Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Poll

How many will die of Covid19 in the 2020s directly and indirectly

Less than 10,000
10 (14.7%)
10,000-100,000
9 (13.2%)
100,000-1,000,000
9 (13.2%)
One to ten million
13 (19.1%)
Ten to a hundred million
14 (20.6%)
Hundred million to one billion
9 (13.2%)
Over a billion
4 (5.9%)

Total Members Voted: 60

Voting closed: March 03, 2020, 12:39:52 AM

Author Topic: COVID-19  (Read 594272 times)

Shared Humanity

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 443
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11800 on: April 17, 2021, 12:58:27 AM »
Cheerio Thomas.

No such luck I'm afraid. Tommy has taken up trolling me on Twitter:

Quote
4 of 4

And it is stunning that you don't appear to know these things either.
"Anger, stress, dysregulation...decreased expression of the anti‐inflammatory cytokine interleukin‐10 in response to exposure to influenza virus"

Well. I'm sympathetic but as long as he is entertained there, he may not come back here.

zufall

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11801 on: April 17, 2021, 09:49:04 AM »
New cases in Europe declined in 2/3 of countries compared to the previous week, as can now be seen on Worldometers. But there may be distortions because of Easter, so I decided to compare this week to the last full work week before Easter. Here we see roughly the same division between countries where case numbers increased and where they declined, only that the magnitude is more pronounced. So the trend is that a majority of countries reduced their case numbers significantly.

No country is at or near 1,000 cases per million and day; Turkey and Sweden come closest.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 10:18:37 AM by zufall »

nadir

  • New ice
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11802 on: April 17, 2021, 01:23:14 PM »
“I DONT WANT POLITICS MIXED IN MY MEDICAL DECISIONS”
Bill Maher got it almost 100% right this time IMO (arrived at the conclusion maybe six months late).



crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2928
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 192
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11803 on: April 17, 2021, 01:42:16 PM »
New cases in Europe ...

No country is at or near 1,000 cases per million and day; Turkey and Sweden come closest.

Turkey highest in Europe yes, but Sweden?

Seems to come after Hungary, France, Croatia and Poland.

#   Country,
Other   Cases in the last 7 days   Cases in the preceding 7 days   Weekly Case % Change   Cases in the last 7 days/1M pop
1   Bermuda   403   365   +10%   6,490
2   Uruguay   21,623   26,378   -18%   6,208
3   Curaçao   860   1,738   -51%   5,224
4   Turkey   404,382   345,361   +17%   4,754
5   Bahrain   7,809   7,826   -0.2%   4,468
6   Seychelles   439   136   +223%   4,442
7   Hungary   36,383   35,039   +4%   3,774
8   France   243,820   238,742   +2%   3,729
9   Croatia   15,234   11,948   +28%   3,729
10   Argentina   160,747   124,728   +29%   3,531
11   Poland   132,069   140,531   -6%   3,493
12   Sweden   35,133   38,007   -8%   3,462

zufall

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 53
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11804 on: April 17, 2021, 02:11:13 PM »
For Sweden, worldometers' case count in the weekly statistics does not match the difference between the total reported cases today and the total reported last week. There seems to be some data adjustment over the week, I don't know. Their source FOHM counts the covid deaths per day of death, not per reporting day, unlike other countries. Maybe it's the same for the cases. But the reported case numbers are comparable to other countries, so I use that number.

karl dubhe2

  • New ice
  • Posts: 69
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11805 on: April 17, 2021, 04:02:57 PM »
When the thread was started I picked high; 100 million to a billion dead.   I was hoping to be rong, as I'm usually wrong when making WAG.    A year later and we're at 3 million official dead people, with variants rampaging and a vaccine production level that seems not to be able to give a shot to everyone on Earth.

Could you math wizards tell me that there's no way in Canada that my WAG is gonna happen.   :)   Thanks.   

