You may we’ll be right about the winter. Unfortunately, the government (and other governments) are going to have to start thinking about the possibility of serious limits on what people can do at Christmas. It’s also why the disgraced former defence secretary’s commitment to have all children back in school in September is a hostage to fortune. Of course we all hope they will be, but why make such a firm promise when there are factors you can’t control?

 

It’s a reactionary response to criticism and they’ve been doing this about all issues the whole time. At least in Wales we’ll be trialling part time school in July, something that can be carried on in September if things don’t change. Hopefully by then social distancing will be a bit looser.

It’s a reactionary response to criticism and they’ve been doing this about all issues the whole time. At least in Wales we’ll be trialling part time school in July, something that can be carried on in September if things don’t change. Hopefully by then social distancing will be a bit looser.

Indeed. That sums up this government’s approach in a nutshell. It’s all about short-term headlines.

55,000 new cases in Brazil today. I believe this is the one day peak above any other country now.

 

The US death rates seem to be consistently below 1,000 now. Interesting that cases have always been 20,000+ per day but deaths have steadily decreased. It would be good to know why in terms of whether the virus is weakening, whether medical staff are now better equipped and more knowledgeable on how to deal with the virus or whether the most vulnerable who would have been susceptible to the virus have already passed.

55,000 new cases in Brazil today. I believe this is the one day peak above any other country now.

 

The US death rates seem to be consistently below 1,000 now. Interesting that cases have always been 20,000+ per day but deaths have steadily decreased. It would be good to know why in terms of whether the virus is weakening, whether medical staff are now better equipped and more knowledgeable on how to deal with the virus or whether the most vulnerable who would have been susceptible to the virus have already passed.

The number of new cases falling more slowly than the number of deaths is probably because of a change in who is being tested. At the beginning of the epidemic, the testing capacity just wasn't there and a large proportion of tests were being performed on those being admitted to hospital, with more milder cases not being detected. Those being admitted to hospital are disproportionately older people at a greater risk of death, which will have artificially raised the death rate. Now that testing has been expanded, a greater proportion of all cases are detected, including those with mild forms of the disease.

55,000 new cases in Brazil today. I believe this is the one day peak above any other country now.

 

The US death rates seem to be consistently below 1,000 now. Interesting that cases have always been 20,000+ per day but deaths have steadily decreased. It would be good to know why in terms of whether the virus is weakening, whether medical staff are now better equipped and more knowledgeable on how to deal with the virus or whether the most vulnerable who would have been susceptible to the virus have already passed.

 

There is some evidence to suggest that as the virus has gradually mutated it has developed weaker and less fatal strains - this is apparently quite normal.

 

I would imagine a combination of more comprehensive testing, slightly weaker strains of Covid-19 and a slightly reduced number of most vulnerable people in the population have all played a part in this. IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) has been roughly estimated at between 0.5% (NYC) and 0.7% but varies massively with age... e.g. in 40-49 year olds it is typically 0.04% and much lower below this, whereas in >70 year olds it rises very quickly above 1% to 1/10 90 year olds.

 

If you take an average IFR of 0.6% and assume that the Covid-19 infections were spread evenly then you could estimate that around 10 million people have been infected in the UK. (60,000 excess deaths / 0.6% IFR = Total Covid-19 infections)

 

The WHO originally estimated IFR at 3.4% - which IMO was just scaremongering!

There is some evidence to suggest that as the virus has gradually mutated it has developed weaker and less fatal strains - this is apparently quite normal.

 

I would imagine a combination of more comprehensive testing, slightly weaker strains of Covid-19 and a slightly reduced number of most vulnerable people in the population have all played a part in this. IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) has been roughly estimated at between 0.5% (NYC) and 0.7% but varies massively with age... e.g. in 40-49 year olds it is typically 0.04% and much lower below this, whereas in >70 year olds it rises very quickly above 1% to 1/10 90 year olds.

