COVID-19

[Woodchopper]

Whether that's relevant depends on if their model takes into account the reduced survival chances of severe cases who don't manage to get an ICU bed.

Certainly, just seems a bit back of the envelope if the data is out of date.

[Cardinal Fang]

The link's already in my post. I'll post it again, though.

https://www.deaconess.com/How-to-make-a-Face-Mask

Don't have space or facilities to make own masks (temp moved out of home into NHS digs, as person I live with has health issues that make them very high risk. Not going to risk coming and going and bringing virus back with me. Just brought essentials to new digs like clothing, computer etc. No sewing kit or machine).

But if anyone's selling any, wouldn't mind a couple

CF

Sell? There's no way I'll be selling any.

But once I've got some made, I'll drop you a PM. Unfortunately, today is a totally non-functional, can't sit up kind of day, so if anyone else here is making them, then they may be able to get you sorted faster than I can.

Managed to sort a couple of cloth ones out, but cheers for the offer

CF

[lpm]

Neighbour next door but one has it. She's a GP. Had been supposed to be separated from any potential Covid patients so as to continue routine NHS services.

Bit of a worry that didn't work. She'll have seen a bunch of vulnerable people during her asymptomatic couple of days.

[shpalman]

Whether that's relevant depends on if their model takes into account the reduced survival chances of severe cases who don't manage to get an ICU bed.

Certainly, just seems a bit back of the envelope if the data is out of date.

Think I'll stick with my ill-informed off-hand reckon of 15000 extra deaths due to the late and badly-organized lockdown then.

[plodder]

Neighbour next door but one has it. She's a GP. Had been supposed to be separated from any potential Covid patients so as to continue routine NHS services.

Bit of a worry that didn't work. She'll have seen a bunch of vulnerable people during her asymptomatic couple of days.

blimey, hope she’s ok (and you and your neighbours). bit close to home, that.

[PeteB]

Slightly more optimistic forecast ?

[lpm]

A very very very basic estimate of official deaths in this first wave would be:

7,000 going up the curve
7,000 going across the top (1,000 a day for 7 days)
7,000 going down the curve

Can probably say official is 70% of actual, giving about 30,000.

Some of the extreme forecasts look obviously wrong. Are the people who 11 days ago predicted a total of 5,700 still sticking with their forecast? Equally 60,000 by the end of April seems very high - we're a long way short of a peak of 3,000 per day.

If a bad wave gives 30,000 and we get three bad lock down waves, plus general non-wave fatalities during the lesser lock downs in rest of the year, then very very broadly on track for about 120,000 total by March 2021.

[Lew Dolby]

Don't know if it's already been mentioned - and not CoVid specific - but this is academic so I assume is woo-free.

For those of us with no background in bio- or medi- sciences, this from the Wellcome Trust and Liv Uni seems a decent summary of epidemics.

https://pcwww.liv.ac.uk/epidemics/Introduction.htm

[jimbob]

A very very very basic estimate of official deaths in this first wave would be:

7,000 going up the curve
7,000 going across the top (1,000 a day for 7 days)
7,000 going down the curve

Can probably say official is 70% of actual, giving about 30,000.

Some of the extreme forecasts look obviously wrong. Are the people who 11 days ago predicted a total of 5,700 still sticking with their forecast? Equally 60,000 by the end of April seems very high - we're a long way short of a peak of 3,000 per day.

If a bad wave gives 30,000 and we get three bad lock down waves, plus general non-wave fatalities during the lesser lock downs in rest of the year, then very very broadly on track for about 120,000 total by March 2021.

https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/ ... 56960?s=20

hris Giles
@ChrisGiles_
We knew the daily coronavirus death counts were too low because of reporting delays

We had little idea they were 80% too low....

All in guts of todays
@ONS
statistics

[Chris Preston]

Cautiously, Australia just might be managing this ok, so far, touch wood, and all similar invocations of hope.

A couple of weeks ago, we were doubling cases every three-and-a-bit days. Now it's ten days. Our testing rates are on par with Germany and Italy but only 2.1% of tests are coming back positive so we're not just testing the obvious cases but we're probably picking up most of what's out there. That we've stopped the exponential growth in new cases and they or mortality rate seems to be around 0.2% add more support to the idea that there aren't large pockets of mild but infectious disease that our testing systems are missing.

