Jump to content

Coronavirus


Anorthernsoul
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Renton said:

 

100,000 is the base case. For perspective flu kills up to 20,000 annually, the Spanish flu of 1918 killed 200,000 in the UK. That was particularly bad though because the young were disproportionately affected. A proper kick in the nuts after WW1. 

 

The numbers are tricky because the denominator isn't really known  - people unknowingly with the infection but not tested. I reckon there may already be thousands of these,  so there could be an explosion of cases soon. 

 

Isn't their base case a worst case though, i.e. there isn't really a base case that's been published? Given that it's killed 4,000 or so globally so far, I don't understand why you think it'll rinse through "hundreds of thousands" here? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assume 70% get the virus (its clearly very contagious so this is realistic). Assume a very optimistic mortality rate of 0.5% (not even factoring in hospitals will be overwhelmed with nowhere near enough respirators). That's  230,000 deaths. 

 

I think the mortality rate is key, which we don't know, because we don't know how many infected "well" there are. If we use unadjusted figures from the WHO, you're looking at 1.6 million deaths. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Gemmill said:

Pretty sure 70% is a very very worst case scenario. Why would we end up with 70% of the population when China has seen nothing like that. And China took a good while to act. 

 

China did react in a much more draconian way than we will though. At the moment, on average every person infects 3 others. That's exponential. Impossible to avoid it tbh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The closed case mortality rate in Italy, that's known cases  (confirmed with DNA testing) that have gone through their full natural history (I.e. you are either classified as recovered [test negative] or dead), is a staggering 39%. How many people just haven't been diagnosed, I dont know.

 

Not sure why I'm being accused of scaremongering here, or why people won't accept hundreds of thousands of lives are at risk. I'm just saying what is already known. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Renton said:

The closed case mortality rate in Italy, that's known cases  (confirmed with DNA testing) that have gone through their full natural history (I.e. you are either classified as recovered [test negative] or dead), is a staggering 39%. How many people just haven't been diagnosed, I dont know.

 

Not sure why I'm being accused of scaremongering here, or why people won't accept hundreds of thousands of lives are at risk. I'm just saying what is already known. 

There has been 4k deaths world wide.

Yet you think in the UK it's going to be in the hundreds of thousands. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

There has been 4k deaths world wide.

Yet you think in the UK it's going to be in the hundreds of thousands. 

 

Because the infection hasn't spread yet. But the government has admitted they cant now stop it. The maths is simple, massive loss of life is inevitable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ewerk said:

I think you're all assuming that this has peaked in the likes of China and Italy. It hasn't. This is going to continue rising for a long time yet.

I read it had peaked in China.  Or was that the duck?

I suppose with somewhere like China you wont know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wykikitoon said:

I read it had peaked in China.  Or was that the duck?

I suppose with somewhere like China you wont know. 

 

Affected areas in China are under complete lock down. Cases are still rising, but not as fast as before. Its really almost impossible to imagine how this wont become endemic though. How sustainable are lock downs like this? Can you see the UK following this?

 

Like I say, the best bet is to delay spread until summer, these viruses hate UV light. Then hope for a vaccine before next winter. My personal guess is 100,000 deaths is realistic, and indeed precedented. We can cope with that but it will be shit. I really hope the mortality data from Italy is flawed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

I read it had peaked in China.  Or was that the duck?

I suppose with somewhere like China you wont know. 

Cases have slowed according to official figure but they've taken massive steps to do so. The problem is when the lockdown finishes and there are still infected people out there. The current situation can't continue indefinitely. My fear is that it will increase again in the near future.

Edited by ewerk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen comparisons with the Spanish Flu.  But that was back in 1918 when medical wasn't advanced as it is now.  So are we making a fair comparrison?


I think it's something that needs respect and caution, but I hope the 100k you're saying Renton is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we've obviously made huge developments in healthcare and general nutrition and wellbeing since 1918 we've also become a far more interconnected world which means that pandemics can travel much further much faster than back then. 

I'm not sure there's much benefit in comparing the two but then again I have zero medical training.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

I have seen comparisons with the Spanish Flu.  But that was back in 1918 when medical wasn't advanced as it is now.  So are we making a fair comparrison?


I think it's something that needs respect and caution, but I hope the 100k you're saying Renton is wrong.

 

We don't have any pharmacological cures for this. We have much better supportive care, but limited capacity. It's very worrying.

 

I actually hope 100,000 is correct (this was from the CMO iirc). I think it's probably optimistic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why it’s a big deal

 

 

 

Patients in Italy who need ventilators are dying because the hospitals have run out of them. If you have COPD/Asthma or are elderly you have a 1 in 6 chance of dying if you catch the virus. That’s WITH treatment.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.