RugbyRebels

One oddity of this, being a person who likes a hard copy of the Times, is I've not read a paper for a while

BTW, there's been a lot of questions about how Hungary has so few deaths (here, locally).

Well, I just took a look at the statistics again...It's killing almost 10% of the infected people. That's seriously insane.

I mean...wow.

They've only tested 37,000 people so far, the healthcare system would collapse under any strain at all, and the population is very, very old. All the young people are abroad!

However...a cynic could look at the stats and say that all the deaths are in places that consistently vote against the government (basically just Budapest). There's been less than 50 CASES in all bar 2 counties. Because no-one wants to go there, lol.

It's really going to decimate the population here...literally.

Mellsblue wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Fair enough. Mea culpa. I was writing that whilst trying to deal with two increasingly restless children and from a position that you are still believing China’s numbers and equating two countries that are completely different in pretty much every sense.
It’s like me looking at Sweden’s raw data and deciding we shouldn’t lockdown at all. It’s a ridiculous position to take and at least we can believe Sweden’s data.

That’s the position taken by many a Times reader judging by the comments section in that paper.

Not sure which shows less judgement, arguing that we should follow the Swedish model or reading the comments section on a newspaper’s website.

I know. I really shouldn’t bother but sometimes the temptation is too great.

Digby wrote:One oddity of this, being a person who likes a hard copy of the Times, is I've not read a paper for a while

I’ve been a digital subscriber for about 5 years now. Can’t remember the last time I bought an actual paper.

Stom wrote:BTW, there's been a lot of questions about how Hungary has so few deaths (here, locally).

Well, I just took a look at the statistics again...It's killing almost 10% of the infected people. That's seriously insane.

I mean...wow.

They've only tested 37,000 people so far, the healthcare system would collapse under any strain at all, and the population is very, very old. All the young people are abroad!

However...a cynic could look at the stats and say that all the deaths are in places that consistently vote against the government (basically just Budapest). There's been less than 50 CASES in all bar 2 counties. Because no-one wants to go there, lol.

It's really going to decimate the population here...literally.

That sounds very odd. Italy has an old population but isn’t that bad. Sounds like you’re local dictator is playing silly buggers with statistics.

Sandydragon wrote:

Stom wrote:BTW, there's been a lot of questions about how Hungary has so few deaths (here, locally).

Well, I just took a look at the statistics again...It's killing almost 10% of the infected people. That's seriously insane.

I mean...wow.

They've only tested 37,000 people so far, the healthcare system would collapse under any strain at all, and the population is very, very old. All the young people are abroad!

However...a cynic could look at the stats and say that all the deaths are in places that consistently vote against the government (basically just Budapest). There's been less than 50 CASES in all bar 2 counties. Because no-one wants to go there, lol.

It's really going to decimate the population here...literally.

That sounds very odd. Italy has an old population but isn’t that bad. Sounds like you’re local dictator is playing silly buggers with statistics.

They absolutely are. The state media is all about how the recovery rate is higher than the death rate. But with so few tests...

Some of the graphs are questionable, but as they don’t record data like deaths per week like the ons (or they don’t make it accessible), truly understanding the impact is impossible.

Blimey:

Mellsblue wrote:Blimey:

Is that real? Where's it from?

As if the majority of self-employed people have to sign up to universal credit to receive anything, and that is deferred until June...they could end up with nothing. Are those figures included in this or not? Because if they are, that's misleading: the majority of those cases are not going to see anything.

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Blimey:

Is that real? Where's it from?

As if the majority of self-employed people have to sign up to universal credit to receive anything, and that is deferred until June...they could end up with nothing. Are those figures included in this or not? Because if they are, that's misleading: the majority of those cases are not going to see anything.

It states IMF data at the bottom of the graph.

Taken from here, I believe:

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/pu ... -it-takes/

So Japan is tightly controlled on the budget front and they're still utterly fecked on the economic front, some good news to start the day with when many of the rest of us aren't controlled even before were fecked.

Though how and what they're measuring could so easily skew this research, and you could easily drop the ball on this sort of research even if you're trying to do a good and honest job, and they might well be as biased as we're fecked.

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Blimey:

Is that real? Where's it from?

As if the majority of self-employed people have to sign up to universal credit to receive anything, and that is deferred until June...they could end up with nothing. Are those figures included in this or not? Because if they are, that's misleading: the majority of those cases are not going to see anything.

I'd imagine a large chunk of that is furloughed employees salaries. It's 100% the right policy (brought to you by Comrade Corbyn ), but it's gotta be costing the government a shit tonne.

Puja

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: Put another way, the first cases in Wuhan were reported at the end of November 2019. Yet the lockdown in China occurred almost two months later, with some well documented attempts to cover it up along the way.

I don't understand your point here.

China could have acted with greater rapidity if it had not attempted to silence the messenger. Their lockdown did prove to be effective (and no I don’t trust their numbers) but could they have acted sooner if they had investigated the reports coming out of Wuhan? Probably.

