COVID-19

[EACLucifer]

In terms of how far from normal we are, the current announced death rate - likely somewhat below the real one - is about the same as the combined Anglo-French death rate during the Battle of the Somme

If you are well enough, and have the time (sewing masks is more important), then I would appreciate, by PM if appropriate, your workings and references for that. It's the kind of statistic that is memorable, indeed worthy of a headline, and I'd like to use it, but I'd like to make sure it is correct.
Note: I am not trying to slyly insinuate you are wrong - I would just very much like to see how the comparison is generated.

It's not a particularly complicated calculation. Battle of the Somme was 140 days, killed and missing for France and Britain about 146000. Numbers are quite widely published.

[bob sterman]

Since I've got the time and it's quite easy calculation...
The Battle of the Somme lasted from July to November 1916, 141 days; during which, according to Wikipedia, British and French suffered 146,000 fatalities, which averages at about 1040 deaths per day.

That's 1040 deaths per day of the perhaps 3,000,000 French and UK troops involved over the course of the battle.

Compared with - perhaps the current 2000-3000 deaths per day from the 135 million combined populations of France and the UK.

I prefer the odds going to pick up some milk at Tescos vs spending some time in the trenches.

[Pucksoppet]

In terms of how far from normal we are, the current announced death rate - likely somewhat below the real one - is about the same as the combined Anglo-French death rate during the Battle of the Somme

If you are well enough, and have the time (sewing masks is more important), then I would appreciate, by PM if appropriate, your workings and references for that. It's the kind of statistic that is memorable, indeed worthy of a headline, and I'd like to use it, but I'd like to make sure it is correct.
Note: I am not trying to slyly insinuate you are wrong - I would just very much like to see how the comparison is generated.

Since I've got the time and it's quite easy calculation...
The Battle of the Somme lasted from July to November 1916, 141 days; during which, according to Wikipedia, British and French suffered 146,000 fatalities, which averages at about 1040 deaths per day.

Beat me to it, Gfamily
Some things thing to note: British means British Commonwealth, and includes deaths of people not considered British today, such as people whose place of origin was Canada, Newfoundland (a separate Dominion to Canada*), India, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and others. Not sure what the number of deaths for people originating in the UK was.

The average death rate also conceals some considerable peaks on particular days, which I hope we don't beat.

The mere fact the death rates are comparable should give most a pause for thought, even if the details are unclear.


*Newfoundland officially joined Canada at midnight on March 31, 1949 after a controversial set of referendums.The official outcome of [the final] referendum was 52.3% for confederation with Canada and 47.7% for responsible (independent) government..

[lpm]

I prefer the odds going to pick up some milk at Tescos vs spending some time in the trenches.

You also have to factor in the squalid conditions, the rats and the stench, and perhaps rethink your conclusion.

[jimbob]

If you are well enough, and have the time (sewing masks is more important), then I would appreciate, by PM if appropriate, your workings and references for that. It's the kind of statistic that is memorable, indeed worthy of a headline, and I'd like to use it, but I'd like to make sure it is correct.
Note: I am not trying to slyly insinuate you are wrong - I would just very much like to see how the comparison is generated.

Since I've got the time and it's quite easy calculation...
The Battle of the Somme lasted from July to November 1916, 141 days; during which, according to Wikipedia, British and French suffered 146,000 fatalities, which averages at about 1040 deaths per day.

Beat me to it, Gfamily
Some things thing to note: British means British Commonwealth, and includes deaths of people not considered British today, such as people whose place of origin was Canada, Newfoundland (a separate Dominion to Canada*), India, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and others. Not sure what the number of deaths for people originating in the UK was.

The average death rate also conceals some considerable peaks on particular days, which I hope we don't beat.

The mere fact the death rates are comparable should give most a pause for thought, even if the details are unclear.


*Newfoundland officially joined Canada at midnight on March 31, 1949 after a controversial set of referendums.The official outcome of [the final] referendum was 52.3% for confederation with Canada and 47.7% for responsible (independent) government..

