Coronavirus outbreak

1118 posts
Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 12:55

Emmer Green Royal As the proportion of the population that has been infected is unknown, surely much of this discussion is meaningless.

For example, if all of the population was already infected, then ending the lockdown would lead to no increase in illness at all. I'm not suggesting that this is the case, but without knowing what proportion of the population is infected everything else is a bit random.


If you look at Spain's numbers, the current ratio of confirmed cases to the TOTAL population is 1:346.

That means if the whole population was already infected there would be 345 un-spotted cases for every one confirmed

For the ratio to be higher you would have to increase the population!

This 345:1 ratio reduces every day as we get more confirmed cases. If you presume that confirmed cases will at least treble by the end of the pandemic then the ratio then will be 115:1... that is with 100% of the population infected. This strongly suggests an eventual ratio of less than 100:1, which is why I'm using 100:1 as a ball-park for now.

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 12:57

leon
Snowball
leon
Well you're not making anyone else feel that way.





All I am doing is posting government stats and analysis or projections

If people don't want to read it/them then they don't read it.

Or they can block me.

What's the problem?

The alternative seems to be "Ignore what is happening or likely to happen and look again in 18 months if we are alive."




For one example. One hugely crucial number is how many uncounted infections are there for every officially logged one.

I have seen speculation that the ratio is 10:1 but others saying it's more than 1000:1

To be able to show based on the UK, Spain, Italy's figures that multiply HAS to be under 350:1, is important. By coming up with that 350-and-falling-every day, there is (for me at least) some removal of uncertainty.

I for one would like to know is the number 10:1, or 37:1 or 99:1. Then I know how many will/would get the virus in a free-society or one heavily locked down. If we knew (just saying) that without this 99% lockdown we would have 100,000 new cases a day (UK) and 50,000 deaths a day (UK) then that would be incredibly strong incentive to stay in etc.

If, OTOH it was shown that free movement would "only" cause 500 cases a day and 100 deaths a day, consistently over, say, a year, (182,500 Cases and 36,500 deaths) then maybe we would just bite that bullet, take the death toll but still have an economy when we came out the other side.


You’re doing it again.



So are you. If the posts disturb you, don't read them.

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 13:07

I am frankly bewildered why, in the middle of what looks like the biggest crisis since WWII, some people want to stick their head in the sand over this.

I want to KNOW whether the lockdown is too loose or too draconian.

I want to know the confirmed-case to actual-case ratio

I want to know, if my loved ones get it, what are their chances.

I want to know why we are fiftieth in the world for tests per million people when we are the fifth or sixth richest nation on earth.

I want to know, if I, or anyone else, is hospitalised, does that mean (for example) a 2/3rds chance of death?

IF we are underestimating the medium-term danger I want that corrected.

IF we are OVER-estimating the medium-term danger I want that corrected.

The Government, the Scientists are all saying they are data-driven.

For example there appears to be a slow decline in death-rate, but that death-rate is measured against confirmed cases. And if you test more you find more cases, so the percentage death rate will, of course, appear to decline

User avatar
leon
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13504
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:18
Location: Hips, Lips, Tits, Power

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by leon » 06 Apr 2020 13:31

Snowball
leon
Snowball



All I am doing is posting government stats and analysis or projections

If people don't want to read it/them then they don't read it.

Or they can block me.

What's the problem?

The alternative seems to be "Ignore what is happening or likely to happen and look again in 18 months if we are alive."




For one example. One hugely crucial number is how many uncounted infections are there for every officially logged one.

I have seen speculation that the ratio is 10:1 but others saying it's more than 1000:1

To be able to show based on the UK, Spain, Italy's figures that multiply HAS to be under 350:1, is important. By coming up with that 350-and-falling-every day, there is (for me at least) some removal of uncertainty.

I for one would like to know is the number 10:1, or 37:1 or 99:1. Then I know how many will/would get the virus in a free-society or one heavily locked down. If we knew (just saying) that without this 99% lockdown we would have 100,000 new cases a day (UK) and 50,000 deaths a day (UK) then that would be incredibly strong incentive to stay in etc.