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6834
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2507
  • Likes Given: 2265
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11806 on: April 17, 2021, 04:09:38 PM »
With IFR <1%, 100 million was not going to happen in any reasonable scenario even if no vaccine was found. As it is, the mRNA vaccines have a good potential to prevent most further deaths, once enough manufacturing capacity exists, they are distributed worldwide and booster shots are generated quickly for any new variants that escape the original vaccines. But 10 million could still yet happen, while developed and developing countries' politicians are bungling the response even at this late stage and many poor countries are not really responding.

bbr2315

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 557
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 89
  • Likes Given: 77
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11807 on: April 17, 2021, 04:30:45 PM »
With IFR <1%, 100 million was not going to happen in any reasonable scenario even if no vaccine was found. As it is, the mRNA vaccines have a good potential to prevent most further deaths, once enough manufacturing capacity exists, they are distributed worldwide and booster shots are generated quickly for any new variants that escape the original vaccines. But 10 million could still yet happen, while developed and developing countries' politicians are bungling the response even at this late stage and many poor countries are not really responding.
I would think we are probably at 5-7.5 million deaths globally by now, we will probably double that before the end due to what you mentioned (so final count somewhere between 10-15 million). The official count is ~3 million to date, given the vast undercount in many developed AND developing countries (and China, which has no information but nearly 20% of the global population), 5-7.5 million is a reasonable estimate.

Russia is nearing 500K, US is past 600K, Mexico is way over 300K, Brazil is ~400K. Peru is over 100K, Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, another 100K. That is 2 million right there. EU is 650K officially, probably 750K+ unofficially.

China is probably at 1.5 million dead based on anecdotal reports on urns / sulfur dioxide emissions from bodies being burned. India could easily get to 1-2 million before they achieve herd immunity, the same could occur in Africa.

Probable final tallies?

China: 1.5M (estimate)
India: 1.5M
USA: 650K
Russia: 550K
Brazil: 500K
Mexico: 400K
EU: 1M

That alone is 6.2 million. And about half the world's population. So ~12ish is probably a reasonable guess.

On China: https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/doubts-02172021092531.html

It is apparent that the death toll in Hubei alone may have been 150K+++. Taking US mortality rate on a population of 1.4 billion = 2.8 million dead. A Russian death toll equivalent would be almost five million dead. The estimate of 1.5 million could be much too low.

Jeju-islander

  • New ice
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11808 on: April 17, 2021, 04:47:45 PM »
A paper by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
Population-wide testing of SARS-CoV-2: country experiences and potential approaches in the EU/EEA and the United Kingdom
has this graphic about false positives for pcr testing.


The paper references a study that actually tested the accuracy of the tests.
Multicentre comparison of quantitative PCR-based assays to detect SARS-CoV-2, Germany, March 2020


Jim Hunt

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4920
  • Stay Home, Save Lives
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 539
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11809 on: April 17, 2021, 04:50:16 PM »
I'm sympathetic but as long as he is entertained there, he may not come back here.

I've declined the opportunity to entertain Tommy further:

https://twitter.com/jim_hunt/status/1383326429501267968
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein

crandles

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2928
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 192
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11810 on: April 17, 2021, 04:52:11 PM »
With IFR <1%, 100 million was not going to happen in any reasonable scenario even if no vaccine was found.

If infection and vaccines only produced 2 or 3 months of immunity 7bn population 1% IFR and lots of people getting it twice as a result such that infections = 150% of worldwide population. Then you have 1% of 10.5bn infections so over 100 million deaths.

This is not a good scenario and I don't believe it is going to happen, but can you rule it out as 'not a reasonable scenario'?

10 bn infections in 10 years would be 2.7million infections per day. We are currently at about .75 million confirmed cases per day. There are more infections than confirmed cases by perhaps a significant margin and the number is currently growing quite quickly so the decade time horizon doesn't seem to rule it out completely. (Perhaps particularly if infectiousness and IFR of new variants continue to get worse.)

My hope and expectation is that vaccine production capacity will increase, new variant boosters will be approved faster, vaccines already in production will provide some protection against new variants, and immunity seems likely to typically last longer than 6 months and so on. Thus I expect that infections are likely to reduce considerably as more people get vaccinated.

However can we rule out new variants emerging that escape vaccine protection faster than we can keep up with developing booster vaccines? I suggest it perhaps takes something other than a bit of basic maths to be able to rule this out.

Appealing to maths wizards seems the wrong people to be asking to me. ;)
 

Thomas Barlow

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 219
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 28
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11811 on: April 17, 2021, 05:23:55 PM »
Maybe you can start with my post that Jim came to with an article that literally lies when it says "covid-19 is dangerous to the elderly".
It's not.
There's a 98% survival rate among the very elderly population.
27 million people over 80 years-old in Europe, and only 660,000 deaths all-ages = At least 98% survival-rate among that >80 group (most have pre-existing immunity from other coranaviruses over their long lives). And that ratio is seen in any region, no matter what the policies.

