Swaps Looking for a swap

[starbird]

I cannot see the number of deaths going into the hundreds of thousands. It's not close to that across the world let alone the UK. No one would allow it to go that how even if that was the governments aim. I feel for those will lose loved ones from this. It's good to see large employers taking pro active action, working from home etc so the herd immunity tactic is unlikely to work as businesses are proactively reacting to the virus.

Once the panic buying phase ends I see most normal, respectful people, keeping a distance and implementing their own social distancing regardless what the government says anyway. In reality the only way to isolate it is to stop all air travel.

 

[bonusmedia]

I cannot see the number of deaths going into the hundreds of thousands. It's not close to that across the world let alone the UK. No one would allow it to go that how even if that was the governments aim. I feel for those will lose loved ones from this. It's good to see large employers taking pro active action, working from home etc so the herd immunity tactic is unlikely to work as businesses are proactively reacting to the virus.

Once the panic buying phase ends I see most normal, respectful people, keeping a distance and implementing their own social distancing regardless what the government says anyway. In reality the only way to isolate it is to stop all air travel.

The working number last Monday was 100,000 extra deaths in the UK with a worst case scenario of 500,000. If anything, they would need adjusting upwards now, not down.

Unfortunately as a species we're really bad at judging this stuff, we tend to go with our guts and past experience.
This is a well recognised bias and phenomenon: Normalcy bias

Also this is really interesting and explains exponential growth:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Closing borders was all far too late I'm afraid, that only helps before there is community transmission within a population. Trump likes his theatre (currently trying to pin all this on foreigners!). It has been spreading for quite a while.

 

[bonusmedia]

And for a little light relief if you haven't seen it already:

https://twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1237492620588470272?s=20

I'll shut up now, good luck folks

 

[webber]

Is this a good time to ask Nominet to revert the price increase?
Or maybe ask for governmental support...

 

[mally]

My Mrs went shopping, I asked if she'd bought any extra just incase, she replied, "I've bought 2 tins of corned beef instead of 1." She also added she was too embarrassed to buy toilet roll.

 

[mally]

A good way to explain the reasons we're not closing schools etc immediately

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[newguy]

The working number last Monday was 100,000 extra deaths in the UK with a worst case scenario of 500,000. If anything, they would need adjusting upwards now, not down.

Unfortunately as a species we're really bad at judging this stuff, we tend to go with our guts and past experience.
This is a well recognised bias and phenomenon: Normalcy bias

Also this is really interesting and explains exponential growth:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Closing borders was all far too late I'm afraid, that only helps before there is community transmission within a population. Trump likes his theatre (currently trying to pin all this on foreigners!). It has been spreading for quite a while.

I tend to think you're right. We have no mental reference point for a pandemic, and so people are largely just perplexed or making inaccurate comparisons to the flu. The rate of people 70+ who end up in intensive care with this is around 10% which is quite staggering. And, in the Netherlands for example half of those in intensive care are actually under 50. They just tend to get over it while older people struggle. There also appears to be lung capacity damage to some of those getting over this. If tonnes of people get sick at the same time though, their outcomes will be very poor. I don't think estimations of 100,000 plus dead are at all unlikely, and I also think that most if not all of us are likely to have loved ones wiped out by this, at which time we may come to view it with fear more than anything else.

I don't quite get the fixation with stockpiling bogroll, but do think getting a couple of months worth of food in is a bit of a nose lose gamble, if you're going to eat it anyway

 

[Siusaidh]

I am very anxious about what is going to happen if ventilators run out, and also about the staffing of doctors and nurses at the peak time.

From the very beginning of this kicking off in China we should have been thinking contingencies, and beginning to initiate mass production of ventilators like Churchill ordered the mass production of aircraft. If necessary requisition workshops. We have 5000 ventilators in the country. That's not anywhere near what we may need.

With regard to mortality rates, it's all a bit confusing. The common statement is that 1% (on average) will die. However, if as we're told, there are 10000 people (probably more now) with the virus, and 34 have died - doing the maths, that is nearer 0.3% mortality rate. The real crunch figure is the 10% rate for the old, frail, and already sick. That highlights the absolute priority of isolating those people as much as humanly possible.

In the wider population, I'm expecting 60-70% of the population to contract the virus in the coming months. It's not just social distancing. Every time you use a cash machine or a ticket machine or open a door, hundreds of people are using everyday things like that.

Say 30 million people contract the virus. That's 3000 times more than the 10000 who are estimated to have contracted it so far. That = 34 x 3000 deaths. That's 102,000 deaths, which may be about right or it might be a very conservative estimate.

If, as they say, 1% will die, then that might indicate an upper figure of around 300,000 deaths.

With either figure, the pressure on a health service with 5000 ventilators is going to be huge - and that's before you factor all the people who are already in critical care for other conditions.

We badly need volunteers in support roles in hospitals. How many doctors and nurses are going to get sick? The pressure will be huge, and in worst case scenario, the elderly and weakest are going to have to be sacrificed for the younger and healthier, which would involve terrible decisions. Hopefully that doesn't arise.

I can't say it enough: there aren't enough ventilators. And it's very uncertain at the height that there will be enough trained staff. 3rd year nursing students in support roles will be very much needed (by then they have most of the skills but not very much experience).

 

[newguy]

I am very anxious about what is going to happen if ventilators run out, and also about the staffing of doctors and nurses at the peak time.

From the very beginning of this kicking off in China we should have been thinking contingencies, and beginning to initiate mass production of ventilators like Churchill ordered the mass production of aircraft. If necessary requisition workshops. We have 5000 ventilators in the country. That's not anywhere near what we may need.

