Caithness Map :: Links to Site Map Paying too much for broadband? Move to PlusNet broadband and save£££s. Free setup now available - terms apply. PlusNet broadband.  
Page 18 of 21 FirstFirst ... 81415161718192021 LastLast
Results 341 to 360 of 420

Thread: Coronavirus

  1. #341

    Default

    An extract from "Wee Ginger Dug", Paul Kavanagh's blog - dated 26 June 2020.

    It concerns the fact that 331 Tory MPs voted against given NHS and Care Staff weekly Covid19 tests. I was going to try to paraphrase what Paul said but he says it so succinctly it's easier just to quote him.

    ".....what they’ve all got in common is that every single one of this sorry shower of British nationalist apologists voted against a motion in the Commons which would have ensured that all NHS workers and care staff received weekly tests for coronavirus. What they’ve got in common is that in 2017 every single one of them voted against a pay rise for nurses. And what they also have in common is that all of them repeat the platitudes about clapping for NHS workers because they’ll make a show of supporting key workers, but won’t follow through with anything that actually has any substance to it. Yeah, this doesn’t reflect well upon them either, but then they’re Tory MPs so what were you expecting. Being a git is very much on brand for this lot. They don’t care. They didn’t care. They never cared. This is what you get when you vote Tory."

  2. #342

    Default

    A very heart warming story on BBC Scotland page about the Scottish pilot who has survived Covid in South Vietnam and become something of a celebrity there at the same time, as a result. South Vietnam has done amazingly well with this virus.

  3. #343

    Default

    One of the hardest bits of data to find in all this carry on is the number of people, particularly in the UK, who have died due to coronavirus, and not just with coronavirus.

    My Dad died some years ago with a replacement hip. That's not what was the finish of him, but it's totally true to say he died with a replacement hip.

    I have read a number of sources that say the number of people who have died in the UK due to coronavirus is around 2000, and the number under age 60 it's around 600.

    But it's very hard to find definitive data on this. All some folk want to count is where coronavirus is mentioned on the death certificate. I am sure the word Sex is mentioned on every death certificate, but is unlikely to be, a few cases excepted, the real cause of a persons demise.

    Any reliable source links much appreciated.

  4. #344
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,710

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orkneycadian View Post
    ...But it's very hard to find definitive data on this...
    Hmmm... I wonder why?

    Quote Originally Posted by orkneycadian View Post
    ...Any reliable source links much appreciated.
    I guess you looked & couldn't find one... Once again, I wonder why?
    “We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine....
    And the machine is bleeding to death."


  5. #345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alrock View Post
    Hmmm... I wonder why?
    Probably to help keep us on our toes with mental arithmetic.

    So, the present number of confirmed cases in the UK is 290,133 (source = worldometers)

    Back in May, an Orkney doctor (Dr Drew) went on the Jeremy Vine show and stated that in his opinion, the number of symptomatic cases in Orkney was more likely 200 to 300 and not the 7 that was being recorded at the time.

    So, let's see, 290,133 x (250 / 7) = 10,362,000 people in the UK who have exhibited symptoms, whether diagnosed in a clinical setting, or self diagnosed at home.

    85% of people have no symptoms. That figure came out of China very early on, and had been affirmed by data from the Herefordshire farm where just a few of the 73 who tested positive had any symptoms.

    So, 10,362,000 / 0.15 = 69,079,000 of us have had it in some form or another.

    Now, what's the official UK population? Ah yes, that's right, 67.9 million, though the supermarkets reckon it's closer to 80 or 90 million based on their data mining.

    So, that explains why cases are flattening off. We have almost all had it. 85% of us didn't notice, 10,362,000 of us noticed, 290,133 of those that noticed had a clinical test, 40 odd thousand folk died of the usual kinds of things folk die of, but were posthumously found to have the virus in their system (just like the rest of us), about 2000 of those 40 odd thousand died solely of coronavirus, and about 600 of those 2000 were under 60 years of age.

    Nothing like a bit of mental arithmetic to keep things in perspective.
    Last edited by orkneycadian; 13-Jul-20 at 19:15.

  6. #346

    Default

    Well, you have to give it to Orkneycadian; his arithmetic is absolutely mental.

  7. #347
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    by the sea
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    When the rule about wearing masks in shops came in I wondered about the shop assistants and see that in England they are not required to wear them. Don't know what the rule is in Scotland as I haven't been shopping since it started. Check-out staff are behind screens so that's OK. Customers don't have to wear them for long but if assistants had to wear them I can see this being a problem. On the other hand does it make sense for them not to when they are around customers? Or are they all regularly tested - somehow doubt it.
    The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.


  8. #348

    Default

    One aspect my arithmetic struggles to deal with is that here were are, in the middle of an extremely deadly pandemic, with a virus so debilitating that 85% of people need to get tested to even know they have it.

    And then, the governments Office for National Statistics go and publish some data that shows that for the 3rd week running, the number of deaths, in this very very deadly pandemic is lower than the average for this time of year;

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...nglandandwales

    I am trying to work out a "deadliness index" for this virus, but I keep getting a negative number. Can any mathematicians on 'e Org help me out please?