Some of this is dumb luck of geography that gave us some time to slowly organise a social/political response and sprawling cities that make social distancing easier. But maybe, just maybe, if we keep doing what we're doing, we can keep this bubbling at manageable levels until we get a vaccine.

Have I added enough caveats yet? Obvs new data tomorrow night undermine all of this or Easter beach holidays might screw it up, even if the current trends is right.

According to the modelling, 80% of Australians had to follow the rules to make the strategy work. Surprisingly for Australians it looks like 90% are following the rules. At Mrs P's schools there has been less than 10% of the normal students attending for the last 3 weeks. I have been working at home for the past 3 weeks and have encourage as much of my team to do the same. I do have one of my trials sitting in the backyard and have promised someone I will get another one there. I am also videoing my practical classes in the backyard and the front room. The worst thing so far is that any Zoom conference with anyone from campus on it crashes.

The looming Easter holidays are going to be a test. I have been stockpiling at the hardware store to keep me busy instead of going with Mrs P., Junior P major and Mrs Junior P major to meet and do tropical stuff with Mrs. P's niece from St Louis.

The mortality rate will rise to about 2% if the data from South Korea is any guide.

[shpalman]

A very very very basic estimate of official deaths in this first wave would be:

7,000 going up the curve
7,000 going across the top (1,000 a day for 7 days)
7,000 going down the curve

Can probably say official is 70% of actual, giving about 30,000.

Some of the extreme forecasts look obviously wrong. Are the people who 11 days ago predicted a total of 5,700 still sticking with their forecast? Equally 60,000 by the end of April seems very high - we're a long way short of a peak of 3,000 per day.

If a bad wave gives 30,000 and we get three bad lock down waves, plus general non-wave fatalities during the lesser lock downs in rest of the year, then very very broadly on track for about 120,000 total by March 2021.

I don't think it will actually peak at 3000 per day as predicted in that link I shared. I just think it will follow the same curve as Italy, and use Germany as a model of how it could have been done. (The worst day in Italy was nearly 1000 deaths.)

The deaths in the UK aren't being reported 80% too low they're being reported 2-3 days too late. That 2-3 days corresponds to an 80% increase is why exponentials are scary.

[Bewildered]

Cautiously, Australia just might be managing this ok, so far, touch wood, and all similar invocations of hope.

A couple of weeks ago, we were doubling cases every three-and-a-bit days. Now it's ten days. Our testing rates are on par with Germany and Italy but only 2.1% of tests are coming back positive so we're not just testing the obvious cases but we're probably picking up most of what's out there. That we've stopped the exponential growth in new cases and they or mortality rate seems to be around 0.2% add more support to the idea that there aren't large pockets of mild but infectious disease that our testing systems are missing.

Some of this is dumb luck of geography that gave us some time to slowly organise a social/political response and sprawling cities that make social distancing easier. But maybe, just maybe, if we keep doing what we're doing, we can keep this bubbling at manageable levels until we get a vaccine.

Have I added enough caveats yet? Obvs new data tomorrow night undermine all of this or Easter beach holidays might screw it up, even if the current trends is right.

According to the modelling, 80% of Australians had to follow the rules to make the strategy work. Surprisingly for Australians it looks like 90% are following the rules. At Mrs P's schools there has been less than 10% of the normal students attending for the last 3 weeks. I have been working at home for the past 3 weeks and have encourage as much of my team to do the same. I do have one of my trials sitting in the backyard and have promised someone I will get another one there. I am also videoing my practical classes in the backyard and the front room. The worst thing so far is that any Zoom conference with anyone from campus on it crashes.

The looming Easter holidays are going to be a test. I have been stockpiling at the hardware store to keep me busy instead of going with Mrs P., Junior P major and Mrs Junior P major to meet and do tropical stuff with Mrs. P's niece from St Louis.

The mortality rate will rise to about 2% if the data from South Korea is any guide.

Where do you get the part I bolded from?

