Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Coronavirus: The Thread

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Coronavirus: The Thread

Old 21st May 2020, 10:32
  #7001 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 853
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
You will recall the reason, as stated by the Chief Medical Officer, fir the UK delaying the introduction of a lockdown was that the advice of the behavioural scientists was that obedience amongst the public would start to fail. Thus it was important to delay introduction until it would have the maximum effect.

Now it can be argued, based on evidence from elsewhere, that that the optimum moment was chosen a week too late. One could also argue that the politicians should have overruled what was only advice (as the scientists are now insisting). But the question remaining is, were the behavioural scientists correct in their forecast?

The preliminary evidence would seem to suggest yes.

https://order-order.com/2020/05/21/l...ng-guidelines/

Less Than Half of Young People Complying with Guidelines
I reckon they were pretty much spot-on. I suspect the lock-down was more successful (in terms of compliance) than even they ventured.
dead_pan is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 11:24
  #7002 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 54
Posts: 843
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
Social distancing, Green tick for yes, red cross for no...... How difficult could that be to understand? lol


Reflecting the dodgy placing of the ticks and crosses for the front bench. Putting a red tick opposite the dispatch box was bit silly!
Curious Pax is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 11:38
  #7003 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,618
Or perhaps deliberate....
ORAC is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 11:57
  #7004 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 798
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Those figures are a bit out of date. As of yesterday, 51 people had died from Covid-19 at Salisbury District Hospital, but there have been no new cases recorded here for nearly a week now. Wiltshire has one of the lowest infection rates for the whole of the UK, at just 102 cases per 100,000 people. It's been worse in the north of the county, in places like Swindon (~197 cases per 100,000), but much better down here in the south west corner of the county for some reason. To put those numbers into some sort of perspective, the average for England is 259 cases per 100,000 people, about 2 1/2 times greater than here.
Well, I did say the figures were only up to 17th April"
Meanwhile, I wouldn't be too complacent; it looks as though, if you catch Covid in Wiltshire, you have a fifty-fifty chance of ending up dead!
According to ONS figures, quoted by the BBC, there are 510 confirmed cases in Wiltshire and there were 246 coronavirus related deaths up the 8th May.
You may be better off in Hampshire, with figures of 3,193 cases and 776 deaths. Better odds there, I would say!
KelvinD is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:19
  #7005 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 378
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Well, I did say the figures were only up to 17th April"
Meanwhile, I wouldn't be too complacent; it looks as though, if you catch Covid in Wiltshire, you have a fifty-fifty chance of ending up dead!
According to ONS figures, quoted by the BBC, there are 510 confirmed cases in Wiltshire and there were 246 coronavirus related deaths up the 8th May.
You may be better off in Hampshire, with figures of 3,193 cases and 776 deaths. Better odds there, I would say!
The problem is the eternal one of trying to compare data, and assuming that correlation = causation. When comparing populations care needs to be taken to compare like with like. An example locally would be trying to compare Swindon with somewhere like Salisbury. The two places have very large differences in terms of average income, percentage of residents from different ethnic backgrounds, housing density, etc.

Another recent example of the danger of assuming that correlation = causation has been the assumption that being from the BAME section of our society makes you massively more likely to die from Covid-19, as ORAC highlighted above. It now looks as if it may well not be anywhere near as clear cut as this, as when corrections are applied to account for pre-existing health conditions etc, the numbers look broadly similar to those for the rest of the population, with a much smaller difference. What the raw data highlights isn't so much a Covid-19 issue, but that those from the BAME section of our society are more likely to have other conditions, and that those conditions then make them more susceptible to this disease. Hopefully the reasons for this can also be pinpointed, and efforts made to improve the health of this section of our society. Might be a sign of yet another failing in our social care system.
VP959 is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:33
  #7006 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,659
With all this spare time, I have "wasted/Invested" some of it looking at daily new infections for various areas. East Sussex is clearly the place to be. Only 1 new case, on average, per day over the last few days, and no admissions to the hospitals in Hastings/Eastbourne.
Even Slough has only 1 or 2 per day. And Slough was badly hit in the beginning.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:38
  #7007 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Ilmington, Warwickshire
Posts: 137
We are seeing a dramatic collapse in new infections.

Just over two weeks ago the daily figure was 6111, we're now seeing it drop below 2500.

Some very encouraging reports coming from London too where a tiny number of new cases are being recorded.

Really good news.
BehindBlueEyes is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:43
  #7008 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Stevenage
Posts: 19
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Another recent example of the danger of assuming that correlation = causation has been the assumption that being from the BAME section of our society makes you massively more likely to die from Covid-19, as ORAC highlighted above. It now looks as if it may well not be anywhere near as clear cut as this, as when corrections are applied to account for pre-existing health conditions etc, the numbers look broadly similar to those for the rest of the population, with a much smaller difference.
The studies only compare outcomes given that you are affected badly enough to be hospitalised. Recent immigrant ancestry (which should imply worse adaptation to Britain) makes one more likely to be hospitalised, even after accounting for pre-existing health conditions.
Richard W is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:51
  #7009 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: There and here
Posts: 1,939
I can't help but notice throughout this whole saga that consistently there have been statements made by researchers/scientists that XXXX makes your risk much higher/lower and then within a short while other statements are put out that XXXX doe NOT make you more/less likely to succumb to Covid-19..... I appreciate newer/better data is coming in, but it just seems to be a running theme.

I think that the summery weather IS making a lot of people think that things are over, more or less, or at least much reduced. The young will want to mingle and be sociable, it's hard-wired into our brains, and when the sun is out the birds and the bees are moved to dance their dance. This might not be clever, or wise, but it seems unstoppable outside of a full hard lockdown.
SpringHeeledJack is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:54
  #7010 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,659
But if you are African Black, Poor, Obese, and living in a multi-generation flat in Hackney, you are still buggared.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 12:55
  #7011 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 378
Originally Posted by Richard W View Post
The studies only compare outcomes given that you are affected badly enough to be hospitalised. Recent immigrant ancestry (which should imply worse adaptation to Britain) makes one more likely to be hospitalised, even after accounting for pre-existing health conditions.
Agreed, but my key point was to highlight the correlation = causation fallacy. When looking at data it's very easy to get suckered into believing something that is other than the data are really showing. For example, from this graph (taken from this site: Spurious Correlations ) one might assume that eating more cheese causes more people to die from getting tangled in their bedsheets:



VP959 is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 14:09
  #7012 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 11,902
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
Agreed, but my key point was to highlight the correlation = causation fallacy.
Even the Romans had a term for that - post hoc ergo propter hoc - it's been around so long.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 14:15
  #7013 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,618
The report identifies an equal outcome for all races who have been admitted to hospital. The later statistics I then posted should a marked correlation between admittance and fatality and diabetes. One place to look, then, is in the propensity amongst the BAME community to suffer from diabetes.

https://www.diabetes.org.uk/resource...he_uk_2010.pdf

Ethnicity

Type 2 diabetes is up to six times more common in people of South Asian descent and up to three times more common among people of African and African-Caribbean origin.

According to the Health Survey for England 2004, doctor-diagnosed diabetes is almost four times as prevalent in Bangladeshi men, and almost three times as prevalent in Pakistani and Indian men compared with men in the general population.

Among women, diabetes is more than five times as likely among Pakistani women, at least three times as likely in Bangladeshi and Black Caribbean women, and two-and-a-half times as likely in Indian women, compared with women in the general population.......

ORAC is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 14:36
  #7014 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: There and here
Posts: 1,939
What are the figures for those ethnicities within the countries/areas that they are traditionally from, I'm wondering if with the 'proper' diet the diabetes figures would be much lower.
SpringHeeledJack is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 14:45
  #7015 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 73
Posts: 798
VP959: I believe I may have rumbled you, your real name is Mr Gain Sayer, right? How's that for a spot of nominative determinism? Over the last few days, I have noticed that, if I was to say, for example, "Today is Thursday", it would take you only a few minutes to come up with an argument, proving what I said was specious and there would be a slew of quotations to prove me wrong.
When I quoted a German doctor's experience of tracking contacts, you chose to dispute that.
Now I quote ONS statistics for Wiltshire & Hampshire and you immediately launch into a rambling correlation vs causation! Nowhere did I try to compare any causes or any correlation. And don't for goodness sake. come back with "Oh yes you did! Wiltshire v Hampshire figures". That was a tongue in cheek dig at what could be seen by some as a complacent attitude. I would have thought the figures for cases of Covid-19 and the number of deaths were stark enough.
PS It IS Thursday
KelvinD is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 14:46
  #7016 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Ilmington, Warwickshire
Posts: 137
If being BAME is such a risk factor, how come we’re not seeing much higher proportional figures from Africa and the Indian subcontinent then?

In fact, the infection rate has been very low in the Caribbean too, although the fact that the nations are all individual islands and can quarantine easier is possibly a contributing factor,
BehindBlueEyes is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 14:52
  #7017 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: 3NM from LROP, 80ft AGL
Posts: 16
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
PS It IS Thursday
Why make such a controversial statement? It's Friday already in Australia.
MikeSnow is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 14:57
  #7018 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
....
The German doctor at the heart of the German response in Stuttgart has said he began testing very early in the epidemic and, in addition to simple testing, he began a contact tracing regime. Have a guess how many contacts each patient was found to have? Between 80 & 90! So these poor trackers could have as many as 800,000 people to contact per day!
Is there any way we can read any details about this?
Peter H is offline  
Old 21st May 2020, 15:15
  #7019 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 378
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
VP959: I believe I may have rumbled you, your real name is Mr Gain Sayer, right? How's that for a spot of nominative determinism? Over the last few days, I have noticed that, if I was to say, for example, "Today is Thursday", it would take you only a few minutes to come up with an argument, proving what I said was specious and there would be a slew of quotations to prove me wrong.
When I quoted a German doctor's experience of tracking contacts, you chose to dispute that.
Now I quote ONS statistics for Wiltshire & Hampshire and you immediately launch into a rambling correlation vs causation! Nowhere did I try to compare any causes or any correlation. And don't for goodness sake. come back with "Oh yes you did! Wiltshire v Hampshire figures". That was a tongue in cheek dig at what could be seen by some as a complacent attitude. I would have thought the figures for cases of Covid-19 and the number of deaths were stark enough.
PS It IS Thursday
Nothing at all to do with you.

It's about making assumptions from published data that may not be accurate, for a host of reasons. Plucking a few numbers from somewhere and using them to reinforce a strongly held belief has to be open to question, whoever does it. Boris Johnson was quite rightly challenged for putting a slogan on the side of a bus stating that the UK would save 350m/day from Brexit, and so should anyone else who chooses to use data to make a point without taking care to ensure that it would pass a reality check.

To answer the question, this specific quote:
Meanwhile, I wouldn't be too complacent; it looks as though, if you catch Covid in Wiltshire, you have a fifty-fifty chance of ending up dead!
clearly stated that if someone is infected with Covid-19 in Wiltshire they have a 50% chance of dying. The fact is that the data don't support this view. In order to be able to draw any conclusion as to what the true risk may be, the data need to be analysed carefully and corrected for a wide range of factors, such as differences in age distribution, income distribution, housing density, ethnic distribution etc between the various populations being compared. It's exactly the same issue as looking at the raw data for deaths amongst the BAME section of our society and comparing them with other sections. Unless the data are looked at carefully to ensure that any comparison is valid, there is a very good chance that any conclusion drawn may not be incorrect.
VP959 is online now  
Old 21st May 2020, 15:18
  #7020 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
I've been looking at the resources that other countries (notably Singapore and South Korea) have been putting into track and trace, and the mean number of contacts per new reported case they have been dealing with. I've no doubt there will be a great deal of variability, but given that we are required to maintain social distancing, and will be doing this for the foreseeable future, I struggle to see how everyone infected could come closer than 2m to ~80 people in a day.
I've been trying to come to grips with this. One possibility is that the discussion has widened to potential contacts. As in the recent Korean example.

What South Korea's Nightclub Coronavirus Outbreak Can Teach Other Countries as They Reopen https://time.com/5834991/south-korea...us-nightclubs/
Authorities have been on high alert since a 29-year-old man who visited several bars and nightclubs in early May tested positive. He is believed to be at least one of the individuals behind the new cluster. More than 100 people have tested positive and some 5,500 may have visited bars and nightclubs in the area around the same time as infected individuals.

From elsewhere: Authorities have tested more than 2,450 people who went to the night spots in the Itaewon neighbourhood, but were still trying to track about 3,000 more. Hundreds of other people who came into contact with club patrons have also been tested.

Peter H is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.