If, OTOH it was shown that free movement would "only" cause 500 cases a day and 100 deaths a day, consistently over, say, a year, (182,500 Cases and 36,500 deaths) then maybe we would just bite that bullet, take the death toll but still have an economy when we came out the other side.


You’re doing it again.



So are you. If the posts disturb you, don't read them.


Yeah

Hound
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 14612
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Hound » 06 Apr 2020 13:46

Snowball I am frankly bewildered why, in the middle of what looks like the biggest crisis since WWII, some people want to stick their head in the sand over this.

I want to KNOW whether the lockdown is too loose or too draconian.

I want to know the confirmed-case to actual-case ratio

I want to know, if my loved ones get it, what are their chances.

I want to know why we are fiftieth in the world for tests per million people when we are the fifth or sixth richest nation on earth.

I want to know, if I, or anyone else, is hospitalised, does that mean (for example) a 2/3rds chance of death?

IF we are underestimating the medium-term danger I want that corrected.

IF we are OVER-estimating the medium-term danger I want that corrected.

The Government, the Scientists are all saying they are data-driven.

For example there appears to be a slow decline in death-rate, but that death-rate is measured against confirmed cases. And if you test more you find more cases, so the percentage death rate will, of course, appear to decline


I think everyone want to know that pretty much tbf Snowball. But we can't make that info come out, as they dont know most of it


Emmer Green Royal
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 05 May 2006 11:57
Location: St Johann in Tirol, Austria

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Emmer Green Royal » 06 Apr 2020 14:09

[quote="Snowball"][quote="Emmer Green Royal"]As the proportion of the population that has been infected is unknown, surely much of this discussion is meaningless.

For example, if [u][b]all[/b][/u] of the population was already infected, then ending the lockdown would lead to no increase in illness at all. I'm not suggesting that this is the case, but without knowing what proportion of the population is infected everything else is a bit random.[/quote]

If you look at Spain's numbers, the current ratio of confirmed cases to the TOTAL population is 1:346.

That means if the whole population was already infected there would be 345 un-spotted cases for every one confirmed

For the ratio to be higher you would have to increase the population!

This 345:1 ratio reduces every day as we get more confirmed cases. If you presume that confirmed cases will at least treble by the end of the pandemic then the ratio then will be 115:1... that is with 100% of the population infected. This strongly suggests an eventual ratio of less than 100:1, which is why I'm using 100:1 as a ball-park for now.[/quote]

A study conducted by researchers at Oxford University says that, according to its model, more than half of the UK population has already been infected by coronavirus. That is, the ratio could be lower than 2:1. Basing your extrapolations on a figure of 100:1, when no evidence is provided to justify this figure, means that the conclusions are meaningless.

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 14:13

Hound
Snowball I am frankly bewildered why, in the middle of what looks like the biggest crisis since WWII, some people want to stick their head in the sand over this.

I want to KNOW whether the lockdown is too loose or too draconian.

I want to know the confirmed-case to actual-case ratio

I want to know, if my loved ones get it, what are their chances.

I want to know why we are fiftieth in the world for tests per million people when we are the fifth or sixth richest nation on earth.

I want to know, if I, or anyone else, is hospitalised, does that mean (for example) a 2/3rds chance of death?

IF we are underestimating the medium-term danger I want that corrected.

IF we are OVER-estimating the medium-term danger I want that corrected.

The Government, the Scientists are all saying they are data-driven.

For example there appears to be a slow decline in death-rate, but that death-rate is measured against confirmed cases. And if you test more you find more cases, so the percentage death rate will, of course, appear to decline


I think everyone want to know that pretty much tbf Snowball. But we can't make that info come out, as they dont know most of it


Gradually, you can work some of these things out. Like, for example the max confirmed/unseen cases ratio. We at least now know that it's not 100s of thousands, not thousands, not even many 100s. That MATTERS. A couple of week's ago many were saying, "Ah this death rate means little, there are masses and masses of infections out there..." (etc) That downplayed the seriousness of the whole thing. To get closer and closer to a true number helps us make decisions

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 14:26

Emmer Green Royal

A study conducted by researchers at Oxford University says that, according to its model, more than half of the UK population has already been infected by coronavirus. That is, the ratio could be lower than 2:1. Basing your extrapolations on a figure of 100:1, when no evidence is provided to justify this figure, means that the conclusions are meaningless.