[Giroliddy]

The UK Heath and Safety Executive (HSE) are the enforcing authority for health and safety in hospitals and operate a reporting line for possible breaches of health and safety in the workplace.
I've drafted the following, but I'm not sure if it is inappropriate to send at this time?


Given the deaths of healthcare workers in the COVID-19 outbreak, and the reported shortages in PPE, I am writing to request HSE to investigate whether absent or inadequate PPE was a contributory factor in their exposure to the virus and subsequent death. Specifically whether the employers, and their controlling entity, the Department of Health, have complied with the requirements of Regulation 4 of the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992, to ensure that “suitable personal protective equipment is provided to his employees”.

Additionally it has been widely reported e.g. (hxxps://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/27/a ... ng-to-cost) that the Department of Health rejected advice to stockpile PPE to deal with a pandemic on the grounds of “the very large incremental cost of adding in eye protection”. I would further request for HSE to investigate whether the Department of Health has sufficiently discharged its duties under Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 to ensure that risks to persons are reduced so far is reasonably practicable. In particular, what assessment was made of the potential risk reduction benefits to employees (from reduced infection rates) of acquiring such PPE, as if the decision was made purely on cost (sacrifice) grounds, then this would appear to be insufficient grounds to make such a decision.

Similarly it has also been reported (e.g. hxxps://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/28/exe ... overnment/) that the results of a previous pandemic exercise (Exercise Cygnus) identified shortfalls in the planning and provision of PPE. According to press reports, the full results of this exercise have never been made public. I would request HSE to fully investigate what learnings and recommendations were made from Exercise Cygnus, and whether, and on what grounds, changes were made or rejected to the ability of the NHS to manage a pandemic. Should there be insufficient grounds for failing to implement recommendations, it should be questioned whether the Department of Health have implemented suitable and sufficient measures to manage the risks of such a pandemic event to NHS staff and service users.

Subsequent to such investigations above, I would request for the HSE to consider whether the Department of Health, by failing to comply with relevant health and safety legislation (with particular regard to the PPE at Work Regulations and the Health and Safety at Work Act) has committed an offence under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 amounting to a gross breach of its duty of care towards its employees resulting in the death or one or more of these employees.

[dyqik]

Ignore.

[lpm]

936 today, probably includes some of the missing weekend numbers. But not far off the likely peak level of around 1,000 a day for 11 April to 18 April.

[FlammableFlower]

Aaaaannnnddd my idiot MP has just joined the religious bandwagon, prompted by an article in the Telegraph, to reopen churches for Easter (here's him sharing his letter on Facebook). FFS I've known he was an idiot for a long time, but that just amazes me. He even shared Boris's FB post to "Stay At Home" on the 3rd of April and now he follows it up with that.

[shpalman]

Well, as long as the churches are all then closed for two weeks with everyone still inside.

Obviously to be extended if anyone develops symptoms.

(ETA: our local racist fat-headed arse Matteo Salvini is saying a similar thing)

(ETA2: about opening churches for Easter, not about locking everyone inside afterwards)

[El Pollo Diablo]

Official numbers today are 938 new(ish) deaths, taking the total 7,097. Still represents both a slowing down of the doubling rate, and a small catching up to Italy. It's also almost as big as their biggest day, and fits with my suggestion that we'd likely see some big numbers in the next few days. Won't be surprising if tomorrow is over 1,000. Still on track to hit 10,000 deaths total by Sunday, or thenabouts.

[shpalman]

Italy did more than 50,000 swabs since yesterday so there were a few more new cases today compared to yesterday but still a lower rate of positive tests. 2099 patients have been declared as recovered.

(this "the government was struggling to hit a target of 10,000 coronavirus tests a day" - Italy was doing 25,000 tests per day back when the total was 50,000-60,000 cases, which is roughly where the UK thinks it is, but I bet it's higher.)

In Lombardy there were only 238 new positives despite more than 8000 swabs. In Como, only 17 new positives.

[plodder]

The UK Heath and Safety Executive (HSE) are the enforcing authority for health and safety in hospitals and operate a reporting line for possible breaches of health and safety in the workplace.
I've drafted the following, but I'm not sure if it is inappropriate to send at this time?


