FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Virus

I don't get the statistics....

Jump to newest
 

By *az080378 OP   Woman
over a year ago

Cromer

Hoping someone can explain it to me!

Looking at the top few countries on the WHO list at the recovery/death percentage,I thought Italy were bad at almost 50/50 until I hit the UK and recovery/ discharged is 5% and death rate is 95%...

Why is ours so bad in comparison?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *utecontradictionMan
over a year ago

Malvern

It's all to do with the numbers being tested. As we are testing a lot less you cant pay any attention to stats linked to testing. The only figure that counts at the mo is the number of deaths. And even that is out as we aren't including deaths from nursing homes at the moment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oggoneMan
over a year ago

Derry


"Hoping someone can explain it to me!

Looking at the top few countries on the WHO list at the recovery/death percentage,I thought Italy were bad at almost 50/50 until I hit the UK and recovery/ discharged is 5% and death rate is 95%...

Why is ours so bad in comparison?"

It is quite difficult to compare because they are not all using the same method of recording.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *az080378 OP   Woman
over a year ago

Cromer

So is it a case of not having any idea what the severity of it is in this country or do we look at our daily death rate compared to other places to work things out?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I've found the best strategy is not to look at the stats. The way cases and deaths are measured, counted, and declared will skew the reality. Don't for one minute think Covid-19 has a 95% death rate.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *az080378 OP   Woman
over a year ago

Cromer


"I've found the best strategy is not to look at the stats. The way cases and deaths are measured, counted, and declared will skew the reality. Don't for one minute think Covid-19 has a 95% death rate.

It's hard to know where to look really, it's hard to get perspective when the stats make no sense.

I should steer clear of all information really but it's hard

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Look at 1st case to current death rate to see the slope.

Germany has rolled out testing early and most people tested were returning to the country from holidays and 80% were under 60 hence the low mortality percentage.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hav02Man
over a year ago

Glasgow/London

I've seen that stats and also wondered why that was like that... but it comes down to GIGO.

The stats don't fully reflect the current UK state. If anything, it is a huge underestimation due to fewer testing, incomplete/lagging data input.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oggoneMan
over a year ago

Derry

I can dig a source out but I did read that the UK isn't recording CV19 as cause of death but instead recording cause of death as respiratory failure or pneumonia. Its possible to argue this is more accurate or an attempt to obfuscate the numbers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eah BabyCouple
over a year ago

Cheshire, Windermere ,Cumbria


"I can dig a source out but I did read that the UK isn't recording CV19 as cause of death but instead recording cause of death as respiratory failure or pneumonia. Its possible to argue this is more accurate or an attempt to obfuscate the numbers."

I would say to obfuscate the numbers, they used to do it with Alzheimer’s with putting pneumonia as cause of death instead of dementia but think this was changed about 10 years ago.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xMFM3sumsxxWoman
over a year ago

SouthWest Lancashire

Statistics are never accurate, they're estimates based on a small percentage of whatever they are recording. Usually they try to pick a sample that is representative but what is considered this can vary also.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In UK they only test people in hospital, which means that they only count the worst cases. This is why 95% die.

The most recent esteem of the real number of people infected in UK is between 780000 and 3500000 (with 95% credibility)

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atandasmileMan
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"Hoping someone can explain it to me!

Looking at the top few countries on the WHO list at the recovery/death percentage,I thought Italy were bad at almost 50/50 until I hit the UK and recovery/ discharged is 5% and death rate is 95%...

Why is ours so bad in comparison?"

No doubt multiple underlying causes feed in to the discrepancy. One that hasn't been mentioned yet is the effect of being near the beginning of the ramp up in an outbreak.

The stats are the ratio of people who have *officially recovered from covid19* to those who have officially died from it. To officially recover, one has to not only tested as having it, but then somehow measured to recover from it. To do that, you either have to discharge them from hospital (and only the serious cases will have been there) or make some assumption about how long since testing positive you can assume that they "must have recovered" because they didn't die.

All of this means that you can be sure that someone has died from covid 19 a long time before you can be sure that they have recovered from it.

