Coronavirus vs Natural Deaths

[Whorty]

Interestingly I am in the camp that thinks it is not going to be as bad as Italy, whereas my brother is convinced it is and we are about 14 days behind them.

Only time will tell.

I believe we are 14 days behind the peak, purely because we've only just closed businesses down and gone full isolation. It would be very surprising if cases didn't continue to rise for the next 14 days - this is logical, as there were people out there infected, who were not aware, and spreading it.

Will we get it as bad, or worse than Italy? Time will tell. But will we get the 70% infection rates that people throw about ... not likely. These rates of infection are based on a model that had 'do nothing', and we aren't doing nothing. For weeks now we have been doing something, and these actions will both slow the spread and reduce the numbers.

We'll all be experts in hindsight

[Whorty]

Hope so.

If everyone keeps social distance strictly, it's a mathematical certainty that the virus has to peter out. Need to get the R number (number of healthy people each case infects) to under 1.
Then the virus has nowhere to go. It'll flare up in pockets for the forseeable future but strict quarantining should keep it down.

The only problem is that I'm not convinced of the intelligence of the great British public (or other populaces to be fair).

Woo hoo, and you and I start to converge again

[OwlHoot]

Hope so.

If everyone keeps social distance strictly, it's a mathematical certainty that the virus has to peter out. Need to get the R number (number of healthy people each case infects) to under 1.

Then the virus has nowhere to go. It'll flare up in pockets for the forseeable future but strict quarantining should keep it down.

The only problem is that I'm not convinced of the intelligence of the great British public (or other populaces to be fair).

I hope supermarkets have someone spraying supermarket trolleys at regular intervals. Otherwise, with it's six hour or so lifetime outside a host it could be spread that way. Ditto wiping card payment gadgets, etc.

[billybiro]

Interesting piece of commentary on the Beeb Linky

It backs up some of the arguments that the models predicting such a high number of deaths in the UK are potentially over-egged, and are missing some key factors. It notes that officially, we have 8000 deaths in the UK, each year, directly attributable to Flu. It also notes that of those who will die now, many will have died anyway and whilst the dead may have the virus in their system, we do not know if they died of the virus or of their underlying illness.

Just goes to show that not even the experts know the answer, and it is all very grey, and not as black and white as some argue. I don't think anyone is arguing that some people will definitely die earlier than their time, but many deaths that are attributed to the virus will have been people who would die anyway this year (although their deaths may be brought forward). It goes back to the risk/reward, or payoff, for doing nothing to doing the extreme that we (and other countries) are doing now.

One interesting figure in the article, and I suppose if you step back and think about it, it shouldn't be that surprising, is we have 500,000 to 600,000 deaths in the UK every year anyway.

Hindsight will tell us how well our actions were, for now we all have our own biased view I guess.

It's a short article, but just a few quotes :

YouTube

[OwlHoot]

Over here, they're expecting exponential growth to continue until next Friday at least. If social distancing measures are working, then new cases should start to level off early the following week. We're still expecting 10 to 15 thousand cases.
This is an example of how not to say things. It's factually correct, but spreads fear as it doesn't quantify the risk. The implication is that if you get the worse strain, you'll get the deadly pneumonia inevitably. But that's not the case.

There are two strains of the virus, S and L. S is the older one with milder symptoms and less infectious. L is the one most people have. It can produce deadly pneumonia in a significant minority of people. It will make around 20% of people pretty ill. This is across the population. Different figures for different demographics.

What is coronavirus, how did it start and could the outbreak grow bigger?
Coronavirus: Are there two strains and is one more deadly? | New Scientist*

“In all practical terms, the virus is as it was when it originally emerged"

So don't worry about which one you'll catch. It'll be the worse one most likely.

* I know the New Scientist article is 5th March,and reports on a study with limited data, but nothing has come out since that refutes it.

OK, next question, to which I realise possibly nobody yet knows the answer:

Does catching and recovering from the L variant offer much subsequent protection against the naughtier one?

If so then might it not make sense to deliberately infect selected people, under controlled conditions, with the L version and enhance partial herd immunity that way? Although of course what nobody needs is to cop both variants at the same time!

[billybiro]

Interesting piece of commentary on the Beeb Linky

It backs up some of the arguments that the models predicting such a high number of deaths in the UK are potentially over-egged, and are missing some key factors. It notes that officially, we have 8000 deaths in the UK, each year, directly attributable to Flu. It also notes that of those who will die now, many will have died anyway and whilst the dead may have the virus in their system, we do not know if they died of the virus or of their underlying illness.

Just goes to show that not even the experts know the answer, and it is all very grey, and not as black and white as some argue. I don't think anyone is arguing that some people will definitely die earlier than their time, but many deaths that are attributed to the virus will have been people who would die anyway this year (although their deaths may be brought forward). It goes back to the risk/reward, or payoff, for doing nothing to doing the extreme that we (and other countries) are doing now.

One interesting figure in the article, and I suppose if you step back and think about it, it shouldn't be that surprising, is we have 500,000 to 600,000 deaths in the UK every year anyway.

Hindsight will tell us how well our actions were, for now we all have our own biased view I guess.

It's a short article, but just a few quotes :

As a child of the Thatcherite political era, where rampant individualism, greed and a steadfast belief that "there's no such thing as society", remind me again why I, a perfectly healthy person, should give one sh!t about this virus and what it might do to others?

[OwlHoot]

As a child of the Thatcherite political era, where rampant individualism, greed and a steadfast belief that "there's no such thing as society", remind me again why I, a perfectly healthy person, should give one sh!t about this virus and what it might do to others?

I assume that is probably a deliberately provocative question, although many no doubt do think much like that, but treating it at face value:

Because even if you don't catch it, or shrug it off like a common cold, the longer and worse the outbreak and consequent disruption to the economy the more likely you are to end up out of contract for longer, perhaps much longer, and/or be in far worse pickle if you need hospital treatment for anything else like a road accident.

[NotAllThere]

OK, next question, to which I realise possibly nobody yet knows the answer:

Does catching and recovering from the L variant offer much subsequent protection against the naughtier one?

If so then might it not make sense to deliberately infect selected people, under controlled conditions, with the L version and enhance partial herd immunity that way? Although of course what nobody needs is to cop both variants at the same time!

The data on the L and S variant came from genome sequencing carried out in China relatively early on.

Given how the immune system works in identifying viruses (largely proteins on the outside of the virus), the chances are if you get one, you're immune against the other. I believe the data backs this up, since there is no real evidence of anyone getting reinfected.

[sasguru]

What medicine did you use?

Ibuprofen. I missed the advice that said you shouldn't use it. And cognac. So was pleased on my walk to see that I wasn't out of breath even though it was a gentle walk so not really definitive. Noticed a couple of young folk obviously visiting parents for Mother's day. Doh!

[sasguru]

Maybe this virus will act as a gammon and stupid culler