Of course, China could have acted even more rapidly.

But what's our excuse for acting even less rapidly than China?

Son of Mathonwy wrote: But what's our excuse for acting even less rapidly than China?

It looks like China acted quickly, but too late..
( estimates of deaths 10x official figures, based on local reports of mortuary and crem. activity; we saw the mayhem in the hospitals too, with doctors wearing nappies etc ).
UK acted, but opted for herd immunity/cocooning the vulnerable, which may have been ok for a less virulent, seasonally active foe, with the population displaying overall less density.(these were the unknowns).
250K dead in a non-squashed sombrero si'eation was not a price we could pay to try & keep the economy ticking over, so we ended up with death rates/economy splat like Ita/Spa.
'He who hesitates..' an' all that.

Mellsblue wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:So, per capita the U.K. locked down earlier than China. That’s measuring exponential growth per capita for you.

No. Per capita we were even worse.

On absolute numbers our deaths at lockdown were 13x China's.

On per capita numbers they were 284x China's.

Fair enough. Mea culpa. I was writing that whilst trying to deal with two increasingly restless children and from a position that you are still believing China’s numbers and equating two countries that are completely different in pretty much every sense.
It’s like me looking at Sweden’s raw data and deciding we shouldn’t lockdown at all. It’s a ridiculous position to take and at least we can believe Sweden’s data.

No worries, we all make mistakes.

It's not like looking at Sweden's data and deciding we shouldn't lock down. That's because Sweden's data is so bad. (In your hypothetical position) what grounds would you possibly have to use Sweden as any kind of example to follow? With 119 Covid-19 deaths per million they are the 11th worst country in the world, worse than the USA (86), worse by far than their nearest neighbours, Norway (28) and Finland (13).

The argument you're making - that China is so different and untrustworthy that we can't draw any conclusions from it (to be precise, that it would be "ridiculous" to draw conclusions from it) - is exactly the kind of thinking that's allowed our response to the pandemic to be so catastrophic.

The attention on the lockdown does seem a little misplaced until further down the line when perhaps there's a vaccine, or perhaps we go through rounds 2, 3 and even more and then get a look at where all the countries come out both in terms of Covid and associated damage. The attention also seems misplaced on the lockdown when there's the relaxing of restrictions to consider, both the order in which things happen and when things happen.

That said for Mat Hanock to say he was going to reward front line workers with a badge was weird, insulting and more than a little pathetic. Though even that might not be as bad as in his attempt to look like he's doing something on the testing front to comment he's referred up to 4,000 people for testing given that's in practice the same as saying I've done nothing (albeit perhaps for understandable reasons), please Mat don't try to play political games and couch things in terms which you think might sound more positive and/or encouraging, keep it simple and keep it true.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: No. Per capita we were even worse.

On absolute numbers our deaths at lockdown were 13x China's.

On per capita numbers they were 284x China's.

Fair enough. Mea culpa. I was writing that whilst trying to deal with two increasingly restless children and from a position that you are still believing China’s numbers and equating two countries that are completely different in pretty much every sense.
It’s like me looking at Sweden’s raw data and deciding we shouldn’t lockdown at all. It’s a ridiculous position to take and at least we can believe Sweden’s data.

No worries, we all make mistakes.

It's not like looking at Sweden's data and deciding we shouldn't lock down. That's because Sweden's data is so bad. (In your hypothetical position) what grounds would you possibly have to use Sweden as any kind of example to follow? With 119 Covid-19 deaths per million they are the 11th worst country in the world, worse than the USA (86), worse by far than their nearest neighbours, Norway (28) and Finland (13).

The argument you're making - that China is so different and untrustworthy that we can't draw any conclusions from it (to be precise, that it would be "ridiculous" to draw conclusions from it) - is exactly the kind of thinking that's allowed our response to the pandemic to be so catastrophic.

Again, it’s a marathon not a sprint. It’s not just about COVID deaths in the first few weeks. That is short sighted. It’s about the COVID deaths over the next 12/18/24 months. It’s about having an economy that will be as strong as possible coming out the other side. UCL have authored a report that the blow to our economy due to the lockdown could cost approx 140,000 lives in the long run, ie many times more than COVID will probably take. How many of the extra deaths last week were due to lockdown side affects? Why have calls to domestic abuse helplines and mental health help lines shot through the roof?The ripple effects of the lockdown are pretty much endless. It’s not all about how many people die from COVID in the first few weeks. Who is to say the Sweden’s response isn’t better for the population in the long term.

Again, it’s not a one size fits all - just adopt this model then we’ll have the same success. For example, it’s surely no coincidence that the four countries that have highest visitor numbers in Europe have the highest death tolls. That densely populated countries/regions, and particularly those with large cities and multi-generational homes, are suffering the most. Given your per. capita deaths list that places the US higher than Finland, perhaps we should’ve adopted Trump’s response rather than looking at Finland’s?!?!?