That is some TERRIBLE mathematics!

The UK Population is approximately 68,000,000

Half of that is 34,00,000. That's how many people you are saying has it! For God's sake 60% is considered the herd-immunity level

The officially confirmed cases number is 47,806 Cases

34,000,000:47,806 is a ratio of 711:1 (Yesterday's numbers)

Not only is that bonkers but please explain: if half the population has it, when you test people WITH symptoms, in hospital, dead, dying, back from a crisis area, or had a contact with a known sufferer the percentage is (yesterday) 24.45%

If there really were half of the population with it, we'd get 97K cases from 194,000 tests, but if we were testing people who are NOT "randoms" but with serious symptoms, dead etc we would surely get something around 75% not 24%

If the 195,524 test were TOTALLY random they would have found 97,762 cases

================================================================

As for "no evidence" for my numbers. I have posted plenty. Spain, for example has 2,888 Confirmed Cases per million, a total of 135,082 Cases. The population, the TOTAL population of Spain is 46,750,098. The ratio between the TOTAL population and the number of confirmed cases is 46,750,098:135,082 is 346. That means if every single person in the country has it (absolutely ridiculous of course) the number, the maximum POSSIBLE number is 346:1, half of the Oxford 711:1

Or, look at the UK. It would be ludicrous to believe that the Confirmed Cases (tests are aimed at likely cases) would produce a number LESS than a random 195,524 people from the untested population. So, wildly saying the general population rate IS 24.45% (anything higher defies logic) that would give a total of about 17 Million people. (Actually 16,541,571)

The ratio of 16,541,571:47,806 is 1:347

Interesting Spain based on actual cases v population produces 1:346. Doing the UK a different way gives 1:347

346:1
347:1


that is the most extreme possible ratio

Emmer Green Royal
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 05 May 2006 11:57
Location: St Johann in Tirol, Austria

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Emmer Green Royal » 06 Apr 2020 14:56

[quote="Snowball"]

As for "no evidence" for my numbers. I have posted plenty. [/quote]

I'm sorry but you have provided no evidence. Yes, you have posted plenty of numbers, but no actual evidence of the number of people infected. And without knowing the actual number of people infected, any conclusions drawn about possible death toll is meaningless.


Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 15:07

Emmer Green Royal
Snowball
As for "no evidence" for my numbers. I have posted plenty.


I'm sorry but you have provided no evidence. Yes, you have posted plenty of numbers, but no actual evidence of the number of people infected. And without knowing the actual number of people infected, any conclusions drawn about possible death toll is meaningless.


If you simply Google "How many undetected cases of Covid-19" you can read dozens of sites

Here are the top ten

85.71% 6:1
90.91% 10:1
66.67% 2:1
93.09% 13:1
86.00% 6:1
83.33% 5:1
90.91% 10:1
60.00% 1.5:1

82.08% Average = 82:18 or 5:1 = This means five undetected cases for every detected case

If that number applies to the UK it means we have 50,000 detected and 250,000 undetected.

As for confirmed infections versus THE POPULATION (of Spain) if you can't understand that then there isn't even a point in you going back to school

Emmer Green Royal
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 05 May 2006 11:57
Location: St Johann in Tirol, Austria

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Emmer Green Royal » 06 Apr 2020 15:14

[quote="Snowball"][quote="Emmer Green Royal"][quote="Snowball"]

As for "no evidence" for my numbers. I have posted plenty. [/quote]

I'm sorry but you have provided no evidence. Yes, you have posted plenty of numbers, but no actual evidence of the number of people infected. And without knowing the actual number of people infected, any conclusions drawn about possible death toll is meaningless.[/quote]

If you simply Google "How many undetected cases of Covid-19" you can read dozens of sites

Here are the top ten

85.71% 6:1
90.91% 10:1
66.67% 2:1
93.09% 13:1
86.00% 6:1
83.33% 5:1
90.91% 10:1
60.00% 1.5:1

82.08% Average = 82:18 or 5:1 = This means five undetected cases for every detected case

If that number applies to the UK it means we have 50,000 detected and 250,000 undetected.

