WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425 
|
Post by WDB on Mar 29, 2020 17:51:55 GMT
The mortality statistics in Spain are exaggerated by the disproportionate effect the virus has had in care homes. T&E is right that the crucial task here is to ensure that the intensive care places that will keep people alive long enough to recover are available in sufficient numbers, and the only that would prevent that in the UK (or anywhere else) is a permanent state of lockdown, in which those who enter care homes are literally never seen again.
Today’s Observer has the front-page headline ‘Shock new figures on intensive care deaths’, which would have us believe that ‘the mortality rate for patients put in intensive care ... [is] close to 50%’. It is, but only if you ignore the people still there. Of 165 patients who are no longer in ICU, 86 were discharged and 79 died. But 610 are still there but not counted in the ‘shock new figures’. In any case, I’m not sure how useful it is, other than for frightening people, to measure outcomes of those who are not even selected for measurement until they are ill enough to require intensive care.
A pessimistic way to look at the overall position might be to say that the virus has the names of 300,000 to 500,000 people on it. The present extreme measures may prevent it claiming them all at once, but only a vaccine (assuming that natural herd immunity will take a politically-unacceptable number of deaths to establish) can actually stop it.
|
|
|
|
Post by tyrednexited on Mar 29, 2020 19:18:56 GMT
If I'm correctly understanding what you're trying to say, I don't think I agree with some/much of it.  The mortality statistics in Spain are exaggerated by the disproportionate effect the virus has had in care homes. T&E is right that the crucial task here is to ensure that the intensive care places that will keep people alive long enough to recover are available in sufficient numbers, and the only that would prevent that in the UK (or anywhere else) is a permanent state of lockdown, in which those who enter care homes are literally never seen again. The choice of the word "exaggerated" is at best poor choice of wording. "Distorted" might be better for the point I think you're trying to make, they are, after all, real deaths which contribute to the overall mortality rate. Simply reducing the nature of the problem to those people who are currently in care homes, however, is just not sensible, part of the problem there is that it is enormously difficult to isolate/distance such residents, so they succumb en masse, much like in cruise liners. There is a huge proportion of the population outside the care community seen at significant additional risk here, not least the 1.4M estimated with severe conditions that are due the "isolation letter", and many of the 11M or so over 65s (allowing for some double counting here). Patently people outside these communities are catching the virus and suffering severe symptoms, albeit with a lower overall risk of dying, especially if they have full access to ICU facilities. That is what the current approach is protecting. Whilst it might be unpalatable, avoiding mass, synchronised infection is the only current way of also avoiding what could be a massive death toll, and it might indeed take some time before relaxing controls won't re-introduce the risk. Today’s Observer has the front-page headline ‘Shock new figures on intensive care deaths’, which would have us believe that ‘the mortality rate for patients put in intensive care ... [is] close to 50%’. It is, but only if you ignore the people still there. Of 165 patients who are no longer in ICU, 86 were discharged and 79 died. But 610 are still there but not counted in the ‘shock new figures’. In any case, I’m not sure how useful it is, other than for frightening people, to measure outcomes of those who are not even selected for measurement until they are ill enough to require intensive care. Other than potentially scaring the shit out of anyone who is unlucky enough to admitted to ICU, the figure is meaningless (though some of the other quoted underlying stats on the ages and status of those who do and don't die in these circumstances throw at least a little light on the profile of those impacted. When modified by such things as "only 0.nnn% of identified cases currently require such admittance", and that the 0.nnn% which is identified "is only n% of the actual infection rate" anyway, due to the way we test, then things look rather better. No consolation as your gurney is pushed through the door, though.  