COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Healdplace

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 May 2013
Messages
2,640
The 18 England patients were aged between 54 and 94 and all had previous underlying health conditions.
 

Healdplace

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 May 2013
Messages
2,640
Wales death total only rises by 1 with 15 new cases.Last week it was 2 deaths and 25 cases.

So running hospital total is 19 compared with 21 last week. With Scotland to clarify any deaths still and N Ireland to add any too.
 

grunge

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 Jun 2009
Messages
3,596
Location
Warrington
Let's use Sweden as an example of what would happen without a strict lockdown, aren't they on around 12 a day dying now? Before people start banging on about population etc Stockholm is more densely populated than London. Many studies have said that a full lockdown has barely any benefit over banning large gatherings together with social distancing. It is also proven our cases peaked before lockdown. In my opinion there is absolutely no way we would be anywhere near 500k deaths.
The Sweden argument, ignoring population density even tho there only the 1 city that can compare to the Uk. The rest is very sparse.

they are naturally reserved, touching in public is not a done thing, young sweeds tend to leave the nest early so lower cross generational contamination.

And more importantly, According to 5/6 people i know who live there, mostly in Stockholm, the majority of the population ignored the gov and self isolated anyways, lots of companies closed offices and got people to work from home etc etc.

And in general, Sweeds see there strategy as an epic fail.

additionally the average age of Stockholm is 38, 40% of the Stockholm population is Between 20-44.

Edit, another point with stockholm is there are less than a million people there. London is 9 million. London had 6100 deaths. Stockholm had 2300, which is a far higher rate to London by populaton
 
Last edited:

The Northern Baptist

Well-Known Member
Joined
26 Jul 2009
Messages
2,546
Location
Salford
That's clearly not true, the amount of people that had it at the start of March was much higher than now, we just didn't know it, that was how it exploded in numbers, not many had it in early to mid Feb though, and it still happened, but now we are testing huge numbers unlike early March, so it should be easier to spot, and we have far better knowledge on treatment, another advantage from back then.

One thing I'd like to know, and that we'll probably never find out, is how many children actually had it asymptomatically and subsequently took it home to their parents ? That could have been the huge spreader that made it explode.
Nah. More have it now than had it on 1st March. I’d you don’t agree, throw some actual figures at me.
 

grunge

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 Jun 2009
Messages
3,596
Location
Warrington
Nah. More have it now than had it on 1st March. I’d you don’t agree, throw some actual figures at me.
UK wise it’s clear more had it then than do now than 1st March. Average 3 weeks from contraction to a death happening and the spike of excess deaths started around the 23rd March so those people were on average being infected around 1st week of March.

globally however far far more have it now than 1st March.
 

Healdplace

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 May 2013
Messages
2,640
As I was saying about Wales and the mining valleys. Merthyr Tydfil has had more cases recently than Leicester. 179 v 141 No timescale mentioned.
 

Eds

Well-Known Member
Joined
7 Nov 2005
Messages
6,552
that’s still an action effecting it tho. Those predictions are pure maths predictions, probably not taking stuff like that into consideration.
So totally made up then. If my auntie had bollocks she’d be my uncle but I won’t take into account she isn’t having a sex change. Might as well have said 10 million could die
 

Don't have an account?

Register now!
Top