 

The WHO originally estimated IFR at 3.4% - which IMO was just scaremongering!

If we take NYC's fatality rate estimate and apply it to UK deaths then this would mean that over 8 000 000 people in Britain have had the virus (300 000 cases have been officially detected).

Edited June 20, 20205 yr by Harve

If we take NYC's fatality rate estimate and apply it to UK deaths then this would mean that over 8 000 000 people in Britain have had the virus (300 000 cases have been officially detected).

 

I think the ONS study had estimates of around 6-8% of the population with antibodies, so that isn't far off - but probably can't assume that the infections have been evenly distributed, especially with the disastrous decision early on to discharge patients from hospital to care homes without proper testing in order to make capacity.

 

About 1/3, or 20K of excess deaths have been from care homes alone.

There is some evidence to suggest that as the virus has gradually mutated it has developed weaker and less fatal strains - this is apparently quite normal.

 

I would imagine a combination of more comprehensive testing, slightly weaker strains of Covid-19 and a slightly reduced number of most vulnerable people in the population have all played a part in this. IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) has been roughly estimated at between 0.5% (NYC) and 0.7% but varies massively with age... e.g. in 40-49 year olds it is typically 0.04% and much lower below this, whereas in >70 year olds it rises very quickly above 1% to 1/10 90 year olds.

 

If you take an average IFR of 0.6% and assume that the Covid-19 infections were spread evenly then you could estimate that around 10 million people have been infected in the UK. (60,000 excess deaths / 0.6% IFR = Total Covid-19 infections)

 

The WHO originally estimated IFR at 3.4% - which IMO was just scaremongering!

I wouldn't say it was scaremongering - the figures quoted supported the figure of 3.4%. However, I suspect the figures made no allowance for the number of asymptomatic cases, probably because they assumed the numbers were very low. There are now good reasons to believe there have been a lot of asymptomatic cases although we still have no real idea of how many.

 

Yes, it is quite normal for a virus to mutate to a less deadly strain. After all, for a virus to survive, it is not a good idea to kill a large number of hosts. if that mutation continues, we may get to a point where it is easier just to live with its continued existence. The only caveat to that is that we still don't know what the long-term effects are for people who have had it.

The asymptomatic rate isn't that great though, around 20% I think and mainly children or young adults, however I take your point. SAGE were estimating at or just below 1% for IFR but it is really difficult to come up with a useful estimate at the start of a pandemic which is why I was surprised they put that figure out there so quickly.

 

I suspect that the reason Italy was so badly affected initally was that it was quickly spread among the more highly susceptible older population (many <30s still live with older parents), conversely in Germany which has a similar age demographic to Italy it spread quickly among the healthy and younger population who are less likely to mix with older generations in the home.

 

Brazil is an interesting case.. clearly no such problems with Vitamin D nor an aging population and yet the 2nd highest death total in the world now.

You can blame a stupid president, no lockdown, a subpar health care system on the verge of collapsing for that

The asymptomatic rate isn't that great though, around 20% I think and mainly children or young adults, however I take your point. SAGE were estimating at or just below 1% for IFR but it is really difficult to come up with a useful estimate at the start of a pandemic which is why I was surprised they put that figure out there so quickly.

 

I suspect that the reason Italy was so badly affected initally was that it was quickly spread among the more highly susceptible older population (many <30s still live with older parents), conversely in Germany which has a similar age demographic to Italy it spread quickly among the healthy and younger population who are less likely to mix with older generations in the home.

 

Brazil is an interesting case.. clearly no such problems with Vitamin D nor an aging population and yet the 2nd highest death total in the world now.

 

Reasons noted above and densely populated favelas.

The stats are interesting at the moment as Peru, Chile, Pakistan will over take all of the European countries within the next couple of weeks, other than the U.K., yet have really low death rates in comparison, I guess we have to assume these countries are not recording all deaths or there are other reasons why Europe has been more susceptible to high deaths.