Given the deaths of healthcare workers in the COVID-19 outbreak, and the reported shortages in PPE, I am writing to request HSE to investigate whether absent or inadequate PPE was a contributory factor in their exposure to the virus and subsequent death. Specifically whether the employers, and their controlling entity, the Department of Health, have complied with the requirements of Regulation 4 of the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992, to ensure that “suitable personal protective equipment is provided to his employees”.

Additionally it has been widely reported e.g. (hxxps://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/27/a ... ng-to-cost) that the Department of Health rejected advice to stockpile PPE to deal with a pandemic on the grounds of “the very large incremental cost of adding in eye protection”. I would further request for HSE to investigate whether the Department of Health has sufficiently discharged its duties under Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 to ensure that risks to persons are reduced so far is reasonably practicable. In particular, what assessment was made of the potential risk reduction benefits to employees (from reduced infection rates) of acquiring such PPE, as if the decision was made purely on cost (sacrifice) grounds, then this would appear to be insufficient grounds to make such a decision.

Similarly it has also been reported (e.g. hxxps://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/28/exe ... overnment/) that the results of a previous pandemic exercise (Exercise Cygnus) identified shortfalls in the planning and provision of PPE. According to press reports, the full results of this exercise have never been made public. I would request HSE to fully investigate what learnings and recommendations were made from Exercise Cygnus, and whether, and on what grounds, changes were made or rejected to the ability of the NHS to manage a pandemic. Should there be insufficient grounds for failing to implement recommendations, it should be questioned whether the Department of Health have implemented suitable and sufficient measures to manage the risks of such a pandemic event to NHS staff and service users.

Subsequent to such investigations above, I would request for the HSE to consider whether the Department of Health, by failing to comply with relevant health and safety legislation (with particular regard to the PPE at Work Regulations and the Health and Safety at Work Act) has committed an offence under the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 amounting to a gross breach of its duty of care towards its employees resulting in the death or one or more of these employees.

H&S includes the “reasonably practicable” line which offers wriggle room

[Cardinal Fang]

There's a petition on the Downing St site asking for them to hold a full public inquiry into the handling of the COVID-19 outbreak

CF

[sTeamTraen]

This chart shows total deaths from all causes in Stockholm for 10-day periods (I have no idea why they divide it up that way --- maybe the raw numbers are less granular) in 2018, 2019, and 2020 so far. It's fairly obvious to even "it's just the flu" morons that 170 more people died in Stockholm between 21 and 31 March than normal --- double the usual rate.

During that time, the number of COVID-19 deaths in the whole of Sweden was 110. Even if "Stockholm" here refers to the metro area rather than the municipality, it represents less than 25% of the population of the country. Scale that up and you would get 680 excess deaths, of which about one-sixth were diagnosed. Maybe knock it down a bit for faster spread in the capital, but it still suggests that deaths are being massively underreported. The all-cause mortality figures are going to be horrific in a few weeks.

EU8yfrDWAAAdUTS.png (42.47 KiB) Viewed 3868 times

[Martin Y]

Yeah, compare also the similar chart Shpalman showed earlier. All cause mortality is going to show us what really happened, especially when you factor in the people not dying of flu or car crashes. However big the spike in deaths goes above the typical line, Covid's a bit worse than that because some of the deaths below the line were Covid too.

[Millennie Al]

Page 5 of this leaflet here : https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... eaflet.pdf

It just seems to me that everyone in a household should be quarantined until they're all over it or we can be reasonably sure they're not going to get it. I mean, yeah, people who've recovered may be immune and thus unable to spread it. But that person C hasn't had it. Unless we're assuming they're one of those asymptomatic cases.

It does look rather dubious, but maybe the assumption is that if C hasn't got it from A despite sharing a household then they must be immune for some reason (either previously had an asymptomatic infection or they're naturally immune) and so won't catch it from D either.

[Millennie Al]

It's here: https://covid19.healthdata.org/united-kingdom

799 feels way to low for the total number of ICU beds in a country anyway though so I'm confused about that number.

It's completely wrong. That's the number of free beds in England in January.