Jim neglected to review the article, as science-denial is now his modus-operandi:
"the “fight” component in the fight‐flight reflex, the psychophysiology of anger overlaps with that of stress. Stress related factors are known to depress immune function and increase susceptibility to or exacerbate a host of diseases and disorders including asthma, hypertension, upper respiratory infection, various skin diseases, chronic fatigue syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, vasovagal syncope and, more obviously, various psychiatric disorders. Indeed, it is hard to find a disease for which emotion or stress plays absolutely no part in symptom severity, frequency, or intensity of flare‐ups."
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2104758/

And then similar science in that thread, referring to similar effects of pollution and unhealthy lifestyles.

Add all that up as hugely exacerbating factors on a respiratory disease that has a 98% general population survival-rate among the elderly. There's up to 10 times the cases than are recorded, most have already been exposed (even people - covid-free - at sea for a month, or in Antarctica have been exposed or infected.)

Follow his immaculate logic in the thread.
It is quite entertaining. Not a single coherent response.
It's also educational, as he only showed you part of the science that shows the reasons a very weak virus can have such an effect on a population, and on a dysfunctional society (which is now becoming like a police-state in some places. Literally. There is no coming back to freedom after this. Hunker down forever under the police-state. It's your position in life now. I'll be having a great time.)
Entertaining thread kicked-off by Jim coming to my post: https://twitter.com/barlow2021/status/1380158329805213705
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 07:46:54 PM by Thomas Barlow »
My YouTube channel - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfk66dfLTAsZIVYbh7bqcoA/videos - talks about climate-change, environmental destruction, BLM, lockdown-hysteria, vampire-capitalism.

El Cid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1545
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 610
  • Likes Given: 125
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11812 on: April 17, 2021, 05:45:56 PM »
With IFR <1%, 100 million was not going to happen in any reasonable scenario even if no vaccine was found.

If infection and vaccines only produced 2 or 3 months of immunity 7bn population 1% IFR and lots of people getting it twice as a result such that infections = 150% of worldwide population. Then you have 1% of 10.5bn infections so over 100 million deaths.

1. 1% IFR is valid only for "old" countries, US, Europe. Everywhere else where they have young populations IFR is likely 0,1-0,2% populationwide (Indian data show this eg)
2. We already know that infection and vaccines produce at least 6 months' immunity. Based on MERS, SARS1 and common cold coronaviruses natural immunity is likely at least 1 year.
3. mRNS vaccines give you much stronger immunity than natural infection, hence immunity could be 2-3 years even with those vaccines
3. Based on the study among British nurses reinfection is almost always milder and even asymptomatic in 70-80% of cases.

The main risk currently is new variants but that is still pretty uncharted territory in terms of vaccines-resistance, mortality, etc.

***
On another note:

Chile published a large scale real life study on Sinovac (first generation vaccine, similar to Sinopharm) based on millions of vaccined in Chile (vs unvaccined).

Conclusions:

One shot is basically good for nothing
Two shots give you 67% protection from infection and 80% protection from death. A far cry from mRNS vaccines but quite similar to AstraZeneca or J&J's oneshot.

karl dubhe2

  • New ice
  • Posts: 69
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 20
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11813 on: April 17, 2021, 08:12:09 PM »
With IFR <1%, 100 million was not going to happen in any reasonable scenario even if no vaccine was found.

If infection and vaccines only produced 2 or 3 months of immunity 7bn population 1% IFR and lots of people getting it twice as a result such that infections = 150% of worldwide population. Then you have 1% of 10.5bn infections so over 100 million deaths.

Appealing to maths wizards seems the wrong people to be asking to me. ;)

Well, you've done a better job of explaining things than the media's done, so hey.  There's that.   :D    I'm more confident of being wrong, and on a science forum that's where I usually am.   All's good.


Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 943
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 167
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11814 on: April 17, 2021, 08:13:56 PM »
graphic about false positives for pcr testing.


Again its assuming that negative samples cross contaminated by other negative samples give positive results and consequently vastly overstating the potential size of the problem at low prevalence. The amount of samples contaminated by virus from other samples is zero when there is no virus in the other samples. That report is 8 months out of date and even then it finds that are PCR tests which just don't return a positive unless there is virus in a sample. Cross contamination happens, but it doesn't get worse at low prevalence. The UK has done lots of low prevalence mass testing and has yet to reach a point where prevalence is low enough for false positives to matter, even though reports like this say the false positive rate was going to be so high that doing the tests would be pointless.