During the phase when the outbreak is growing exponentially you will then see a lot more deaths than recoveries because at that stage there are more people who've had it for two weeks currently dieing than the number of people who've had it for three or four weeks who have recovered. This is because the total number of infections two weeks ago is much greater than the number from three (or four) weeks ago.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Those who die in nursing homes weren't tested or In Their own home.. Was just hospital admissions that were counted.

Whatever the figures.. We need just to stay at home

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andKBCouple
over a year ago

Plymouth

The recovery stats sit at just over 100... surely that is vastly wrong. Do they retest after recovery?? If not that will skew the stats. For example the news stated prince charles is out of isolation but was he retested??

Also remember not everyone is tested. Those in the community that are well enough to just self isolate dont get tested and recover without being tested.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Hoping someone can explain it to me!

Looking at the top few countries on the WHO list at the recovery/death percentage,I thought Italy were bad at almost 50/50 until I hit the UK and recovery/ discharged is 5% and death rate is 95%...

Why is ours so bad in comparison?

No doubt multiple underlying causes feed in to the discrepancy. One that hasn't been mentioned yet is the effect of being near the beginning of the ramp up in an outbreak.

The stats are the ratio of people who have *officially recovered from covid19* to those who have officially died from it. To officially recover, one has to not only tested as having it, but then somehow measured to recover from it. To do that, you either have to discharge them from hospital (and only the serious cases will have been there) or make some assumption about how long since testing positive you can assume that they "must have recovered" because they didn't die.

All of this means that you can be sure that someone has died from covid 19 a long time before you can be sure that they have recovered from it.

During the phase when the outbreak is growing exponentially you will then see a lot more deaths than recoveries because at that stage there are more people who've had it for two weeks currently dieing than the number of people who've had it for three or four weeks who have recovered. This is because the total number of infections two weeks ago is much greater than the number from three (or four) weeks ago."

This is why mortality rate should only be calculated after an epidemic when all outcomes are known.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eanne VegasTV/TS
over a year ago

tameside

Sad so.many dying but they can't say for certain if covid19 actually killed most people as most had prior health issues. They may of had the symptoms but no certain the virus actually killed them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rFunBoyMan
over a year ago

Longridge

The way I understand it:

Taking a starting figure of 100%

And that the original figure of 20% seems to have been revised up to 30% from 20%.

70% will have either no or limited symptoms such as light cold or heavy flu.

Of the remaining 30% many will become very poorly but may make a recovery.

Within this, a large number will need medical intervention starting with CPAP - entiched Oxygen supply - the tube uo the nise to uplift blood oxygene level due to reduced lung function.

Those suffering serious pneumonia or lost the ability to breath for themselves with need machanical ventilation such as that provided by a ventalator.

The death rate is artificially high in locations of limited CPAP and Ventilators due to actually being able to survive but only if equipment was actually available.

This is why you are hearing on the news that Doctors have to make an informed decision as who out of five people needing, which would possibly still not survive compared to those that will but there is only one machine available.

Old and underlying condotions are not in your favour in this decision and unstead you would recieve paliative care instead.

The issue in Italy, Spain, USA and here is chronic shortage of Oxygen delivering machinery, hence F1 creating CPAP and Dyson on Ventilators.

Although crude in design, they are better than nothing at all.

Governments have had a 3 month heads up of vast requirement of this equipment and appauling they are now competing on little stock at premium prices.

It is a travesty that people who would have otherwise survived will die due to lack of equipment and another reason for lockdown in order to spread the demand if this precious rescource and why so important to Stsy at Home.

You may not suffer symtoms but anyone else you pass it on to could be severe and need equipment already taken up, and thus die.

Anyone correct me if you think I am wrong...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *litterbabeWoman
over a year ago

hiding from cock pics.


"The recovery stats sit at just over 100... surely that is vastly wrong. Do they retest after recovery?? If not that will skew the stats. For example the news stated prince charles is out of isolation but was he retested??