A pessimistic way to look at the overall position might be to say that the virus has the names of 300,000 to 500,000 people on it. The present extreme measures may prevent it claiming them all at once, but only a vaccine (assuming that natural herd immunity will take a politically-unacceptable number of deaths to establish) can actually stop it. .....but, once again, if you flatten the curve such that people (not all of them crinklies, not all of them vulnerable) can get the ICU attention they need, then the residual number thus saved (let's max it and say 500K - 20K, which is rather too simplistic really) are then potentially part of that herd immunity, if such a concept is deliverable. There is little doubt that the only foreseeable viable exit strategy at the moment is via a vaccine, but steps can be taken to minimise deaths until that is deliverable. Reliable antigen and antibody testing may be available shortly, and this will (subject to proof of medium to long-term immunity) change the landscape quite a bit. If this is combined with any success of the current parallel testing of various drugs that are thought might mitigate the worst effects of the virus once infected, then the urgency for the vaccine recedes somewhat. I'm sure there will be various reviews of strategy over the coming weeks months and years, but at the moment, we seem to be throwing roughly the appropriate approach at it. |
|
|
|
Post by tyrednexited on Mar 30, 2020 9:22:48 GMT
...... Not entirely scenic as it involves Crewe but beggars...etc. ...well, it would appear that you've survived Crewe, so the coronavirus should be a cinch.... We've managed to accumulate over 30 miles of walking in 4 days - I don't know if i can keep this up. (Though we've discovered parts of the forest adjacent that we've never seen before, and realised that it wouldn't be difficult to get in a 10 to 15 mile bike ride on the forestry roads, as and when and being imaginative). Very few people encountered around yesterdays circuit, and almost all we did meet were good friends. Quite surprising really given we've been here over 30 years, but a large portion of the area you need to traverse to make decent distances was, until reasonably recently, military land, and thus barred. Now it's all open access. The now weekly shop was done at the local, smallish Tesco this morning. Much better organised (only limited numbers allowed in at once, distancing markings on all the aisles, a single, distance-marked queue for the tills). It wasn't particularly busy, and though there were gaps on the shelves, handwash and bog rolls were in evidence. It's certainly feeling considerably less manic here, if no less restrictive. |
|
|
|
Post by tyrednexited on Mar 30, 2020 9:35:29 GMT
Can we hope that Dominic Cummins gets it bad? ...well, you can now..... (I wouldn't wish it on anyone really, but it would be supreme irony). |
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425
|
Post by WDB on Mar 30, 2020 10:49:16 GMT
Is it OK to feel a bit sorry for a virus?
|
|
|
|
Post by tyrednexited on Mar 30, 2020 10:59:11 GMT
Is it OK to feel a bit sorry for a virus? If you admit to it, the police will be round.... |
|
|
|
Post by Humph on Mar 30, 2020 11:50:30 GMT
Ironic isn't it. Under normal circumstances, if I was offered the chance to take a few weeks off, on 80% pay, I'd most probably have bitten their hands off...
|
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425
|
Post by WDB on Mar 30, 2020 14:24:46 GMT
I see we’ve had a second consecutive fall in deaths-per-24h. Not a trend yet, but a hopeful sign. Today’s Mercedes-CPAP announcement was an intriguing development.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2020 14:26:29 GMT
I see we’ve had a second consecutive fall in deaths-per-24h. Not a trend yet, but a hopeful sign. Today’s Mercedes-CPAP announcement was an intriguing development. Wassat? |
|
WDB
Full Member
Posts: 7,425
|
Post by WDB on Mar 30, 2020 14:41:15 GMT
|
|
Rob
Full Member
Posts: 2,778
Member is Online
|
Post by Rob on Mar 30, 2020 16:21:48 GMT
The problem with needing to be on a ventilator, apart from having one available, is the need to be sedated which then needs an appropriate set of medics to look after you.
I am surprised we don't have more CPAP devices already.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2020 17:04:21 GMT
I don't if this belongs in here as it's a direct result or if a separate thread.
Fuel prices. I'd read the price of a barrel had dropped dramatically, they're practically giving the stuff away here if you strip out government added taxes and VAT.
I've just filled the Volvo up for the equivalent of 90.6p/litre at the current exchange rate of 1.12€ to the £.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hofmeister on Mar 30, 2020 17:42:51 GMT
Can we hope that Dominic Cummins gets it bad? ...well, you can now..... (I wouldn't wish it on anyone really, but it would be supreme irony). Can I put the doll and pins away now then? |
|
|
|
Post by tyrednexited on Mar 30, 2020 18:19:42 GMT
...well, you can now..... (I wouldn't wish it on anyone really, but it would be supreme irony). Can I put the doll and pins away now then? I think you have to give it seven days....... |
|
|
|
Post by dixinormus on Mar 30, 2020 20:21:05 GMT
Re: fuel prices: less revenue for the government too, whilst they are handing out money to keep the economy on life support.
Wouldn’t be surprised if fuel taxes go up as soon as we get through this.
On the upside, the planet can finally give 2 fingers to OPEC after years of the economy being held to ransom by their cartel!
|
|