Another comparison, with a larger population, which I have used before.

Wikipedia tells me that the Blitz lasted 8-months and had 40,000 civilian deaths.

Over the entire war, Wiki also tells me that there were about 60,000 UK civilian deaths from various bombing and V-weapon campaigns.

[lpm]

You have to value a 20 year old higher than a 90 year old, though. I know it's grotesque. But lives are not all equal, when it comes to headlines statistics and impact on society, This is why nobody cares that much when thousands of elderly die in a bad flu season or heatwave.

[noggins]

I prefer the odds going to pick up some milk at Tescos vs spending some time in the trenches.

You also have to factor in the squalid conditions, the rats and the stench, and perhaps rethink your conclusion.

You could try another supermarket though.

[AMS]

A really thorough Twitter thread comparing the UK response with Ireland's


ETA, probably better with a link

https://twitter.com/laineydoyle/status/ ... 28259?s=20

When comparing the two countries' responses, how significant is it that Leo Varadkar is a qualified doctor, and was a GP before going into politics?

[shpalman]

Two months after we discussed oxygen... two weeks after shpalman raised the alert about very high oxygen use in Italy hospitals... the UK is discovering it could be the constraining factor in numbers treated.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... s-patients

So how are oxygen supplies looking? Is there much point ordering umpteen thousand ventilators if we've not the oxygen to put through them?

Anecdata Alert: My uncle is in hospital with COVID-19 and he's hopefully on the mend. Once the worst of it was over they took him straight off the oxygen to "see how he does", he's still struggling to breathe but can just about manage without so ... no oxygen for him.

They are trialling him on remdesivir to see if that has any benefit too.

GPs tell patients to buy their own oxygen

[El Pollo Diablo]

A really thorough Twitter thread comparing the UK response with Ireland's


ETA, probably better with a link

https://twitter.com/laineydoyle/status/ ... 28259?s=20

When comparing the two countries' responses, how significant is it that Leo Varadkar is a qualified doctor, and was a GP before going into politics?

It wouldn't be significant if Johnson was of similar stature, but instead he's a qualified c.nt, and was a c.nt before going into politics.

[jimbob]

A really thorough Twitter thread comparing the UK response with Ireland's


ETA, probably better with a link

https://twitter.com/laineydoyle/status/ ... 28259?s=20

When comparing the two countries' responses, how significant is it that Leo Varadkar is a qualified doctor, and was a GP before going into politics?

There are several countries with populist leaders, where the response has been late or lax. I think there probably is something in that, but not sure precisely what - so the following barely make it to speculation, but might still allow some better responses:


Johnson, being an inveterate bullshitter* possibly suspects everyone else of doing similar and maybe decided that there was little to chose between conflicting advice, so might as well go with what aligns with his inclinations, or what I'd suspect he might regard as his highly advanced instincts**.


*Will say whatever he thinks will get a good response, as opposed to more strategic liars, where the truth is acknowledged in some way, even in denial.


**He's not short of self-confidence, and that probably translates to over-belief in his abilities way out of his expertise.

[jimbob]

A really thorough Twitter thread comparing the UK response with Ireland's


ETA, probably better with a link

https://twitter.com/laineydoyle/status/ ... 28259?s=20

When comparing the two countries' responses, how significant is it that Leo Varadkar is a qualified doctor, and was a GP before going into politics?

It wouldn't be significant if Johnson was of similar stature, but instead he's a qualified c.nt, and was a c.nt before going into politics.

Yes, my comment about being an inveterate bullshitter was thinking along those lines.

Johnson has spent his adult life in situations where he can just make something up to further his ends. It's probably taught him an approach that is not useful in dealing with a crisis.

[jimbob]

Meanwhile, this article from the start of March hasn't aged particularly well - most of it is behind a paywall, which I am *not* going to pay, but the preview is sufficient.

Firmly and calmly, the UK is leading Europe in the fight against the coronavirus

ASA BENNETT
6 MARCH 2020 • 2:11PM

[raven]

I feel like we need confidence intervals on the expected deaths line.