Also remember not everyone is tested. Those in the community that are well enough to just self isolate dont get tested and recover without being tested. "

I currently believe that the only people who are tested for it have been admitted to hospital with it, so anybody who has recovered at home or not needed to be kept in hospital, or became ill at home and passed away within the community, are not counted in statistics for people who have recovered or sadly died.

In my view there is no way of actually having any idea of how many people might have already developed immunity.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ob198XaMan
over a year ago

teleford


"Sad so.many dying but they can't say for certain if covid19 actually killed most people as most had prior health issues. They may of had the symptoms but no certain the virus actually killed them."

Go look at the wards rapidly filling with new patients who can’t breath and then tell us these people are dying with Covid19 and not because of Covid19

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ob198XaMan
over a year ago

teleford


"The recovery stats sit at just over 100... surely that is vastly wrong. Do they retest after recovery?? If not that will skew the stats. For example the news stated prince charles is out of isolation but was he retested??

Also remember not everyone is tested. Those in the community that are well enough to just self isolate dont get tested and recover without being tested.

I currently believe that the only people who are tested for it have been admitted to hospital with it, so anybody who has recovered at home or not needed to be kept in hospital, or became ill at home and passed away within the community, are not counted in statistics for people who have recovered or sadly died.

In my view there is no way of actually having any idea of how many people might have already developed immunity."

In Singapore they achieved mass testing... there data showed 15% of all those who tested positive needed hospital care... as most UK positive tests are from hospitalised patients it would be a reasonable assumption to suggest actual number of infections in UK is about 6 times greater than the reported confirmed cases. 30x6 ie 180,000.. or at least it would have been 14 days ago, have to allow for lag time in developing symptoms and time to get test results. Assuming doubling still every 4 days we might be at 1.4million people infected by today (social distancing should have now pegged back the infection rate so 1 to 1.2million infected in UK or 1 in 60 is probably a good estimate)

We are a very long way from 80%, herd immunity!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

The UK has been an anomaly, as we've not been testing as a general principle. Only those admitted to hospital have typically been tested and these patients are also not typical of the UK population who have had the infection.

So we've had almost no testing compared, for example to Germany who've tested 70,000 people a day.

Comparison between countries for all parts of the data is thus troublesome.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rFunBoyMan
over a year ago

Longridge

Italy and the Alps was our downfall.

They missed the ball while looking towards Asia..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

For a succinct daily update on coronavirus-related stats, follow John Burn-Murdoch of the Financial Times.

Some highlights from his analysis today:

- in the UK the death toll is accelerating. More dead every day than the last, and rate of increase also rising

- UK death toll is now higher than Italy’s at the same stage

- London’s daily death toll higher than Wuhan’s at same stage of its outbreak

- in terms of cumulative death toll, London is where Wuhan was (at the same stage since day 0), but accelerating much faster

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yx_InannaWoman
over a year ago

Burslem


"For a succinct daily update on coronavirus-related stats, follow John Burn-Murdoch of the Financial Times.

Some highlights from his analysis today:

- in the UK the death toll is accelerating. More dead every day than the last, and rate of increase also rising

- UK death toll is now higher than Italy’s at the same stage

- London’s daily death toll higher than Wuhan’s at same stage of its outbreak

- in terms of cumulative death toll, London is where Wuhan was (at the same stage since day 0), but accelerating much faster

"

Italy's first case 29th January, Spain's first case 30th January.

U.K.s first case is 30th January. The difference in stages is UK lockdown came later than the other countries.

We can't say we're at different staged times other than differences between isolation and lockdown.

U.K. is lacking testing, lacking official data on who is actually sick with covid 19 and who isn't. People ring the gp with flu like symptoms some been recorded as covid 19 some are not. The data is unreliable and the cured cases only resembling those discharged from hospital. So is it covid 19 people have had or seasonal flu? Without testing the data can't be analysed efficiently and it can't be used as a prediction as to how many more cases there will be. We can estimate and it's nothing more than a wild guess. Skewed data isn't helpful. If people were tested and stayed home and reported they'd recovered to their gp it should be counted as recovered. Comparative to population there hasn't been enough testing to give a broad sense of the infection rates vs death vs recovery, basically it's cherry picked data to suit agenda. Amazing how quick the celebrities have recovered with such mild symptoms. If they had it then it's quite entirely possible most of the UK who experienced a cold or a bit flued up in the past 2 months it could have been covid 19 because with out testing no one can know for sure and it's all speculative.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

With the greatest respect I’d actually look at his source data before trying to argue with it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yx_InannaWoman
over a year ago

Burslem


"With the greatest respect I’d actually look at his source data before trying to argue with it."