  9. #349

    Default

    Plenty of people in the States have thought the same way as you do and sadly, look at them now. I watched an interview with one of them who had believed that the virus was fake news and just a hoax. He caught it, became rapidly severely ill, spent 2 weeks on a ventilator and is now, back home, struggling to get back to any semblance of health and with considerable post-viral disability. He was in his 40s. Have you seen the footage from Brazil with all the acres of new graves rapidly filling up?
    In Caithness in the shops that I have been in at least, the store staff are now wearing masks.

  10. #350
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Watten area
    Posts
    234

    Default

    Covid-19 is deadly, while the overall death rate per infected may be around 1-2% this is actually meaningless. For people who are older and have underlying health issues such as diabetes and high blood pressure the death rate is far higher.

    The other issue is that other long term health issues are now being reported worldwide for people who have been infected, even for people that have not been very ill with the disease. This includes damage to the brain, heart and lungs. Not trying to scare anyone however I would suggest that nobody should underestimate the health issues with this virus.

  11. #351

    Default

    Pretty much the point I was trying to make, richardj.

    As you say, for older folk, diabetics and those with underlying health conditions, there is greater risk. But an awful lot of emphasis is placed on the number of people who have died with coronavirus, and not those who have died of coronavirus. Remember, right back at the beginning of this, when reporting number of deaths, the media meticulously added "all had underlying health conditions".

    Now we are seeing that, whilst for the last few months, total deaths was higher than the 5 year average for the time of year, for the last 3 weeks, total deaths is under that average. That alone is rather bizarre whilst we are in the middle of a deadly pandemic. What will be rather telling us to look at that figure over the whole of 2020. Will we see the first 6 months being above the average followed by the last 6 months being as equally below the average? Only time will tell.

    My play on the mental arithmetic highlights what could actually be very possible. Most recently, at the farm in Herefordshire, most of the 73 who tested positive felt absolutely fine, and were stunned to have returned a positive result. How many more of us would have returned the same result had we been tested?

  12. #352
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    340

    Default

    Deaths involvingcoronavirus (COVID-19) in Scotland Week28 (06 to 12July2020) at:

    https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files/...rt-week-28.pdf


    On page 26 "COVID-19 deaths at a small area levelA breakdown of deaths involving COVID by intermediate zone is available in table S8 of the additional analysis spreadsheet. Intermediate zones are a statistical geography that sit between datazones and local authorities. There are 1,279 intermediate zones covering the whole of Scotland and their populations ranges between 2,500 and 6,000."

    https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files/...s-week-28.xlsx

    Table S8 Numbers and crude rates of deaths involving COVID-19, by Intermediate Zone, between 1st March 2020 and 30th June 2020

    Figures relating to Caithness extracted and put on following graphic:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Numbers and crude rates1 of deaths involving COVID-19, by Intermediate Zone, between 1st March 2.png 
Views:	47 
Size:	22.7 KB 
ID:	35267

  13. #353

    Default

    They can't seem to be able to allow themselves to say "Deaths caused by Coronavirus" can they? Always had to be "Deaths Involving Coronavirus" or "Where Covid was mentioned in the death certificate"

  14. #354

    Default

    So yesterday was a day of rather interesting revelations.

    We had Matt Hancock saying that the way that deaths are counted "involving" coronavirus requires a major shake up. This on the BBC Radio 2 news around lunchtime. Hypothetical examples were given of someone who tested positive for Coronavirus in February, who was run over and killed by a bus in July would be counted as a coronavirus death.

    Then we had Ian Duncan Smith on the Jeremy Vine show stating that survey data shows that just 4% of people who die "with coronavirus", die "of coronavirus". The other 96% had, in his words, "co-mortalities"

    So where does that sit with the earlier estimations in "mental arithmetic"?

    Well, if there have been 45,223 UK deaths (source = Worldometers, Coronavirus section), then just 1,809 of these died from coronavirus rather than "with coronavirus" or "where coronavirus was mentioned" Not far below the 2,000 estimated above.

    At last, some perspective and real numbers.

    Compare the 1,809 coronavirus deaths in the first ~6 months of 2020, with the likely 165,000 cancer deaths in the UK per year for some further perspective. Or you could compare with the 1,743 road traffic fatalities recorded in 2018.

    Now, unlike cancer, if we didn't want all this upheaval, and small number of deaths in the UK, we had a choice. Cancer unfortunately is not something we can keep out of the country, even if we tried.

  15. #355

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by orkneycadian View Post
    One aspect my arithmetic struggles to deal with is that here were are, in the middle of an extremely deadly pandemic, with a virus so debilitating that 85% of people need to get tested to even know they have it.

    And then, the governments Office for National Statistics go and publish some data that shows that for the 3rd week running, the number of deaths, in this very very deadly pandemic is lower than the average for this time of year;

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...nglandandwales

    I am trying to work out a "deadliness index" for this virus, but I keep getting a negative number. Can any mathematicians on 'e Org help me out please?
    Still struggling with this "deadliness index". That's now 4 weeks on the trot where the UK's death rate has been below the 5 year average;

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulat...ding10july2020

    And to quote from that report.....