As for confirmed infections versus THE POPULATION (of Spain) if you can't understand that then there isn't even a point in you going back to school[/quote]

But there is no EVIDENCE for these numbers. They are guesses.

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 15:18

Emmer Green Royal
Snowball
Emmer Green Royal
I'm sorry but you have provided no evidence. Yes, you have posted plenty of numbers, but no actual evidence of the number of people infected. And without knowing the actual number of people infected, any conclusions drawn about possible death toll is meaningless.


If you simply Google "How many undetected cases of Covid-19" you can read dozens of sites

Here are the top ten

85.71% 6:1
90.91% 10:1
66.67% 2:1
93.09% 13:1
86.00% 6:1
83.33% 5:1
90.91% 10:1
60.00% 1.5:1

82.08% Average = 82:18 or 5:1 = This means five undetected cases for every detected case

If that number applies to the UK it means we have 50,000 detected and 250,000 undetected.

As for confirmed infections versus THE POPULATION (of Spain) if you can't understand that then there isn't even a point in you going back to school


But there is no EVIDENCE for these numbers. They are guesses.


Explain the "evidence" you had when you said "MORE THAN HALF" of the UK population have it?

You said "Oxford".

Strange the WHO etc don't agree

Emmer Green Royal
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 05 May 2006 11:57
Location: St Johann in Tirol, Austria

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Emmer Green Royal » 06 Apr 2020 15:32

[quote="Snowball"][quote="Emmer Green Royal"][quote="Snowball"]

If you simply Google "How many undetected cases of Covid-19" you can read dozens of sites

Here are the top ten

85.71% 6:1
90.91% 10:1
66.67% 2:1
93.09% 13:1
86.00% 6:1
83.33% 5:1
90.91% 10:1
60.00% 1.5:1

82.08% Average = 82:18 or 5:1 = This means five undetected cases for every detected case

If that number applies to the UK it means we have 50,000 detected and 250,000 undetected.

As for confirmed infections versus THE POPULATION (of Spain) if you can't understand that then there isn't even a point in you going back to school[/quote]

But there is no EVIDENCE for these numbers. They are guesses.[/quote]

Explain the "evidence" you had when you said "MORE THAN HALF" of the UK population have it?

You said "Oxford".

Strange the WHO etc don't agree[/quote]

https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd ... bea055720b


User avatar
Hendo
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7629
Joined: 25 Mar 2012 20:53
Location: Mornings are for coffee and contemplation

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Hendo » 06 Apr 2020 15:33

EGR - I am not sure how you are constantly failing to quote Snowball properly :lol:

Emmer Green Royal
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 05 May 2006 11:57
Location: St Johann in Tirol, Austria

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Emmer Green Royal » 06 Apr 2020 15:38

[quote="Hendo"]EGR - I am not sure how you are constantly failing to quote Snowball properly :lol:[/quote]

Do you mean what the quote looks like, or the contents that I'm quoting?

User avatar
Hendo
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7629
Joined: 25 Mar 2012 20:53
Location: Mornings are for coffee and contemplation

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Hendo » 06 Apr 2020 15:48

Emmer Green Royal
Hendo EGR - I am not sure how you are constantly failing to quote Snowball properly :lol:


Do you mean what the quote looks like, or the contents that I'm quoting?


Just what it looks like, did it when quoting me just then as well!

Emmer Green Royal
Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 05 May 2006 11:57
Location: St Johann in Tirol, Austria

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Emmer Green Royal » 06 Apr 2020 16:28

[quote="Hendo"][quote="Emmer Green Royal"][quote="Hendo"]EGR - I am not sure how you are constantly failing to quote Snowball properly :lol:[/quote]

Do you mean what the quote looks like, or the contents that I'm quoting?[/quote]

Just what it looks like, did it when quoting me just then as well![/quote]

I don't know - I just hit the quote button and type after the end quote. My own quotes have always looks odd to me> I've used different computers, different browsers. Don't know!

