get 17% from for heard immunity, utter nonsense. Every single paper I've looked at suggest figures of 40% to 70% to reach immunity and most papers say that you need 90 to 95% to stop a virus spreading entirely.