    In Week 28, the number of deaths registered was 6.1% below the five-year average (560 deaths fewer), this is the fourth consecutive week that deaths have been below the five-year average; the number of deaths in care homes, hospitals and other communal establishments were also fewer than the five-year average, while the number of deaths in private homes was 706 deaths higher than the five-year average.

    So, this pandemic has, for the last 4 weeks in the UK, resulted in a lower death rate than average. And meanwhile, the worlds population has increased by about 45 million. And this is a deadly pandemic? Comparing conoravius to the Spanish Flu outbreak in 1918 - 1920, https://ourworldindata.org/spanish-f...%20population. suggests that at the time of that outbreak, the worlds population was growing by 13 million per year. Then along came Spanish Flu, and caused the deaths of anywhere between 20 and 50 million. So as that link above suggests, the worlds population declined. Yet here we are, in a deadly pandemic, where the worlds population continues to increase, with almost a negligible slowing down?

    A pandemic where the UK death rate is below average, and the global population growth is almost completely unaffected? A strange definition of a pandemic if ever there was.

  16. #356

    Default

    We are in the early stages of the global pandemic- I'm surprised you haven't realised that when you set yourself up to be such an expert. In many countries, infection rates are rising exponentially and sadly, that will result in many many deaths, in countries least able to withstand it and among the poorest. I find it very sad and certainly don't wish to see people dying on mass while you seem to almost relish the prospect. Even in European countries, incidence and outbreaks are rising again and the fear in these islands, is for a covid 19 combined with flu epidemic this winter. The Spanish flu actually killed more people second time around. My maternal great uncle was one of them, having survived the First World War, he died from Spanish flu aged 38.
    It is a pity that you do not show more compassion but maybe it is not too late. Disasters Emergency Committee and Unicef are among the many seeking donations to combat Covid 19.

  17. #357

    Default

    I realize what you are saying....on the other hand when The Aids Prob arose, some years later it was discovered that in some poor Countries, every person who died, did so from Aids...Reason....More money was available to them.
    And each Country has it’s own reporting criteria.
    And I heard from ‘a person in authority‘ that certain Hospitals do not want to be known as the Hosp., with the most Covid deaths!
    Sends an ominous msg on accuracy!

  18. #358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fulmar View Post
    I find it very sad and certainly don't wish to see people dying on mass while you seem to almost relish the prospect.
    Not sure where that concept came from? In the very early stages, I was rather concerned about this, and the growth rates. I tried to bring to folks attention, the exponential growth rates that were happening in China. But no-one seemed to be batting an eyelid on here back then. Thats when we could have taken real action, in closing our borders. But that, to some, if not most, seemed a completely unpalatable action.

    So, having passed up on our chance to keep this virus out, we embraced its arrival, by welcoming tens of thousands of arrivals a day through our ports and airports. That inevitably led to its spread. It was only after that, that people started paying attention, and rather than every death being reported as "with underlying health conditions" the focus seem to change to "Died with coronavirus"

    Since then, we seem to have almost developed a fascination for this virus and the more it can be bigged up, the better. As a result, about 1900 deaths from coronavirus has become 45,000 deaths with coronavirus. Hundreds of thousands, soon to become millions of people in the UK have lost their jobs, and we have brought on the biggest recession in 300 years, all for not a lot of purpose. And now we have the inconvenient truth that the death rate in the UK has been lower than the 5 year average for the last 4 weeks. And as a result, 3 times more people now die from common or garden flu and pneumonia than they are of (or even with) coronavirus. And the number of people who are likely to die early of undiagnosed conditions like cancer, has a high probability of going through the roof.

    We had our chance to keep coronavirus out of the country. Instead, we welcomed it in. Time then now to make sure that (and I think this might be a bit late too.....) that the pill is not worse than the ill. With ~1900 folk having died in the UK from coronavirus, now is the time to make sure we don't have more than that dying from other things.

    As for other countries? Well, its fair to say that the UK has more than its fair share of problems at the moment. If other countries were to count only deaths from, and not with coronavirus, they will find it not as bad as places like the UK have made it out to be. As for the UK helping out? Well, we are still firing vast amounts of foreign aid all over the world. For example, we were sending £71m to China each year, even though they are the worlds second largest economy;

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/f...-a4506646.html

    Dominic Raab slashes foreign aid to China after £71m taxpayers' cash paid in one year

    We send foreign aid to India, even though they are rich enough to have their own space programme

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian...h_Organisation

    And we send lots of money to countries that then go and spend it on arms, Bob Geldof found out to his disappointment.

    https://www.spin.com/featured/live-a...eldof-feature/

    Though I think he managed to cover up that disappointment and continue trying to deny that much of the Live Aid money went on arms.

    With the first wave having been something of a damp squib, it seems now that the scaremongers have moved onto the fabled Second Wave. Anything to try and squeeze some more out of the furlough scheme and get some more paid holidays.

  19. #359

    Default

    What an imagination you have. You should write a book- maybe you already have.

  20. #360

    Default

    Could someone explain Sturgeon’s 3 day Turnaround on Spain Quarantine?
    Seems a bit of a Faux Pas?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •