Coronavirus Thread (Off Topic, Politics) (6 Viewers)

[jordan210]

There were around 40-60,000 daily cases in January. 450 people a day catching it in hospital is a tiny fraction of that total.

Your second article refers only to one set of hospitalized COVID patients, 40% of whom caught it while in hospital.

Where did you get that 80% of all COVID cases were being contracted in hospital from?

Apoligies it wasn't of all. But of all hospitalisations

In this report from. Was 80% of hospital cases. Caught it in hospital in June 2020

the proportion of infections that are hospital associated has increased, and was approximately 80% as of the 1st June

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/897526/S0471_SAGE_40_200603_SPI-M-O_Consensus_Statement.pdf

 

---

[SBAndy]

Apoligies it wasn't of all. But of all hospitalised cases.

In this report from. Was 80% of hospital cases. Caught it in hospital in June 2020

the proportion of infections that are hospital associated has increased, and was approximately 80% as of the 1st June

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/897526/S0471_SAGE_40_200603_SPI-M-O_Consensus_Statement.pdf

Strewth. Where to start.

1. The paper you’ve linked is a year out of date and is written after approximately 3 months of near-full lockdown. It even says in there that as cases have dropped the proportion is higher, and that is because there was little to no social contact when the report was written.

2. It doesn’t say 80% caught it in hospital, it says up to 80% were linked to hospital-acquired infection. Ergo, if I caught it in hospital and then passed it on to 30 people in Asda, it still qualifies as hospital-acquired infection.

Using this as a qualifier for why hospital data shouldn’t be trusted really doesn’t work, sorry.

 

[David O'Day]

Strewth. Where to start.

1. The paper you’ve linked is a year out of date and is written after approximately 3 months of near-full lockdown. It even says in there that as cases have dropped the proportion is higher, and that is because there was little to no social contact when the report was written.

2. It doesn’t say 80% caught it in hospital, it says up to 80% were linked to hospital-acquired infection. Ergo, if I caught it in hospital and then passed it on to 30 people in Asda, it still qualifies as hospital-acquired infection.

Using this as a qualifier for why hospital data shouldn’t be trusted really doesn’t work, sorry.

he's a big confirmation bias fan

 

[baldy]

New York back to normality with all restrictions lifted after they’ve had 70% of people vaccinated - yet we’ve vaccinated more & we‘re nowhere near to being free - absolutely ridiculous

 

[David O'Day]

New York back to normality with all restrictions lifted after they’ve had 70% of people vaccinated - yet we’ve vaccinated more & we‘re nowhere near to being free - absolutely ridiculous

That's because cases etc are dropping in New York while cases are doubling weekly in the UK.

This is like comparing apples and a fucking watermelon

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

New York back to normality with all restrictions lifted after they’ve had 70% of people vaccinated - yet we’ve vaccinated more & we‘re nowhere near to being free - absolutely ridiculous

How’s the delta variant there badly, do you know?

 

[skybluetony176]

That's because cases etc are dropping in New York while cases are doubling weekly in the UK.

This is like comparing apples and a fucking watermelon

Big Apples at that

 

[jordan210]

Strewth. Where to start.

1. The paper you’ve linked is a year out of date and is written after approximately 3 months of near-full lockdown. It even says in there that as cases have dropped the proportion is higher, and that is because there was little to no social contact when the report was written.

2. It doesn’t say 80% caught it in hospital, it says up to 80% were linked to hospital-acquired infection. Ergo, if I caught it in hospital and then passed it on to 30 people in Asda, it still qualifies as hospital-acquired infection.

Using this as a qualifier for why hospital data shouldn’t be trusted really doesn’t work, sorry.

Thats why the NHS have been told to change the way they collect data "Hospitals have been told to change the way they collect data on patients infected with coronavirus to differentiate between those actually sick with symptoms and those who test positive while seeking treatment for something else."

NHS told to identify patients actually sick from Covid-19 separately to those testing positive

Exclusive: Changes to the way hospitals collect data will make the impact of the virus on the NHS look better

www.independent.co.uk

Oh look 84 inpatients testing positive. More inpatients tested positive than new admissions.

 

[David O'Day]

How’s the delta variant there badly, do you know?

doubling at around 10% of all cases, mostly in the southern less vaccinated states

Fear grows that delta variant will become dominant COVID strain worldwide as WHO says it's now in 74 countries

The Delta variant of COVID-19 has now been detected in 74 countries, prompting fears it will become the dominant strain around the world, as it continues to...

www.marketwatch.com

 

[David O'Day]

Thats why the NHS have been told to change the way they collect data "Hospitals have been told to change the way they collect data on patients infected with coronavirus to differentiate between those actually sick with symptoms and those who test positive while seeking treatment for something else."

NHS told to identify patients actually sick from Covid-19 separately to those testing positive

Exclusive: Changes to the way hospitals collect data will make the impact of the virus on the NHS look better

www.independent.co.uk

Oh look 84 inpatients testing positive. More inpatients tested positive than new admissions.

do you even read what you post?

 

[David O'Day]

Thats why the NHS have been told to change the way they collect data "Hospitals have been told to change the way they collect data on patients infected with coronavirus to differentiate between those actually sick with symptoms and those who test positive while seeking treatment for something else."

NHS told to identify patients actually sick from Covid-19 separately to those testing positive

Exclusive: Changes to the way hospitals collect data will make the impact of the virus on the NHS look better

www.independent.co.uk

Oh look 84 inpatients testing positive. More inpatients tested positive than new admissions.

Also that is basically a week out of date as well.

 

[jordan210]

Also that is basically a week out of date as well.

Let me guess its all lag...

Feel free to look over the NHS data availably that shows 55% of all covid patients in hospital. Where all ready in hospital before catching it

Statistics » COVID-19 Hospital Activity

Health and high quality care for all, <br />now and for future generations

www.england.nhs.uk

Talking about out of date Sage used out of date data for the extension of lockdown. But I guess thats fine with you.

Sage have a tendency of using out of date data

Covid modelling that pushed back June 21 was based on out-of-date data

Government published figures to support pushing back ‘Freedom Day’ despite knowing estimates of vaccine effectiveness were incorrect

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Over 9000 infections today

 

[David O'Day]

Let me guess its all lag...

Feel free to look over the NHS data availably that shows 55% of all covid patients in hospital. Where all ready in hospital before catching it

Statistics » COVID-19 Hospital Activity

Health and high quality care for all, <br />now and for future generations

www.england.nhs.uk

Talking about out of date Sage used out of date data for the extension of lockdown. But I guess thats fine with you.

Sage have a tendency of using out of date data

Covid modelling that pushed back June 21 was based on out-of-date data

Government published figures to support pushing back ‘Freedom Day’ despite knowing estimates of vaccine effectiveness were incorrect

www.telegraph.co.uk

Once again you post things that you clearly don't have a clue about if it seems to confirm your clearly nonsense arguments

Also it seems you can't even read a spreadsheet either.

You're done here

 

[David O'Day]

Over 9000 infections today

It's ok Jordan will post a thread he doesn't understand to convince you that isn't a bad thing

 

[jordan210]

Once again you post things that you clearly don't have a clue about if it seems to confirm your clearly nonsense arguments

Also it seems you can't even read a spreadsheet either.

You're done here

You never come back with facts. You just insult.

pathetic really

 

[jordan210]

It's ok Jordan will post a thread he doesn't understand to convince you that isn't a bad thing

9000 positive tests. Not cases. Hospitalisation is the only important figure and has been for a while.

 

[PVA]

Let me guess its all lag...

Feel free to look over the NHS data availably that shows 55% of all covid patients in hospital. Where all ready in hospital before catching it

Statistics » COVID-19 Hospital Activity

Health and high quality care for all, <br />now and for future generations

www.england.nhs.uk

It doesn't say that

It says that of all covid patients in hospital 7% of them were diagnosed with Covid in the last 24 hours while already in hospital.

If I've read it correctly

 

[David O'Day]

It doesn't say that

It says that of all covid patients in hospital 7% of them were diagnosed with Covid in the last 24 hours while already in hospital.

he doesn't understand what he posts

 

[jordan210]

he doesn't understand what he posts

why don’t you have a look at this study from public health Scotland. Shows 64% of severe infections acquired in hospitals

Relation of severe COVID-19 in Scotland to transmission-related factors and risk conditions eligible for shielding support: REACT-SCOT case-control study

Objectives To investigate:(1) the risk of severe COVID-19 in those eligible for shielding, and (2) the relation of severe COVID-19 to transmission-related factors in those in shielding and the general population. Design Matched case-control study (REACT-SCOT). Setting Population of Scotland...

www.medrxiv.org

Then again you won’t read it. You will just insult and say data is out of date.

Also up to 40% of first wave could have been caught in hospital

Up to 40 per cent of first wave Covid cases could have been caught in hospitals

NHS faces questions over Covid infections contracted in hospital

As bereaved families seek answers, number of cases and alleged failings cause concern in England

www.google.co.uk

 

[MusicDating]

Once again you post things that you clearly don't have a clue about if it seems to confirm your clearly nonsense arguments

Also it seems you can't even read a spreadsheet either.

You're done here

How's your understanding of Scottish football coming along Dave?

 

[David O'Day]

How's your understanding of Scottish football coming along Dave?

top notch comeback - great stuff

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Over 9000 infections today

The key thing remains how much this translates into serious illness. I remain very cautiously optimistic that with most of the cases in the ‘right’ groups we will not see anything like the carnage of before.

It is I think prudent to seriously define ‘we have to live with Covid’ at a practical level

 

[SBAndy]

why don’t you have a look at this study from public health Scotland. Shows 64% of severe infections acquired in hospitals

Relation of severe COVID-19 in Scotland to transmission-related factors and risk conditions eligible for shielding support: REACT-SCOT case-control study

Objectives To investigate:(1) the risk of severe COVID-19 in those eligible for shielding, and (2) the relation of severe COVID-19 to transmission-related factors in those in shielding and the general population. Design Matched case-control study (REACT-SCOT). Setting Population of Scotland...

www.medrxiv.org

Then again you won’t read it. You will just insult and say data is out of date.

Also up to 40% of first wave could have been caught in hospital

Up to 40 per cent of first wave Covid cases could have been caught in hospitals

NHS faces questions over Covid infections contracted in hospital

As bereaved families seek answers, number of cases and alleged failings cause concern in England

www.google.co.uk

64% of severe infection at one point were acquired in hospitals - that point being December 2020. Again, whilst there were stringent lockdown measures in place. The paper doesn’t specify whether this percentage is on a specific day, a rolling 7-day average, a rolling 30 days, etc.

Unfortunately as a non-subscriber I can’t access the Teegraph article. However, the Guardian article makes for interesting reading and again tallies with the idea that a single week in December saw the peaking of hospital-based infection, before beginning to drop again i.e. when there is more social mixing the percentage acquired in hospital reduces - suppose that’s not groundbreaking. Estimates are that between August and February there were 39,000 people likely to have been infected in English hospitals; a not insignificant number but making up a tiny proportion of infections within that timeframe.

Forgive me, but I genuinely don’t understand the point you are trying to make with this. The data you provide basically proves that lockdown measures work for reducing community-based infection, but I know you ain’t arguing for measures to be extended/reimposed!

 

[jordan210]

64% of severe infection at one point were acquired in hospitals - that point being December 2020. Again, whilst there were stringent lockdown measures in place. The paper doesn’t specify whether this percentage is on a specific day, a rolling 7-day average, a rolling 30 days, etc.

Unfortunately as a non-subscriber I can’t access the Teegraph article. However, the Guardian article makes for interesting reading and again tallies with the idea that a single week in December saw the peaking of hospital-based infection, before beginning to drop again i.e. when there is more social mixing the percentage acquired in hospital reduces - suppose that’s not groundbreaking. Estimates are that between August and February there were 39,000 people likely to have been infected in English hospitals; a not insignificant number but making up a tiny proportion of infections within that timeframe.

Forgive me, but I genuinely don’t understand the point you are trying to make with this. The data you provide basically proves that lockdown measures work for reducing community-based infection, but I know you ain’t arguing for measures to be extended/reimposed!

The difference is if you catch Covid why in hospital when you then test positive you are then classed as a patient in hospital for Covid. Yet you came in for another reason. Hospitals have always been a super spreader for illness. Same with care homes.

The point was Saddle mentioned we have been seeing more short stays in hospital. Hence the numbers not shooting up. I was just showing how many are catching It in hospital.

Basicly get your jabs 1st and 2nd and we should be all good. If the gov actually allow us freedoms.

But the problem with the thread is it's not a debate. Its David just insulting people with different views to his. He comes back with no evidence or counter argument other than out of date data. Yet all the data we can go on is what the gov/NHS give us.

Everyone has different views on Lockdown/restrictions. Debate is healthy. trying to disprove people with no actual facts is now.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The difference is if you catch Covid why in hospital when you then test positive you are then classed as a patient in hospital for Covid. Yet you came in for another reason. Hospitals have always been a super spreader for illness. Same with care homes.

The point was Saddle mentioned we have been seeing more short stays in hospital. Hence the numbers not shooting up. I was just showing how many are catching It in hospital.

Basicly get your jabs 1st and 2nd and we should be all good. If the gov actually allow us freedoms.

But the problem with the thread is it's not a debate. Its David just insulting people with different views to his. He comes back with no evidence or counter argument other than out of date data. Yet all the data we can go on is what the gov/NHS give us.

Everyone has different views on Lockdown/restrictions. Debate is healthy. trying to disprove people with no actual facts is now.

If we hit the vaccination numbers the government claims we will by the date they have set then in combination with school holidays and the good weather we should be able to justify the full unlock. That said while deaths remain stubbornly low I do think more should be allowed for events where all attendants give a negative test or proof of vaccination.

