Yeah and I’m basing the school closures as being the first reducer based on the information that those that die, tend to do so 14-21 days after infection and schools closed 18 days before the peek which couldn’t more more in the centre of that range.Sort of agreed in that it shows a range of measures would appear to have had an impact some time later.
The ones above are hospital
The ONS are seperate
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...overnments-hospital-only-figures-ons-11976357
Thanks for posting that. A thoughtful explanation. But personally I'm glad that here in Spain we are adopting a different strategy because otherwise the already sad numbers would have escalated out of control as they would do in the UK.
I think the point is this is a brand new virus,we are discovering that has mutated,animal to human was one ,it has since mutated 33 times according to this china expert,we can't compare to anything else as we are just at the start,we assumed immunity but that is now up in the air,we don't yet have a vaccineMeasles mutates as much as flu but the same vaccine has been used for many years.
There are various mutations but is it just one strain that makes people very poorly?
Has the spike protein changed much?
Awful indeed but taking a seven day average then the figures are lower than the previous seven days by maybe 25% which is much more encouraging.Absolutely awful numbers again. Any small hope we have is immediately ruined the day after
hi, is the whole of Spain treated the same or is it regional. I know madrid had it bad but are rural areas under the same lockdown rules ?
I live in Jerez, population roughly 220,000. We've had 22 confirmed deaths and 60 confirmed cases, so it's not Madrid or Barcelona. Despite that we are subject to the same restrictions as everywhere else.
I think he is right on one thing,we need to discuss this in a years time,not sure about the restthanks for posting, very interesting that
Awful indeed but taking a seven day average then the figures are lower than the previous seven days by maybe 25% which is much more encouraging.
Awful indeed but taking a seven day average then the figures are lower than the previous seven days by maybe 25% which is much more encouraging.
No need for second doctor to certify at the moment.You can’t register a death without a death certificate.
A death certificate is not available for around 5-7 days at best as two GP’s have to sign it and see the body.
After you receive the death certificate, you may then make an appointment to register the death.
I can see the same from the simple BBC graph mate. Sorry to have questioned your manhood. Peak on the 8th, and go back 2 or 3 weeks as you have drawn.Ok as the line doesn't do it for you, you need to go and look at the literature about mean time from Infection to symptoms to death then work out when those who died on the 8th of April got infected.
I don't need to correct you I am simply saying your graphs don't reveal any insight which is not obvious nor deducible from the more basic graphs, and they also don't prove anything they merely highlight a potential correlation. That you get off on them is fine by me.It's good enough for Neil Ferguson.
I've used 18 days which is a reasonable mean value based on about 50 scientific reports all of which are available here.
I would be delighted if you could review them and correct me if you can show it to be unreasonable.
I understand perfectly thank you.
One thing that you might agree with is that lockdown reduces death in the here and now.
What may or may not happen in 2 or 3 years is hugely speculative on your part.
Immunity, vaccination are all up in the air at the moment.
I suspect Sweden thought similar to Boris that the whole thing was over exaggerated and we'll just roll our sleeves up and get on with this herd immunity thing.

What you can say with absolute certainty is that you cannot have more infection and fewer death. Not without a cure. So the only way for daily deaths to decline is for R<1 at some point approximately 18 days earlier.