Orpington Astronomical Society

Random Rambling Ruminations => Chat => Topic started by: MarkS on Mar 18, 2020, 07:54:54

Title: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: MarkS on Mar 18, 2020, 07:54:54
This Washington Post article has some interesting simulations that demonstrate the effectiveness of various strategies to reduce the number of people becoming ill simultaneously:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/

Mark
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Roberto on Mar 18, 2020, 10:55:44
Mark

This is behind a paywall and I'm not a reader of the WP but the paper from Imperial College that the UK government based its change on approach is available to everyone. It is relatively easy to follow and written in plain English:

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf)

It's not comfortable reading but at least it describes what could be expected in quite a lot of detail.

Roberto
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Mar 18, 2020, 14:39:48
...and this analysis of pandemic limitation strategies was circulating on the Net at the end of last week:

https://link.medium.com/aNvjs2ctL4

Also not comfortable reading, especially as you go through it and spot all the occasions this country has done the wrong thing....
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: NoelC on Mar 25, 2020, 11:29:34
Good articles thanks Roberto and Rick
The Imperial College one clearly defines the reasons for the Government's current strategy (and their sudden change of direction) detailing the risk of the second wave (quite rightly).  I couldn't see any consideration of virus loading; if you get a small amount of virus could your outcomes be dramatically different from if you are bombarded by virus 24/7?  I suspect there is a flaw in the argument, in that the PPE and Infection Prevention Controls for NHS staff appear inadequate (IMHO) and there will consequently be higher losses of staff from the hospitals (with an increased mortality risk associated). 
(https://miro.medium.com/max/991/1*YB5WbhPdiX7B-tgKaH2Tjw.png)
A hospital in Wuhan.
(https://i2-prod.somersetlive.co.uk/incoming/article3968443.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/0_Drive-Through-Coronavirus-Test-Site-Established-In-Wolverhampton.jpg)
Front line nurses at a Coronavirus testing centre.
Spot the difference in PPE.

I think it's also worth noting the Case Fatality Ratio for different countries at present: 10% in Italy and 7% in Spain verses less than 0.5% in Germany and Austria.  We are at 5.2% and rising.  Obviously this reflects the difference in approach to testing and availability of tests, but it seems to reflect how overloaded systems are to cope with the virus.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Mar 25, 2020, 15:22:06
The "Viral Load" thing seems to be trying to explain why London (in particular) is seeing a lot of patients in ICU who are relatively young (20s, 30s) and were fit and healthy before the virus got to them. According to the early evidence they should have been at low risk...

As a hypothesis, it makes some sense. Proof may take a while, but this virus is a killer, and I don't want to catch it, so I'll take any reasonable tips towards staying away from it.

The figures for London are certainly skewed by the lack of testing. If you only (mostly) count the cases that end up in hospital (who are more likely to be seriously infected) then your death rate is bound to be higher.

The Imperial College report may have been what finally tipped the government's ideas, but the numbers had been clear for at least a couple of weeks before that, while the clowns in number ten were still quipping about taking it on the chin and building herd immunity.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Roberto on Mar 25, 2020, 16:27:16
Hopefully the experts can agree to disagree and in the end get us out of this mess:

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/368/bmj.m1216.full.pdf (https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/368/bmj.m1216.full.pdf)

Link to commentary on the recently (un)published paper by a team at Oxford University and their thesis that the spread may well be much larger than thought and that the R factor is in fact lower.

Roberto
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Mar 25, 2020, 21:44:45
A bunch of graphs... https://www.ft.com/coronavirus-latest
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: NoelC on Mar 27, 2020, 19:30:22
Interesting about the Oxford Study; it's almost as if someone wanted them to produce a scientific study that says we don't need to bother too much...   Who on earth would have an interest in an opinion like that.  Clearly not the PM since he uses only the 'best science' to guide him.

Having read the WHO report on the China epidemic; I cannot help but be impressed with the amount of preparation China had clearly given to prepare for an epidemic.  40,000 medics sent to Wuhan within a week, and millions of pieces of stockpiled PPE and testing kits sent from every prefecture to the epicentre, surface decontamination kit deployed within a week. 
In comparison, the NHS was over 95% occupancy, less than 2.5 critical care beds per 100,000 of population, testing capacity of less than 5 tests per hospital per day and PPE that was nowhere near the standard set by WHO - a health care system that was in crisis before the crisis hit.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Roy on Mar 28, 2020, 10:55:34
What is apparent from having read much of the called 'science' surrounding the Covid-19 epidemic is the extent to which these papers/reports are really speculation based on mathematical modelling which in turn relies on assumptions. We are currently hamstrung by a absence of hard data as a result of (1) insufficient testing for the virus (ideally should be in the millions by now within the UK) and (2) the lack of any test to identify those who have had the virus and have recovered. I for one am looking forward for a prick in the arm, because until we are all in inoculated, we cannot start getting back to some kind of normality. So let us hope that the development of a vaccine takes just a few months rather than the year to 18 months that has been predicted.