 

[jordan210]

Just so everyone is aware. Once we do come out of lockdown. We are likely to see a surge of RSV esp in younger children/babies. Due to not being exposed to everyday viruses.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Just so everyone is aware. Once we do come out of lockdown. We are likely to see a surge of RSV esp in younger children/babies. Due to not being exposed to everyday viruses.

Not if we continue with masks and social distancing

 

[jordan210]

Not if we continue with masks and social distancing

True. But I cant see kids having birthday parties with masks and social distancing in the summer can you ?

If your fully vaccinated I cant see people wanting to ware a mask anyway.

Children need to be exposed to illness to help boost immune system.

The mask thing will be one to watch. As CDC guidelines in the states is

"You can resume activities without wearing a mask or staying 6 feet apart, except where required by federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial laws, rules, and regulations, including local business and workplace guidance."

full guidelines :COVID-19 Vaccination

So will be interesting to see what way we go.

 

[Saddlebrains]

I couldnt give a shit anymore to be honest. I've been double jabbed and done everything asked of me for 16 months.

Masks etc can fuckoff now

 

[SBAndy]

The difference is if you catch Covid why in hospital when you then test positive you are then classed as a patient in hospital for Covid. Yet you came in for another reason. Hospitals have always been a super spreader for illness. Same with care homes.

The point was Saddle mentioned we have been seeing more short stays in hospital. Hence the numbers not shooting up. I was just showing how many are catching It in hospital.

Basicly get your jabs 1st and 2nd and we should be all good. If the gov actually allow us freedoms.

But the problem with the thread is it's not a debate. Its David just insulting people with different views to his. He comes back with no evidence or counter argument other than out of date data. Yet all the data we can go on is what the gov/NHS give us.

Everyone has different views on Lockdown/restrictions. Debate is healthy. trying to disprove people with no actual facts is now.

That’s fair, and not something I’d thought about a great deal. Still, I think that plays a much smaller role than the figures you’re using suggest. I had said to CCFCSteve already that inpatients might be a better measure than admissions this time around so I’m in tune with your way of thinking on this. Had my first jab the other day as well, second will be just after August Bank Holiday as it stands.

 

[MusicDating]

top notch comeback - great stuff

Well, your air of superiority is tiresome. You try to belittle anyone who has a different view to your own and yet as your Celtic prediction laughingly showed, you ain't always right.

You appear to be an intelligent person, so pls try and debate with a little more humility, ta.

 

[jordan210]

That’s fair, and not something I’d thought about a great deal. Still, I think that plays a much smaller role than the figures you’re using suggest. I had said to CCFCSteve already that inpatients might be a better measure than admissions this time around so I’m in tune with your way of thinking on this. Had my first jab the other day as well, second will be just after August Bank Holiday as it stands.

I think the problem is a lot of the figures do not make sense or tally. Gov will do a big data drop over night with the latest data that tents to be out of date anyway.

For example death count the gov announce and what NHS and other nations health care announce never matches.

My point is and still is. Hospitals are super spreaders. Without getting that under control figures are always going to be worse. Esp when testing patients in for other issues then adding them as a covid patient if positive.

This is why multiple times the death figure has had to be changed for miss counting.

But this all stems from not using the nightingale/dedicated hospitals for covid new arrivals is really a massive failing from the Gov

 

[chiefdave]

I had said to CCFCSteve already that inpatients might be a better measure than admissions this time around so I’m in tune with your way of thinking on this.

I'm not taking much comfort from the inpatient numbers to be honest, there's been a 23% rise in 2 weeks.

Desperately hoping that the increased cases and hospitalisations aren't going to lead to increased deaths but all metrics (cases, admissions, inpatients, ventilators) are increasing and we seem to just be hoping those increases stop.

I think the problem is a lot of the figures do not make sense or tally. Gov will do a big data drop over night with the latest data that tents to be out of date anyway.

That's a fair point but the problem is there's a desire, and need, to put figures out every day but the more accurate data takes time to collate. For example the headline hospital admissions figures are by date of reporting hence the issues with weekends but any expert will want it by date of admission which is a few days behind. They'll then want info like age, health conditions, vaccination status which all takes time to come through.

 

[chiefdave]

It is I think prudent to seriously define ‘we have to live with Covid’ at a practical level

Think there's an issue with context here. You hear case numbers, hospital admissions and deaths and no matter how low it goes it still sounds pretty bad as we have nothing to compare it to. How many people know the equivalent figures for other viruses that we live with?

But before we can think about that we've got to stabilise numbers. We're not at the learn to live with it stage while every statistic used is going up.