COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
shemnel said:
i want to add some context to this hospitality debate;

the 3% figure is largely based on Acute Respiratory Infection surveillance reports, which report where a location/setting has 2 or more positive cases that are linked to it. This does not tell you how many cases but the type of location that is experiencing cases. Also it is still very hard to link the cases to that location but is the best data available. Furthermore that 3% figure is probably a little out of date now that students are back and the covid landscape has changed.
This is the latest (week39) data for ARI incident surveillance;

View attachment 3616



To give Mr Whitty something, he is (probably) using the Enhance Test & Trace data, which attempts to track where a person has been who has tested positive. This data is reported and 'Eating Out' plus hospitality buried under 'Other' comes to a shade under 30% of 28,000 locations stated by 14,000 people. Obviously people can state multiple locations, with a mean of only 2 (surprisingly). This absolutely cannot tell you where the infection happened but it can give you an idea of where people are in the 7 days leading up to a positive test.

View attachment 3617


So, my belief is that 3% is out dated and 30% should NOT be used as the figure for hospitality either. I would say quoting either end of the spectrum is very disingenuous. In reality it's impossible to know the exact figure but 5% to 30% would be your range, in my opinion. Not insignificant.


personal thought; can't see why hospitality is a bigger target to politicians/media than clothes shopping and all the other shops people go into for whatever reason's (that are beyond me)
Click to expand...

so basically pick a figure that suits your argument
 
Australia seems to think they have contained their second wave. Though, of course, they are coming into Summer there. Which will help

No deaths for two days now - longest zero death spell in three months.

And falling cases were down to just 16 yesterday,

Though they have used their isolation and largest island in the world status well and have probably handled this best of any large western nation.

But there is a reason Nevil Shute set On The Beach in Melbourne. And it is why the pandemic was more easy to contain here and in New Zealand. And to a lesser degree somewhere like Cornwall in the UK. Which has a pop score of 279! Like much of this more isolated peninsula 1000 less than pretty much everywhere in the North West.

Though even isolated Cornwall cannot escape the invasion of the virus fron the north and west and since the 1 August has seen what was an all Summer long situation of 0 people on ventilators and about 18 in hospital become 6 on ventilators and 66 in hospital.

The UK is just a great breeding ground for this virus - especially now as we spend less time outdoors.
 
Last edited:
Scottyboi said:
America has 655 deaths per mil pop we have 627, not a million miles apart really considering our measures compared to theirs.
Click to expand...
That statistic is silly though because how can we improve it? We can't reduce the number of deaths per million people because it's already happened as we were hit very hard in the initial pandemic because the government didn't impose it quick enough. The US did have a lockdown don't forget early on in the pandemic.

The fact is in the US that 655 per million figure is growing and it will not stop growing whereas here it stopped growing months ago because of lockdown.

The only way this justifies not taking action is if we see a case increase alongside flat deaths but that isn't happening, deaths are currently increasing with the number of reported cases.

So we have a choice, take action, or take no action and accept an undetermined number of people are going to die and will keep dying until no vulnerable people are left.

The only gamechanger I see is a vaccine or a change in treatment which means people do get sick but don't die and so allowing people to go back to normal.
 
Last edited:
The Northern Baptist said:
so basically pick a figure that suits your argument
Click to expand...

sadly that's sort of correct. I mean, when you deal with this sort of stuff, especially in this situation, the uncertainty bounds are large and i would be cautious over ANY claims of exactitude (even case numbers & deaths). As i say, i think pushing towards using 3% or 30% in terms of hospitality is probably not wise, but simply to think of it as a reasonable (15 to 20%?) contributor in community settings that is one of many settings for transmission. People are trying to think in boxes here when the truth is there is mass overlap.
 
Scottish data is pretty horrific sadly.

6 deaths

1246 cases - new record

at record 16.2% positive

440 Greater Glasgow 306 Lanarkshire 192 Lothian

397 in hospital - up 20

33 on ventilators - up 2
 
Scotland week to week

4 deaths v 6 today

775 cases v 1246 today

12.6% positive v 16.2% today

175 in hospital v 397 today (more than doubled in a week)

19 on ventilators v 33 today.
 
I genuinely would like to hear from those who were saying these kind of numbers are not as worrying as they seem a week or so ago as they do - to my non expert eyes - appear to have fairly rapidly got worse.

Do they see anything as having changed or is this still on the more hopeful path they were posting about for the data a week or so ago?

The governments all over the UK seem to be reacting this week almost in a panic as if there is a real threat now of things getting out of control.

Is there still a cause for optimism in the data?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.