His pretty graph disproves your statement. His sources aren't going to supersede global health organisations tackled with monitoring it.

Their data relies on what the government's voluntarily hand over. Reliability is down to accumulation of data if they don't collect it there is no accurate information. It's all conjecture unless they do enough to collect all data which means testing and accurate recording.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"His pretty graph disproves your statement. His sources aren't going to supersede global health organisations tackled with monitoring it.

Their data relies on what the government's voluntarily hand over. Reliability is down to accumulation of data if they don't collect it there is no accurate information. It's all conjecture unless they do enough to collect all data which means testing and accurate recording."

The worst bit is you think it’s me that has drawn those conclusions when in reality I just copied and pasted those from his Twitter feed

The sheer cheek to question his sources when they’re - and I quote - ‘ the World Health Organization, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control, the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China, local media reports, local health departments, and the DXY, one of the world’s largest online communities for physicians, health care professionals, pharmacies and facilities.‘

Stop your posturing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Doctors are also entering COVID-19 as cause of death on death certificates without the actual proof it was that, as reported on the BBC news on Tuesday lunchtime.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Most of the stats are fake news tho.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *otsossieMan
over a year ago

Chesterfield

It’s all chaos. The stats aren’t comparable.

Just keep yourself and your loved ones safe and try to wait it out.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yx_InannaWoman
over a year ago

Burslem


"His pretty graph disproves your statement. His sources aren't going to supersede global health organisations tackled with monitoring it.

Their data relies on what the government's voluntarily hand over. Reliability is down to accumulation of data if they don't collect it there is no accurate information. It's all conjecture unless they do enough to collect all data which means testing and accurate recording.

The worst bit is you think it’s me that has drawn those conclusions when in reality I just copied and pasted those from his Twitter feed

The sheer cheek to question his sources when they’re - and I quote - ‘ the World Health Organization, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control, the National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China, local media reports, local health departments, and the DXY, one of the world’s largest online communities for physicians, health care professionals, pharmacies and facilities.‘

Stop your posturing."

I don't believe youre the one who came to the conclusions. You pointed out I should check his sources.

I merely pointed out that the sources are lacking information to provide accurate data.

The data is based in incomplete data. What more you get from that?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" I don't believe youre the one who came to the conclusions. You pointed out I should check his sources.

I merely pointed out that the sources are lacking information to provide accurate data.

The data is based in incomplete data. What more you get from that?"

/facepalm that’s the point - you will NEVER get complete data. Ever. For anything.

Time to take a break from the Fab forums methinks.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The recovery stats sit at just over 100... surely that is vastly wrong. Do they retest after recovery?? If not that will skew the stats. For example the news stated prince charles is out of isolation but was he retested??

Also remember not everyone is tested. Those in the community that are well enough to just self isolate dont get tested and recover without being tested. "

It's 100 of those that were on ventilators in intensive care as they are not even testing anyone other than serious hospital admissions. These are mostly older people with underlying serious conditions, so the death rate seems high and recovery low.

If like Germany, we tested 70,000 randoms every day the figures would be massively different.

We are mostly wasting what tests we do have available as we cannot treat the disease/virus...we just try to alleviate symptoms . It matters not one bit WHY the symptoms came about...just treat them and hope for recovery in as many cases as possible.

Test NHS staff first...then randomly so the "experts" get a better idea of spread patterns...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yx_InannaWoman
over a year ago

Burslem


" I don't believe youre the one who came to the conclusions. You pointed out I should check his sources.

I merely pointed out that the sources are lacking information to provide accurate data.

The data is based in incomplete data. What more you get from that?

/facepalm that’s the point - you will NEVER get complete data. Ever. For anything.