 

.

Edited June 20, 20205 yr by Alex P

A main part in that is that testing is more widely done than it was in Europe.

 

In the Netherlands +-900k people have antibodies, yet only 50k have tested positive due to the lack of test kits available at that time. I also am sceptical about the truth of the deaths as reports are coming in of covidpatients being noted as pneumonia in various countries but I donr think we'll ever find out

A main part in that is that testing is more widely done than it was in Europe.

 

In the Netherlands +-900k people have antibodies, yet only 50k have tested positive due to the lack of test kits available at that time. I also am sceptical about the truth of the deaths as reports are coming in of covidpatients being noted as pneumonia in various countries but I donr think we'll ever find out

 

I had an antibody test and it was negative. Not convinced it is accurate as I had a lot of the symptoms including loss of taste and smell back in March. Given I was on the underground everyday back in early March I can’t think what else it would have been.

 

So either faulty test, anti bodies don’t last long or I never had it in the first place.

There is some evidence to suggest that as the virus has gradually mutated it has developed weaker and less fatal strains - this is apparently quite normal.

 

I would imagine a combination of more comprehensive testing, slightly weaker strains of Covid-19 and a slightly reduced number of most vulnerable people in the population have all played a part in this. IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) has been roughly estimated at between 0.5% (NYC) and 0.7% but varies massively with age... e.g. in 40-49 year olds it is typically 0.04% and much lower below this, whereas in >70 year olds it rises very quickly above 1% to 1/10 90 year olds.

 

If you take an average IFR of 0.6% and assume that the Covid-19 infections were spread evenly then you could estimate that around 10 million people have been infected in the UK. (60,000 excess deaths / 0.6% IFR = Total Covid-19 infections)

 

The WHO originally estimated IFR at 3.4% - which IMO was just scaremongering!

I think the WHO initial estimates are as good as is reasonable to expect given that they initially had data from an uncooperative and unreliable source. Unlike other countries, China isn’t including asymptomatic people in their headline count of virus cases which impacts the reliability of the initial IFR

The accuracy of serological tests are questionable right now, as they produce a fast result. Thankfully it only gives false negatives, not false positives so that's something I guess :lol:

 

Molecular testing would be more accurate but also a lot more expensive and time consuming

A lot of the countries that are currently being hit are in the southern hemisphere ie it is their winter rather than our summer, so that could have an effect on cases. It will be worth keeping an eye on countries in the Southern Hemisphere that had handled their response to the outbreak reasonably well (New Zealand, Australia) to see if the changing of the seasons has any impact.

Interesting that you mention New Zealand.. the 2 women from the UK who arrived in the country this month and subsequently tested positive for Covid-19, well apparently they met up with friends and have generated over 400 contacts. So far a further 3 new Covid-19 positive cases have been traced from these contacts.

 

Oops.

New Zealand probably wish they hadn't opened up again.

 

I imagine the fact the Southern Hemisphere is in winter now only effects more southern nations as places like Brazil are near the equator and don't really have a winter so it would still be warm.

New Zealand probably wish they hadn't opened up again.

 

I imagine the fact the Southern Hemisphere is in winter now only effects more southern nations as places like Brazil are near the equator and don't really have a winter so it would still be warm.

 

I don't think it's that New Zealand wish they didn't open, but it just shows how trying to show compassion has led to a potential small outbreak. They should have been tested before they were let loose.

 

I think the different deatha dn infection rates just highlight what I have been banging on about for weeks now, there is now standard across countries so Governments across the world can present the data how they like. Like take our country for example, don't they suspect that for 22 odd days we had over 1,000 deaths per day for Covid-19? Yet it you look at our figures it doesn't say that. It's still a useful metric to give a vastly reduced estimate I suppose, but I don't think it's useful to be comparing like for like against countries as it's painfully obvious the real situation is far worse across the world in terms of infected and deaths.