I feel like it won't make a substantial difference to the conclusion.

Probably not, but I would like to see just how far outside normality we are.

Might the EU excess mortality graphs help? Woodchopper posted a link up-thread but you may have missed it.

[purplehaze]

You have to value a 20 year old higher than a 90 year old, though. I know it's grotesque. But lives are not all equal, when it comes to headlines statistics and impact on society, This is why nobody cares that much when thousands of elderly die in a bad flu season or heatwave.

A flu death isn't going to affect you if you are taking care of an old person in terms of dying from it because vaccines, nor is them dying in a heatwave. This is a novel virus and you really don't want to be catching it or passing it on to an elderly patient in your care.

[Sciolus]

The researchers were ordered to stop testing because the swabs were not collected for coronavirus, it was an ethical violation. Also the labs were not certified for that kind of testing.

That winds me up. Useful info chucked during a global emergency.

It underlines the need to define carefully what the patient/contributor is consenting to, and to work with ethics review boards. It is not difficult to get right. Using exigency to bypass ethical standards and other rules is one of the oldest tricks in the book.

I agree that sometimes it can be justified post hoc, but you have to be very careful with that, as it can lead to reluctance for people to participate in future studies, because they can't trust the researchers to keep their word.

99.9% of the time, I agree with that. But this is unquestionably the 0.1%.

[Sciolus]

Am getting loads of "if you got sick in Nov or Dec then you probably had the coronavirus" stuff at the moment.

Is there any handy debunking available that anyone's seen that I can counter with. Have had a google and come up empty handed. It's taking me an age to explain death and infection rates to them without sounding rude.

They might well have had a coronavirus. Just not the particularly lethal and transmissible one called SARS-CoV-2.

[jdc]

You have to value a 20 year old higher than a 90 year old, though. I know it's grotesque. But lives are not all equal, when it comes to headlines statistics and impact on society, This is why nobody cares that much when thousands of elderly die in a bad flu season or heatwave.

Yes, I might be sad if this disease kills my gran but it's not like she'll have been cut down in her prime. And tbf, she's survived two world wars and the Spanish flu pandemic so she's done pretty well to get this far.

[Herainestold]

You have to value a 20 year old higher than a 90 year old, though. I know it's grotesque. But lives are not all equal, when it comes to headlines statistics and impact on society, This is why nobody cares that much when thousands of elderly die in a bad flu season or heatwave.

Yes, I might be sad if this disease kills my gran but it's not like she'll have been cut down in her prime. And tbf, she's survived two world wars and the Spanish flu pandemic so she's done pretty well to get this far.

If you have a 90 year old with severe dementia, do you take heroic measures to save their life? Probably not. On the other hand it sounds like dying of Covid19 pneumonia is a nasty way to go. What do you do?

Obviously I am thinking of somebody in particular.

[Pucksoppet]

That winds me up. Useful info chucked during a global emergency.

It underlines the need to define carefully what the patient/contributor is consenting to, and to work with ethics review boards. It is not difficult to get right. Using exigency to bypass ethical standards and other rules is one of the oldest tricks in the book.

I agree that sometimes it can be justified post hoc, but you have to be very careful with that, as it can lead to reluctance for people to participate in future studies, because they can't trust the researchers to keep their word.

99.9% of the time, I agree with that. But this is unquestionably the 0.1%.

You might be right that there are reasonable extenuating circumstances, but I don't agree that it is unquestionable. If the samples are tested and subsequent data handled so that confidentiality/privacy of the people providing the samples is maintained, that would be better than saying 'anything goes'. Running something past an ethics committee saying "We would like to test old samples taken for another purpose to provide important information that will influence the way COVID-19 is dealt with. Sample provider anonymity will be preserved." should not take long. If someone doesn't do that, how do you know they are not playing fast-and-loose with the data they do get? The labs were not certified for the testing they were carrying out. This is not a trivial thing - not 'just paperwork', but for example: assuring that working practices minimise the possibility of cross-contamination; ensuring reagents are stored and used correctly; making sure patient data is handled correctly.
I very much understand the old saw that "Rules are for the observance of fools, but for the guidance of wise men", so it is possible that there were pressing reasons why ethics committee approval wasn't in place; and the lab used wasn't certified for the work - but leaping on a COVID-19 bandwagon and shouting "Chewbacca!" doesn't give a free pass.

