Now that the death rate has fallen, should we proceed to normality?
Now that the death rate has fallen, should we proceed to normality?
It is very difficult to find the death rate using the previous criteria - I challenge you to find the numbers who died after 28 days with a positive test, and those where Covid was on the death certificate but the test was negative or not done. We are being manipulated - with the economy being the reason - politics is about manipulation, and sometimes it is for the overall good. Whether this manipulation of the numbers is a good thing is of course a matter of opinion.Originally Posted by Stagger
Don't be mislead by this single case a "second" infection. The 33 year old male concerned had a pretty minor illness first time around, and was asymptomatic the second time. Whether the isolation the second time - with a different strain - was an infection or just "colonisation", like on a door knob, is not known, or, at least, not so far revealed. If they had good evidence of an active infection I would have expected them to give it.
An analogy that has been widely used: now that RTA deaths are tiny should we abandon speed limits and seat belts?
We obviously do very much need to proceed to normality. How we do it and how quickly it can be achieved are the questions
We can’t prevent RTA by leaving all vehicles parked on the drive
Poacher turned game-keeper
How would you record it Mike?
28 days brings England into line with the other countries of the UK and it is certainly far better than the old system where nobody was ever assumed to recover. The infection fatality rate would have eventually been 100%, which I hope you agree is ridiculous. The death toll would have continued going up and up even when nobody was getting Covid anymore. Apparently, 88% of Covid deaths occur within 28 days of the first positive swab so the figures are not going to be massively out.
https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3220
We also have the ONS weekly measure, which is based on what is stated on the death certificate. This includes where Covid is suspected even if no test has been done.
Last edited by Muddy Retriever; 25-08-2020 at 09:04 AM.
It's a reasonable point but I think these things should be based on balance and perspective. Lockdown and the on-going restrictions mean millions will lose their livelihoods A couple, who are relatives of mine have both lost their jobs. It is a very frightening experience for them I can tell you.
Then you have to factor in the other health conditions like cancer that have been neglected and continue to be so. The oncologist Karol Sikora calls this an unfolding disaster and thinks we have already caused the future deaths of tens of thousands of people unnecessarily from cancer.
Wearing seat belts and having speed limits does not cause other deaths, lockdown does.
We have all been Manipulated throughout our lives, and the truth about Corona19 will not be known for 30 years
under the 30 year rule and then there will still be manipulation if they can work it.
So in the meantime as I have said throughout best get on with life using common sense and compassion, after all if your number is up you are going and there is nothing you or anybody else can do about it.
The older I get the Faster I was
We need to be able to see both the new method figures and the old method figures - the latter are now very hard to find, despite it being said they would be provided. As Spiegelhalter says in the BMJ article: " The 28 day limit marks an improvement . . . but does exclude those who die more than a month after testing, even if they have covid on the death certificate. Including deaths up to 60 days, and later covid registered deaths, seems even better, but still excludes people who were not tested."
As to the 88% figure, it depends how you define a Covid death - this may seem circular, but I know from having filled them out myself that there is a huge amount of opinion and politics in what is written on death certificates - it used to be almost forbidden to write "cigarette smoking" for example - and in the current climate, without a positive test, it will often make life easier to leave Covid off, even if it was strongly suspected.
Economy/jobs vs deaths/chronic illness. It is not easy. But the best way to save the former is to minimise the latter. It is how we get there. Minimising the risk is not the answer, but of course nor is maximising it. Sikora is minimising the risk of Covid, but maximising the risk of "missed" cancers - an interesting mixture.
Isn't it interesting, though? It's almost as if no one was thinking of the long-term. There shouldn't have to be an either/or here, surely this could have been spotted early on and planned for?minimising the risk of Covid, but maximising the risk of "missed" cancers
I think one of the things people are beginning to forget is the rush to do something about the virus initially, in the face of pretty horrendous scenes from Europe and elsewhere, which perhaps added to the lack of clear-thinking and long-term planning.
....it's all downhill from here.