Time to take a break from the Fab forums methinks."

It's like product testing 96% would recommend a product but they only had 20 testers. But the product flops at sales due to the fact the majority of the population doesnt agree.

The same goes for comparative data, if it doesn't reflect the majority then the data lacks accuracy.

Which means if only a small fraction of the population is tested then the results are skewed. If 70% of the population may have caught the virus and only 10% tested and they were already admitted it doesn't reflect the infection rate nor the recovery rate. As shown across the UK it's evident not everyone who died was tested but recorded as covid 19 related without actual proof they died of it. So when the government hands these statistics over the information is inaccurate entirely.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *olly_chromaticTV/TS
over a year ago

Stockport

There seems to be a number of people posting on these forums who for some reason are desperate to downplay the seriousness of this. Saying stuff like "oh, they died with the virus, not of the virus, the virus doesn't actually kill anybody" - if they didn't get the virus most of them would have every chance of living years longer, so of course it was the bloody virus that caused them to die!

Saying that because there's fuck all testing going on, there's no proof that anybody has got it, therefore everybody must have just got a bit of a cold. Then in the same breath claiming that everyone who had a cold in the last twelve months has already had this virus and must be immune now!

That it's just the media hyping it up so they can sell newspapers.

Any number of other nonsensical chains of illogic, denying that there is any problem.

Why are these people still denying reality? What do they gain from it? What the hell is wrong with them?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *orwegian BlueMan
over a year ago

Iceland, but Aldi is closer..

Without reading through all of this thread, so apologies if this has already been stated,

The values quoted are based upon actual tests being conducted.

The UK testing rate is low for several reasons, and as such, the values being quoted are biased and not a true reflection..

Only those going to hospital are being tested, so that is those showing severe symptoms which requires hospitalisation.

Those who are self isolating and having only mild symptoms are not being recorded. As it stands, until a test which can detect antibodies has been proven effective, the actual numbers will remain a nothing more than a wild arsed guess.

However, there is an app that recently come in use and is being run by scientists working at King's College London with an aim to get a better understanding of the virus spread.

I have attempted to publicise it on as many platforms as possible and there is a thread in this forum detailing it.. Covid 19 tracker app.

So far, around 2 million people have downloaded it but if many more do, a more accurate picture of the numbers could be ascertained.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *yx_InannaWoman
over a year ago

Burslem


"There seems to be a number of people posting on these forums who for some reason are desperate to downplay the seriousness of this. Saying stuff like "oh, they died with the virus, not of the virus, the virus doesn't actually kill anybody" - if they didn't get the virus most of them would have every chance of living years longer, so of course it was the bloody virus that caused them to die!

Saying that because there's fuck all testing going on, there's no proof that anybody has got it, therefore everybody must have just got a bit of a cold. Then in the same breath claiming that everyone who had a cold in the last twelve months has already had this virus and must be immune now!

That it's just the media hyping it up so they can sell newspapers.

Any number of other nonsensical chains of illogic, denying that there is any problem.

Why are these people still denying reality? What do they gain from it? What the hell is wrong with them?

"

I certainly haven't down played the virus in anyway.

Talking about statistics.

Take for example care homes and patient deaths not recorded as covid 19 but as natural causes even if symptoms were that of the virus. They aren't being tested. They could have or not have died because of the virus and not knowing means any of the data that is meant to be representative of the effects of the virus mean very little. Knowing that a person had been infected can mean more measures put in place for those around them.

Whether it's claiming someone died of it or claiming they didn't and not having more tests confirming so then reliability of the data in how far and quick it's spreading in the community, who it is affecting and how it is affecting the population. Without more information as I said it's speculation and conjecture. The virus is real, the virus is killing, the virus is causing sickness but without extensive amounts of information then the figures won't be representing the actual event. Just a tiny cross section of what is really going on.