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 16:29

Snowball
Emmer Green Royal

A study conducted by researchers at Oxford University says that, according to its model, more than half of the UK population has already been infected by coronavirus. That is, the ratio could be lower than 2:1. Basing your extrapolations on a figure of 100:1, when no evidence is provided to justify this figure, means that the conclusions are meaningless.


Imperial College's virology department (the main scientific analyses being used by UK Govt) is led by Neil Fergusson

Who published this:

Ferguson believes the number of undocumented infections is not nearly as high as a recent estimate by researchers at Oxford University, who suggested that half of the British population is already infected. If that were true, the CFR for COVID-19 in the U.K. would be something like [b]0.002 percent, making the disease much less deadly than the seasonal flu, which has an estimated CFR of 0.1 percent.[/b]

(Me here: EXACTLY. Their figures suggested that Covid-19 was ONE FIFTIETH as lethal as Seasonal Flu. Yeah, of course it is. That's why we've closed down the country - for a mild cold.


Fergusson again:

"I don't think it's consistent with the observed data," Ferguson said of the Oxford estimate, citing the results from comprehensive testing of Italian villages and the Diamond Princess cruise ship's passengers and crew. Raising the reproduction number from 2.5 to 3 or more nevertheless implies that the number of undocumented infections is higher than Ferguson's group originally thought.

But then what would a professor of virology know, eh?

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 17:01

Imperial College

Paper

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperi ... ort-13.pdf



Predict that between 5.9% and 15.2% of twelve countries might have been infected (with a mean of 9.8%.

Before you get excited, Italy and Spain are way ahead of the UK and their infection and death rates skew the average. For example, based on Sunday's figures, Spain's infection rate was FOUR TIMES that of the UK

05.9% times 67,793,325 is 03,999,806 UK infections
09.8% times 67,793,325 is 06,643,746 UK infections
15.2% times 67,793,325 is 10,304,585 UK infections

Current UK deaths are 5,903. There is a lag in deaths, but at this point the death rate would be, for the LOWEST estimate, 0.15% just one and a half times the lethality of seasonal flu. At the middle figure this would mean that seasonal flu is eleven times more lethal than coronavirus.
At the top end the numbers would mean that seasonal flu is 16.6 times more deadly than Covid-19



At that 5.9% level (4m having it) the ratio of unseen:confirmed is 4m:47,806 or 84:1 making Corona = Seasonal Flu

The UK "Attack Rate" is given as 2.7% [1.2%-5.4%]

Possible - - - Actual - - - Ratio
0,813,520 - - 47,806 - - 17.02
1,830,420 - - 47,806 - - 38.29
3,864,220 - - 47,806 - - 80.83

Snowball
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16937
Joined: 02 Jan 2009 18:35

Re: Coronavirus outbreak

by Snowball » 06 Apr 2020 17:28

Updated with today's figures

UK Cases now 51,608

The UK "Attack Rate" is given as 2.7% [1.2%-5.4%]

Possible - - - Actual - - - Ratio
0,813,520 - - 51,608 - - 15.76
1,830,420 - - 51,608 - - 35.47
3,864,220 - - 51,608 - - 74.88

Spain's Max has dropped to 343 (it will be much lower eventually)

The UK's can be calculated

We have tested 260,445, 1 in every 268 and 19.82% of those tested positive,608

260,445 100.00% Total Tests
208,837 080.18% Total Negative
051,608 019.82% Total Positive


Apply that 19.82% to the total UK population you get 13,436,637 maximum infected ATM. We have spotted 51,608 of those.

13,385,029 :51,608 equals a ratio of 259:1

259:1 Maximum UK
346:1 Maximum Spain

As stated previously, these numbers are dropping every day and they are 95% certain to go under 100:1

All the above is based on the ridiculous idea that the general population, random people, could have an infection rate equal to 19.82%

It will be amazing if ATM it was a third of that

1118 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 194 guests

It is currently 11 Jul 2020 01:25