[Woodchopper]

A really thorough Twitter thread comparing the UK response with Ireland's


ETA, probably better with a link

https://twitter.com/laineydoyle/status/ ... 28259?s=20

Not just Ireland

Here's a graph showing deaths per capita in 33 European states. (Its from a Swedish site, you should be able to get most of the the country names, Storbritanninen is Great Britain, Schweiz is Switzerland, Tyskland is Germany, Sverige is Sweden, Norge is Norway.

Eur Cov.jpg (130.11 KiB) Viewed 3464 times

Of the worst affected Belgium is notable as we haven't heard much about it, probably because the absolute numbers are lower than in France.

There is though a group of 23 with deaths below 50 per 100 000. Here they are (plus Sweden as the site wouldn't let me remove it):

Eur Cov 2.jpg (136.54 KiB) Viewed 3464 times

In Europe so far the normal experience of Covid-19 is that deaths have been relatively low and the numbers have increased gradually. The death rate in the UK is around 15 times what it is in Finland or Greece.

One notable thing is that Central and Eastern European post-communist states have few deaths per capita. I doubt the explanation is to do with expensive things like mass testing or large numbers of ICU beds equipped with ventilators.

The best thing I can think of is that they were relatively unconnected to China and Italy, and so had few cases before they locked down. In addition, nascent or overt authoritarianism may have made the lock-downs more effective. Which as a lesson for the future would suggest that the most important response is to enforce social distancing as quickly as possible.

[Woodchopper]

Government demands its money back from China after 3.5 million antibody tests it purchased were found to be faulty
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... HWFTfBeO50

Anyone remember when they were supposed to be a game changer.

Sorry about the source.

[shpalman]

it was estimated based on a sample of about 1,554 people in the first week of April that 0.33% (0.12%--0.76%) of Austrians had some sort of coronavirus infection despite not being in hospital (with 95% confidence)

According to covid19.geem.at there were about 10,000 known cases. About 5-10% of swabs were positive in that period.

Translating the percentages according to the population of Austria (8.859 million) you get 29,000 (10,600--67,000).

Despite saying that

... researchers, speaking at a press conference to release the results, said the study provided only a “snapshot” and did not account for asymptomatic infections, or people who were immune.

the article does then go on to assume that it did indeed pick up asymptomatic cases in that sample in order to insist that their prevalence in the population is not as high as you might be hoping, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

tl;dr herd immunity is b.llsh.t.

[shpalman]

The researchers were ordered to stop testing because the swabs were not collected for coronavirus, it was an ethical violation. Also the labs were not certified for that kind of testing.

That winds me up. Useful info chucked during a global emergency.

It underlines the need to define carefully what the patient/contributor is consenting to, and to work with ethics review boards. It is not difficult to get right. Using exigency to bypass ethical standards and other rules is one of the oldest tricks in the book.

I agree that sometimes it can be justified post hoc, but you have to be very careful with that, as it can lead to reluctance for people to participate in future studies, because they can't trust the researchers to keep their word.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... s-response

Technology firms are processing large volumes of confidential UK patient information in a data-mining operation that is part of the government’s response to the coronavirus outbreak, according to documents seen by the Guardian.

A Whitehall source said they were alarmed at the “unprecedented” amounts of confidential health information being swept up in the project, which they said was progressing at alarming speed and with insufficient regard for privacy, ethics or data protection.

I can think of something else which is also progressing at alarming speed and with insufficient regard for privacy, ethics or data protection.

[jaap]

Has anyone already posted the video of a queue of ambulances at a hospital in Moscow? I just saw it on tv here. The same youtube channel has a few more videos of the queues at other hospitals. It looks like things are really kicking off there.