With regard to mortality rates, it's all a bit confusing. The common statement is that 1% (on average) will die. However, if as we're told, there are 10000 people (probably more now) with the virus, and 34 have died - doing the maths, that is nearer 0.3% mortality rate. The real crunch figure is the 10% rate for the old, frail, and already sick. That highlights the absolute priority of isolating those people as much as humanly possible.

In the wider population, I'm expecting 60-70% of the population to contract the virus in the coming months. It's not just social distancing. Every time you use a cash machine or a ticket machine or open a door, hundreds of people are using everyday things like that.

Say 30 million people contract the virus. That's 3000 times more than the 10000 who are estimated to have contracted it so far. That = 34 x 3000 deaths. That's 102,000 deaths, which may be about right or it might be a very conservative estimate.

If, as they say, 1% will die, then that might indicate an upper figure of around 300,000 deaths.

With either figure, the pressure on a health service with 5000 ventilators is going to be huge - and that's before you factor all the people who are already in critical care for other conditions.

We badly near volunteers in support roles in hospitals. How many doctors and nurses are going to get sick? The pressure will be huge, and in worst case scenario, the elderly and weakest are going to have to be sacrificed for the younger and healthier, which would involve terrible decisions. Hopefully that doesn't arise.

I can't say it enough: there aren't enough ventilators. And it's very uncertain at the height that there will be enough trained staff. 3rd year nursing students in support roles will be very much needed (by then they have most of the skills but not very much experience).

You're right, we have laughably few ventilators, which is a worry since so many people (both young and old) will need them. There is a perception that if you're 40 and 50 and get this, it's something you shrug off without much trouble. Many people within that age range do need to have their breathing managed for them for a period of time though and if that isn't an option, then we're in real trouble.

As for the mortality rate, I think it's early days as all of these people will have received the very best treatment available. Something that will unfortunately not be a realistic expectation soon. The death rate where this runs rampant like in Italy is close to 9% (1,809 deaths from 20,603 cases). The country does have an elderly population, but this is still a very worrying number and many magnitudes higher than the flu.

For those over 80 in China the mortality rate was around 15% (with 30% requiring ventilators I believe), and over 70s 5% or more die.. In this day and age I don't think 70 is incredibly 'old' and so it's suddenly dawning on these people that if they get this there is a not insignificant chance of them dying. If the treatment options are not available due to demand, I don't want to think about the worsening outcomes. I wouldn't say I'm typically an alarmist or overly concerned about current events, but this is a pandemic that may well kill millions around the world and hundreds of thousands at home. It's a weird event to be living through that's for sure and I think the reality of it over the coming months may well be both traumatic and harrowing. Please think about developing a plan for your elderly relatives to minimise the risk to them.

Sorry for the grim post. I am also available for children's parties!

 

[bonusmedia]

With regard to mortality rates, it's all a bit confusing. The common statement is that 1% (on average) will die. However, if as we're told, there are 10000 people (probably more now) with the virus, and 34 have died - doing the maths, that is nearer 0.3% mortality rate. The real crunch figure is the 10% rate for the old, frail, and already sick. That highlights the absolute priority of isolating those people as much as humanly possible.

I agree with everything you say except your mortality workings, I'm afraid you haven't factored in the delay between catching it and dying of it. The people dying today mostly caught it 2+ weeks ago.

There are some sourced stats here, I'm afraid they are grim reading: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/

Obviously there is going to be a lot of local variation. For example, Italy's population is older than ours - but not massively.

 

[bonusmedia]

You're right, we have laughably few ventilators, which is a worry since so many people (both young and old) will need them. There is a perception that if you're 40 and 50 and get this, it's something you shrug off without much trouble. Many people within that age range do need to have their breathing managed for them for a period of time though and if that isn't an option, then we're in real trouble.

As for the mortality rate, I think it's early days as all of these people will have received the very best treatment available. Something that will unfortunately not be a realistic expectation soon. The death rate where this runs rampant like in Italy is close to 9% (1,809 deaths from 20,603 cases). The country does have an elderly population, but this is still a very worrying number and many magnitudes higher than the flu.

For those over 80 in China the mortality rate was around 15% (with 30% requiring ventilators I believe), and over 70s 5% or more die.. In this day and age I don't think 70 is incredibly 'old' and so it's suddenly dawning on these people that if they get this there is a not insignificant chance of them dying. If the treatment options are not available due to demand, I don't want to think about the worsening outcomes. I wouldn't say I'm typically an alarmist or overly concerned about current events, but this is a pandemic that may well kill millions around the world and hundreds of thousands at home. It's a weird event to be living through that's for sure and I think the reality of it over the coming months may be both traumatic and harrowing. Please think about developing a plan for your elderly relatives to minimise the risk to them.

Sorry for the grim post. I am also available for children's parties!

Ah great I can say something positive
That 9% is using recorded/reported cases. There will definitely be a very large number of people who have or had it and haven't been tested and so aren't recorded.

 

[bonusmedia]

That worldometer site's totals have gone skewiff, they may just be updating the numbers

 

[newguy]

Ah great I can say something positive
That 9% is using recorded/reported cases. There will definitely be a very large number of people who have or had it and haven't been tested and so aren't recorded.

That's true and is a positive . There are bound to be plenty of cases that aren't troubling enough to bother hospitals with and so may reduce the mortality rate. On the flipside, large numbers of those that haven't died are still in hospital with unknown eventual outcomes. I guess really, it's still so new that it's hard to totally weigh out the possible outcomes if this doesn't go away. I'm hoping that a vaccine is eventually developed. I'm not sure how realistic that hope is, but if it happens it'll certainly be a game changer and save many lives.

 

[Murray]

Absolute arsehole

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[newguy]

Absolute arsehole

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

'A pandemic meant an opportunity'. You couldn't make it up.. Shameless!