The theory has a massive hole in it (cross contamination of two negative samples does not generate a positive result) and ignoring reports like this and actually going out and doing mass testing has proven that these estimates are gross exaggerations.

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 943
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 167
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11815 on: April 17, 2021, 08:41:39 PM »
When the thread was started I picked high; 100 million to a billion dead.   I was hoping to be rong, as I'm usually wrong when making WAG.    A year later and we're at 3 million official dead people, with variants rampaging and a vaccine production level that seems not to be able to give a shot to everyone on Earth.

Could you math wizards tell me that there's no way in Canada that my WAG is gonna happen.   :)   Thanks.
The chance of someone dying if they get COVID before they get vaccinated is roughly the same as a year's worth of chances of dying from everything else put together.
Not everyone will get it.
Some people will get it more than once.
Some people will be substantially protected by vaccination or prior infection.
Not all deaths will be counted.
World deaths in 2019 were about 60M.

Put that lot together and I don't think 100M will be counted, but its the round number I'd pick for the top end of a plausible range with pessimistic assumptions about immunity fading and vaccine protection against spread.
With optimistic assumptions about vaccine efficacy and rollout I think its quite possible that the count doesn't reach 10M.

The Walrus

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1021
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 120
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11816 on: April 17, 2021, 09:25:03 PM »
With IFR <1%, 100 million was not going to happen in any reasonable scenario even if no vaccine was found.

If infection and vaccines only produced 2 or 3 months of immunity 7bn population 1% IFR and lots of people getting it twice as a result such that infections = 150% of worldwide population. Then you have 1% of 10.5bn infections so over 100 million deaths.

1. 1% IFR is valid only for "old" countries, US, Europe. Everywhere else where they have young populations IFR is likely 0,1-0,2% populationwide (Indian data show this eg)
2. We already know that infection and vaccines produce at least 6 months' immunity. Based on MERS, SARS1 and common cold coronaviruses natural immunity is likely at least 1 year.
3. mRNS vaccines give you much stronger immunity than natural infection, hence immunity could be 2-3 years even with those vaccines
3. Based on the study among British nurses reinfection is almost always milder and even asymptomatic in 70-80% of cases.

The main risk currently is new variants but that is still pretty uncharted territory in terms of vaccines-resistance, mortality, etc.

***
On another note:

Chile published a large scale real life study on Sinovac (first generation vaccine, similar to Sinopharm) based on millions of vaccined in Chile (vs unvaccined).

Conclusions:

One shot is basically good for nothing
Two shots give you 67% protection from infection and 80% protection from death. A far cry from mRNS vaccines but quite similar to AstraZeneca or J&J's oneshot.

1.  Not to mention the high fatality rate among the elderly during the first wave as it rampaged its way through various homes.  Since the elderly were first in line for vaccines in these countries, current cases are occurring in the young, with significantly fewer deaths.  UAR and Qatar have the lowest elderly population (>65), and their CFRs are 0.2% and 0.3% respectively. 
2.  After which time, a second round or vaccines should be available for continuous coverage.
3.  Which matches the declining death rate in the worldometer tables.

At this point, I would be shocked if he surpassed 10 M with the next 20 months.  In the long run, we may, if this virus lingers around like the flu every year.

vox_mundi

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5219
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2638
  • Likes Given: 403
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11817 on: April 17, 2021, 10:36:28 PM »
Ontario Gives Police Sweeping Powers as Covid Crisis Spirals Out of Control
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/16/ontario-coronavirus-police-powers-covid-canada

Ontario has announced sweeping new police powers to enforce an extended stay-at-home order, in the latest sign that officials in Canada’s most populous province have lost control of the rapidly spreading coronavirus.

The restrictions came as new modeling forecast more than 15,000 new cases a day in Ontario by June if current growth continues – even with vaccinations. If measures are weakened prematurely, the province could see more than 30,000 a day. Ontario announced a record 4,812 new cases on Friday.

The new modeling also projects that as many as 1,800 residents could be in the intensive care unit by the end of May.

“[Our hospitals] are bursting at the seams, we are setting up field hospitals,” Adalsteinn Brown, co-chair of the province’s science table, told reporters. “Our children’s hospitals are admitting adults. This has never happened in Ontario before. It’s never happened in Canada before.”