Further, who is to say total deaths is the best way measuring govts’ lockdown timing. Plenty of stuff out there that Germany’s ICU numbers:deaths ratio is loads better than the UK’s. Same re: Italy’s ratio though less in both number and quality of source.

No ones arguing the U.K. has played a blinder but, as I’ve said before, I’m not being drawn on the China comparison because, well, they’re run by a bunch of lying, genocidal ****s.

The virus seems to have taken hold in some massive population states ( India, Mexico, Brazil Indonesia, Russia.). The vaccine is not available for the first wave attack. If the now typical curve plays out in these places, devastation awaits...let's hope some of the variables at play can keep things in the ball-park.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: I don't understand your point here.

China could have acted with greater rapidity if it had not attempted to silence the messenger. Their lockdown did prove to be effective (and no I don’t trust their numbers) but could they have acted sooner if they had investigated the reports coming out of Wuhan? Probably.

Of course, China could have acted even more rapidly.

But what's our excuse for acting even less rapidly than China?

Well partially the information wasn't as forthcoming from China as it could have been. But I agree with you that we could have acted faster (ordered PPE in bulk and testing equipment).

I think the original strategy was well intentioned but was the wrong choice.

Mellsblue wrote:
No ones arguing the U.K. has played a blinder but, as I’ve said before, I’m not being drawn on the China comparison because, well, they’re run by a bunch of lying, genocidal ****s.

And the UK isn’t?

David Hockney's hunch doesn't fit well with the health message generally, tbf.
That's all we need..
"A study by New York University found that just five per cent of 4,103 coronavirus hospital patients in the city admitted to being smokers.
This was far lower than the 15.5 per cent of smokers in the population there.
The same proportion of smokers were found in COVID-19 patients who did not need hospitalisation, suggesting they were less likely to catch the virus or were not being accurately recorded. 
The New York study is not the first to find a low number of smokers in COVID-19 hospital admissions.
Data from multiple Chinese studies shows that COVID-19 hospital patients contained a smaller proportion of smokers than the general population (6.5 per cent compared to 26.6 per cent), suggesting they were less likely to end up in hospital"
(dailymail)

Mellsblue wrote:Given your per. capita deaths list that places the US higher than Finland, perhaps we should’ve adopted Trump’s response rather than looking at Finland’s?!?!?

Sorry, should have been clearer about what the numbers in brackets were. They're the deaths per million, not the position in the list, ie the USA has 86 dead per million, Norway 28 per million and Finland 13 per million.

Galfon wrote:David Hockney's hunch doesn't fit well with the health message generally, tbf.
That's all we need..
"A study by New York University found that just five per cent of 4,103 coronavirus hospital patients in the city admitted to being smokers.
This was far lower than the 15.5 per cent of smokers in the population there.
The same proportion of smokers were found in COVID-19 patients who did not need hospitalisation, suggesting they were less likely to catch the virus or were not being accurately recorded. 
The New York study is not the first to find a low number of smokers in COVID-19 hospital admissions.
Data from multiple Chinese studies shows that COVID-19 hospital patients contained a smaller proportion of smokers than the general population (6.5 per cent compared to 26.6 per cent), suggesting they were less likely to end up in hospital"
(dailymail)

I wonder if vapers are any better or worse?

And I wonder if the whole thing isn't just a load of Daily Mail bullshit, of course.

Son of Mathonwy wrote: I wonder if vapers are any better or worse?
And I wonder if the whole thing isn't just a load of Daily Mail bullshit, of course.

you wouldn't do that to guinea pigs ( hang on, they do..)
; 'Blah-blah says..'.= b'shit, but the other numbers may be worth a closer look.
(the only doods not going down with throaty coughs at our place before lockdown were the smokers, oddly)
The other piece of sensationo-journo waggy-tongue stuff was report of 'Patient Zero' first recorded case in China was geezer working in Virus research lab in Wuhan, and there is a facility a few miles from the said meat-market.
Has China released details of the first postive cases
( names, where they live, occupatons etc ), in the spirit of transparency ?
There is form such as SARS / Smallpox, with lab leaks.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Given your per. capita deaths list that places the US higher than Finland, perhaps we should’ve adopted Trump’s response rather than looking at Finland’s?!?!?

Sorry, should have been clearer about what the numbers in brackets were. They're the deaths per million, not the position in the list, ie the USA has 86 dead per million, Norway 28 per million and Finland 13 per million.

Where does China sit with their newly revised numbers that are a first attempt not to look like serial bullshitters?

Digby wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Given your per. capita deaths list that places the US higher than Finland, perhaps we should’ve adopted Trump’s response rather than looking at Finland’s?!?!?

Sorry, should have been clearer about what the numbers in brackets were. They're the deaths per million, not the position in the list, ie the USA has 86 dead per million, Norway 28 per million and Finland 13 per million.

Where does China sit with their newly revised numbers that are a first attempt not to look like serial bullshitters?

7th in total deaths, way down in per capita obviously (2 per million)