Take for example cases of sepsis, it was rarely documented on file that a person suffered the effects of sepsis it is contributed to the main cause of needing treatment or death be it respiratory failure or septicemia and such. Meaning numbers of actual recorded cases are smaller than the actual cases. In doing so knowledge that would have been more widely known is that sepsis occurs more and the symptoms are missed due to the consideration it being a rare occurence. Believing it is an unlikely event. In recent years more information and more detailed cases have brought to light the exact seriousness of sepsis.

So with the right information and more knowledge more can be done. As it stands skewed information can disrupt the right course of action. Be it further action to enforce a more strict quarantine, lessening it or providing enhanced measures for protective clothing and other ppe or public environmental sanitizing across the country such as other countries are doing. If they know exactly where more help is needed via test data they can prepare for the eventuality and possibility of people needing it.

Example - a village 20 miles from the city an individual tests positive they can prepare especially for the most vulnerable in the area that possibly have been infected. Right now as it stands it's a case of people being sick and not enough resources in the area as they didn't anticipate it.

It is better to be prepared than not.

Stoke on trent as of yesterday 55 tested positive, Staffordshire which surrounds stoke on trent (which is a hub for shopping, travel - trains and such)

Has 329 confirmed cases. Prediction would have said stoke on trent would have had more cases in actuality Staffordshire has going by the results. The villages and towns weren't prepared for the virus. Less density means more isolated but in this case hasn't prevented the spread which differs from the more dense population, it didn't prevent the spread from happening. If people were tested they could have imposed more restrictions and assisted with care planning getting the resources where it's needed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iketoshow74Man
over a year ago

Northampton

Most of the stats are rubbish. I take the bench mark of the cruise ship Diamond Princess. All 3.7k customers and staff tested, most were in the upper age bands, 712, 20%, had it, 11 people have died so far, 0.3%, only 82 active cases left.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *astledking19TV/TS
over a year ago

buckingham


"It's all to do with the numbers being tested. As we are testing a lot less you cant pay any attention to stats linked to testing. The only figure that counts at the mo is the number of deaths. And even that is out as we aren't including deaths from nursing homes at the moment. "

Deaths outside of hospitals started to be recorded as from last Tuesday.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Statistics are unreliable. To give you an example - I have three families l know who all have at least one member who appear to be suffering from Covid 19. Each family has a child who is either aspergers or add/adhd so that means what? People who have kids on the spectrum are more likely to catch it?

Oh hang on a minute though....two parents have bad asthma, so maybe thats why? Then again one parent works in retail, one in the nhs, and one in a school making them far more likely to pick up a virus.

The current system of recording who has the virus or not is impossible to draw conclusions from because the methods are inconsistent and because there is no universal testing of the virus. There is also no knowledge yet of whether the virus can be caught twice or if it is mutating to become more, or as in SARS case, less potent. The one thing we do know is that social isolation and distancing will slow down the spread of the virus and this will help the nhs to cope with the weeks and months ahead

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ultry SuccubusTV/TS
over a year ago

London


"Hoping someone can explain it to me!

Looking at the top few countries on the WHO list at the recovery/death percentage,I thought Italy were bad at almost 50/50 until I hit the UK and recovery/ discharged is 5% and death rate is 95%...

Why is ours so bad in comparison?"

I think because the denominator is the outcome (discharged/died).

As most of the covid patients are still treated/ admitted in wards, they are not included into the denominator.

Once you have more patients discharged well ( 2 negative swabs), then the percentage might improve.

It is relatively new in the UK compared to Italy, so the outcome is still small in number.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *az080378 OP   Woman
over a year ago

Cromer


"Hoping someone can explain it to me!

Looking at the top few countries on the WHO list at the recovery/death percentage,I thought Italy were bad at almost 50/50 until I hit the UK and recovery/ discharged is 5% and death rate is 95%...

Why is ours so bad in comparison?

I think because the denominator is the outcome (discharged/died).

As most of the covid patients are still treated/ admitted in wards, they are not included into the denominator.

Once you have more patients discharged well ( 2 negative swabs), then the percentage might improve.

It is relatively new in the UK compared to Italy, so the outcome is still small in number."

Did our first cases not arrive around the same time?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *meric-anaWoman
over a year ago

B

[Removed by poster at 03/04/20 13:55:17]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top