Ontario estimates it will need more than 4,000 additional nurses in the coming months and has asked all provinces and territories for 620 nurses – especially those with intensive care experience – as soon as possible.

“We’re losing the battle between the variants and vaccines,’’ Ontario’s premier, Doug Ford, said on Friday as he announced the new measures. “We’re on our heels. If we dig in, remain steadfast, we can turn this around.”

Police in Ontario will now have the power to stop drivers or pedestrians and ask for their address and reason for being out. Residents could face fines of up to $C750 (US$600) for refusing to comply. Checkpoints will be established on provincial borders with Manitoba and Quebec to stop non-essential travel – but not on the frontier with the US.
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10910
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4037
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11818 on: April 17, 2021, 10:47:32 PM »
I don't think 100 million or more is likely.

But I do think that 10 million recorded deaths from Covid is possible. What scares me most is India.

- One should remember how in rich countries health systems were driven to the point of collapse. India's health systems produce miracles on a shoestring budget, but.....
- In India's megacities pollution is high, and as far as covid is concerned, especially air pollution. As is the same everywhere, the poor are exposed to pollution far more than the well-to-do, with consequent health problems.

It is hard to see how, even with all the luck in the world, India can avoid an extremely high death toll. Daily deaths are low compared with daily case numbers at present, but the daily death toll grows.

The world graphs attached ( from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries ) may understate the underlying situation.

click images to enlarge

"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

glennbuck

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 131
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11819 on: April 17, 2021, 11:48:59 PM »
Evidence on Twitter is 10 x more deaths in India than the government count is reporting!



There are estimated to be around 56m deaths per year according to the World Health Organisation - and it's thought half are not registered.

In the developed world almost all deaths are registered and the cause of death recorded on an official medical death certificate.

Controversially, in 2010 the team found malaria deaths in India were 13 times higher than WHO estimates.

By contrast, most deaths in the developing world go unrecorded, and estimates of the causes of death are generally based on people who die in hospitals and under medical supervision.

But hospital deaths are the exception in India.

"India has about nine million deaths [a year], most of which occur at home and in rural areas" - says Prof Prabhat Jha, who leads the study from the Centre for Global Health Research in Toronto.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28228177
« Last Edit: Today at 12:07:58 AM by glennbuck »

glennbuck

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 131
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11820 on: Today at 12:15:05 AM »
1% IFR if a hospital or the country runs out of oxygen, like Brazil and India become, 5% IFR hence the lockdowns!
« Last Edit: Today at 12:30:53 AM by glennbuck »

Rodius

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 550
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 324
  • Likes Given: 14
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11821 on: Today at 03:24:54 AM »
Maybe you can start with my post that Jim came to with an article that literally lies when it says "covid-19 is dangerous to the elderly".
It's not.
There's a 98% survival rate among the very elderly population.
27 million people over 80 years-old in Europe, and only 660,000 deaths all-ages = At least 98% survival-rate among that >80 group (most have pre-existing immunity from other coranaviruses over their long lives). And that ratio is seen in any region, no matter what the policies.

Jim neglected to review the article, as science-denial is now his modus-operandi:
"the “fight” component in the fight‐flight reflex, the psychophysiology of anger overlaps with that of stress. Stress related factors are known to depress immune function and increase susceptibility to or exacerbate a host of diseases and disorders including asthma, hypertension, upper respiratory infection, various skin diseases, chronic fatigue syndrome, irritable bowel syndrome, vasovagal syncope and, more obviously, various psychiatric disorders. Indeed, it is hard to find a disease for which emotion or stress plays absolutely no part in symptom severity, frequency, or intensity of flare‐ups."
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2104758/

And then similar science in that thread, referring to similar effects of pollution and unhealthy lifestyles.

Add all that up as hugely exacerbating factors on a respiratory disease that has a 98% general population survival-rate among the elderly. There's up to 10 times the cases than are recorded, most have already been exposed (even people - covid-free - at sea for a month, or in Antarctica have been exposed or infected.)

Follow his immaculate logic in the thread.
It is quite entertaining. Not a single coherent response.
It's also educational, as he only showed you part of the science that shows the reasons a very weak virus can have such an effect on a population, and on a dysfunctional society (which is now becoming like a police-state in some places. Literally. There is no coming back to freedom after this. Hunker down forever under the police-state. It's your position in life now. I'll be having a great time.)
Entertaining thread kicked-off by Jim coming to my post: https://twitter.com/barlow2021/status/1380158329805213705

Last winter, Melbourne had an outbreak.

There was A LOT of testing and tracking, so it is reasonable to say that the case count is about right. But feel free to double the numbers to account for people who had no symptoms.
But it needs to be stated that the case count is more accurate than most places around the world.

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

We are currently sitting at about 29,500
Deaths are at 910
As you would expect, most of the deaths were in the over 60s.

The percentage of case to death is 3.08%
Personally, I think this percentage is too high because when Melbourne was hit with the outbreak last year the Fed Govt did almost nothing to prevent Covid getting into aged care homes, and caregivers were allowed to work in multiple facilities and it spread like wildfire.
State funded aged care didn't have the same problem. Almost all of the aged care deaths were from poorly run Fed funded facilities. (as in 99% of the cases and deaths)

2051 people in aged care caught Covid and 685 of them died.
That is 33.4% of aged care elderly dying.

https://www.health.gov.au/resources/covid-19-cases-in-aged-care-services-residential-care

Just to be clear, EVERYONE in aged care was tested, so the case count is correct.
The death count is correct.
The care provided was very good because our hospital system didn't collapse.

Even if you account for the fact that people in aged care tend to be less healthy, 33% is still extremely high.

So.... given this information, how do you think the death rate for over 60s is only 2%?
The reality of the situation strongly disagrees with your numbers.

POLICE STATE

You mention that when a police state is created it is difficult (edit) to remove.

Again, Melbourne was under strict lockdown for months to get rid of Covid (it worked and we are still Coivd free 10 months later). Many would call it a police state situation. I tend to agree but it was required and the situation was a health emergency. There are legitimate reasons for governments to use extreme measures to stop an emergency from worsening.

According to you, we should still be stuck in a police state.
Oddly enough, we have had total freedom of movement for nine months.

Again, this example disagrees with your worldview.

Of course, you will just say this is the exception rather than the rule. But the same situation has happened in other regions around the world. How many times does this need to happen before you figure out that, for the most part, you are wrong?
« Last Edit: Today at 03:32:16 AM by Rodius »

Shared Humanity

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 443
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11822 on: Today at 03:59:06 AM »
somebody is off their meds

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6834
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2507
  • Likes Given: 2265
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11823 on: Today at 08:46:12 AM »
Thanks for all the refutations, but the reality is Thomas Barlow was trolling this thread and wilfully ignoring the data, and will continue to do so when he comes back.

Jim Hunt

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4920
  • Stay Home, Save Lives
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 539
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11824 on: Today at 09:32:11 AM »
The reality is Thomas Barlow was trolling this thread and wilfully ignoring the data, and will continue to do so when he comes back.

I must be living in an alternate universe. In mine he is trolling this thread again, and what's more he's calling me rude names:

Jim neglected to review the article, as science-denial is now his modus-operandi:

Are you able to persuade him to desist?

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6834
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2507
  • Likes Given: 2265
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11825 on: Today at 10:35:27 AM »
LOL @ me...
Didn't notice he came back already, due to moderated posts appearing late.
But hey, at least my prediction immediately turned out to be true.

DNFTT is my only advice.

nadir

  • New ice
  • Posts: 79
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 18
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11826 on: Today at 11:26:25 AM »
I completely agree with those pointing out China government as a big source of lies and I disagree with those presenting a rosy, naive (or calculated?) vision about what China has shared to the humanity.

COVID-19 got Wuhan off-guard from early December 2019 (or earlier). Wuhan is massively populated metro area of more than 8 million people. Only Hubei has a population of 60 million. Mmobility levels were high during Dec 2019 and Jan 2020 due to the preparations of Chinese New Year.

So, tens of thousands of deaths during the first wave in NY, or London, or Madrid, or Lombardy... and we got less than 5000 deaths over the entire China so far????

I would laugh but it’s not funny.

be cause

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1537
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 652
  • Likes Given: 528
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11827 on: Today at 12:06:23 PM »
I must confess I do not understand what moderation is for . TB, HHI etc are under moderation yet have free run here while Kassy and Oren complain when they are allowed to post in the off-topic section . Hard not to predict TB's  return when he is welcome to post without moderation . b.c.
2007 + 5 = 2012 + 4 = 2016 + 3 = 2019 + 2 = 2021 + 1 =  ' if only we could have seen it coming ' ...

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6834
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2507
  • Likes Given: 2265
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11828 on: Today at 12:14:02 PM »
Oren complains here too... I don't think we should allow flagrant misinformation to be posted without serious edits. However it is Kassy's jurisdiction and he makes the final call, just as I do in my section even if not all agree.

Jim Hunt

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4920
  • Stay Home, Save Lives
    • View Profile
    • The Arctic sea ice Great White Con
  • Liked: 539
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11829 on: Today at 12:59:44 PM »
I must confess I do not understand what moderation is for .

What say you mod?
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one - Albert Einstein

Archimid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3368
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 857
  • Likes Given: 204
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11830 on: Today at 01:09:42 PM »
Regular exercise shielded COVID-19 patients from hospitalization, death

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/health/story/2021-04-17/study-regular-exercise-shielded-covid-19-patients-from-hospitalization-death

Quote
Kaiser members who reported that they were regularly engaging in at least 150 minutes of moderate-to-strenuous exercise per week — essentially a brisk walk or better — when they were diagnosed with COVID-19 had significantly lower odds of hospitalization, intensive care unit admission and death than those who estimated their weekly efforts at 10 minutes or less.

It is not obesity, specifically. It's the thermodynamic advantage of having a strong blood pump and good blood flow. Obesity is highly correlated with sedentarism. With sedentarism comes a weak heart and less than optimal blood flow.

So getting people to do 150 minutes of strenuous exercise per week is a C-19 "cure".

On Moderation:

There is a fine line between an echo chamber and a forum with a free exchange of ideas.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.

glennbuck

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 376
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 131
  • Likes Given: 30
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11831 on: Today at 02:19:06 PM »
A grim Covid-19 milestone was passed on Saturday when it was revealed that the global death toll from the disease had passed three million.

The news was described as “chilling” by Wellcome Trust director Jeremy Farrar, who warned that the true number of deaths was probably much higher. “Worryingly, this pandemic is still growing at an alarming rate,” he said. “Hundreds of thousands are dying every day.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/18/global-death-toll-passes-3m-as-pandemic-grows-at-an-alarming-rate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Farrar

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10910
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4037
  • Likes Given: 31
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11832 on: Today at 02:24:28 PM »

On Moderation:

There is a fine line between an echo chamber and a forum with a free exchange of ideas.

Or (vice-versa)  as in between an interesting if controversial contra point of view and a total pain in the arse.
« Last Edit: Today at 06:26:51 PM by gerontocrat »
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Jeju-islander

  • New ice
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11833 on: Today at 02:40:28 PM »
I am quite baffled by the response to my comment on the accuracy of PCR testing by Richard Rathbone.
In the study I quoted only positive samples were tested.
And yet the refutation is that 'Again its assuming that negative samples cross contaminated by other negative samples give positive results'

It is far more important to know that positive samples are being measured accurately and that the actual carriers of the virus are isolated,  than the occasional negative ones are also asked to isolate.

The reason I discuss this topic is because I am also quite baffled by the UK decision to massively deploy lateral flow tests, despite headlines such as this.
As few as 2 per cent of positive results from lateral flow results are accurate
Quote
Mr Dyson, who is an executive director of strategy at the health department and one of health secretary Matt Hancock's advisers, reportedly raised feared that the reliability of positive results could be as low as two per cent in certain areas.

More importantly -
Quote
PILOT IN LIVERPOOL FOUND FEWER THAN HALF OF POSITIVES

When the same Innova test was trialled on members of the public in Liverpool - with people taking their own swabs and trained military staff operating the tests - the swabs picked up just 41 per cent of positive cases.

In the study the rapid tests detected 891 positive results, compared to lab-based PCR swabs that found 2,829 positives in the same group. This means 1,938 people got a wrong negative result from the rapid test.

The Walrus

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1021
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 120
Re: COVID-19
« Reply #11834 on: Today at 03:02:13 PM »
[quote author=Archimid link=topic=2996.msg306019#msg306019 date=1618744182

On Moderation:

There is a fine line between an echo chamber and a forum with a free exchange of ideas.

Or (vice-versa)  as in between an interesting if controversial contra point of view and a total pain in the arse.
[/quote]

I agree geronrocrat.  A free exchange of ideas should be encouraged, even if they are controversial.  After all, that is how science works.  If we want to viewed as a scientific forum, rather than an “echo chamber” than I suggest we operate as such.  The pain in the area portion becomes a little harder to deal with.