Roy
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Mar 28, 2020, 12:57:10
QuoteSo let us hope that the development of a vaccine takes just a few months rather than the year to 18 months that has been predicted.

Ditto
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: NoelC on Mar 29, 2020, 12:38:46
I think there's huge pressure to fast track a vaccine.  But fast tracking didn't work so well for the virus test the US CDC put together in Feb.  They have got vaccine test candidates now, but I guess there are huge risks involved if they get it wrong. We should keep in mind this will not be the last epidemic; I think we need to put more investment into the process we use rather than relying on a silver bullet to fix it (look at Germany). 

The test data that is being released at present seems weak.  The confirmed infections are really only an impression of admission rates, and the downturn may be a reflection of capacity as much as of infection rates. The rate of increase in mortality has slowed significantly, which is far too soon for the restrictions to have had that effect, maybe it indicates some other issue.  Have the NHS managed to improve management and outcomes, or is there some other systematic problem (like delays in the data)?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/CoViD-19_GB.svg/660px-CoViD-19_GB.svg.png)
Number of cases (blue) and number of deaths (red) on a logarithmic scale (US dates).

I can't see why we aren't testing more.  Did you hear Radio 4 Any Answers this week?  Prof Julian Peto of LSHTM suggested we could test at up to 10 million tests a day!  I like Trump's wartime powers act; I think something like that could be very useful here to sort some of the problems. 
[edited to update the url - someone blocked the old one] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us3TeKO6nPo%5B/url)
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Mar 29, 2020, 12:43:09
Quinine is emerging as a treatment for coronavirus once you get it, and they are planning for possible use with hydrochloroquine (an ante malarial drug).  Still to be clinically proven.

It appears that tonic water has low doses of quinine in it so might be a good idea to have some on standby.

Carole
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: The Thing on Mar 29, 2020, 14:33:21
G&T solves a lot of problems in the short term...
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: RobertM on Mar 29, 2020, 14:40:35
Tonic water and Quinine - fact, fiction or just 'Fake News'...  at least the retailers will be guaranteed to sell out tomorrow.  There will also be a lot of people unaware of the medical consequences of taking too much.

Robert
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: The Thing on Mar 29, 2020, 15:11:18
My understanding is its fake news. At least two people have died from overdosing on cholorquine in Nigeria hoping to protect themselves. I used to take it when I worked in Papua New Guinea in the 1980s, nasty hallucinations if you took two doses in a day by mistake. Nasty but necessary in that part of the world. 16 different mossies and 21 malarias :}
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Mar 29, 2020, 21:27:20
I didn't get that off the internet, it was on BBC News with a scientist presenting it.

Carole
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Mac on Mar 30, 2020, 01:00:55
Heres an interesting quick read from the BBC.
Its a paper by a professor at cambridge university on the death toll.

in a nut shell,

every year there at 600'000 deaths in the uk.
How many more are due to this virus, not many according to their calculations and explanation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654)

Mac
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Mar 30, 2020, 12:15:22
Quote from: Mac on Mar 30, 2020, 01:00:55How many more are due to this virus, not many according to their calculations and explanation.

Perhaps the author should visit some of the hospitals being overwhelmed by COVID-19 patients. I think, if they did, they might just change their tune. I think they've missed something along the way...
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Mar 30, 2020, 13:40:44
Quote from: The Thing on Mar 29, 2020, 15:11:18
My understanding is its fake news. At least two people have died from overdosing on cholorquine in Nigeria hoping to protect themselves. I used to take it when I worked in Papua New Guinea in the 1980s, nasty hallucinations if you took two doses in a day by mistake. Nasty but necessary in that part of the world. 16 different mossies and 21 malarias :}
Is it true that Mosquitoes have killed more humans than have died in ALL of the wars in human history?
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Mar 30, 2020, 17:27:46
Mosquitos never killed anyone. They do, however, play a part in quite a few diseases, and some of those have been killing people since before the human race was even human...

It's one of those "lies, damned lies, and statistics" quotes best taken with a pich of salt (or a stiff G&T, if that takes your fancy).
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Mar 30, 2020, 22:31:05
Quote from: Rick on Mar 30, 2020, 17:27:46
Mosquitos never killed anyone. They do, however, play a part in quite a few diseases, and some of those have been killing people since before the human race was even human...

It's one of those "lies, damned lies, and statistics" quotes best taken with a pich of salt (or a stiff G&T, if that takes your fancy).
Mosquitoes may have killed half the people who ever lived

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24332420-500-mosquitoes-may-have-killed-half-the-people-who-ever-lived/#ixzz6ID6QPiTl
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: NoelC on Mar 31, 2020, 10:44:13
Roger; mosquitoes rule!  Interesting that they haven't been identified as a vector for diseases other than malaria (why not ebola or HIV?).

COVID-19
A semi interesting article from LSHTM on critical care bed availability and the relationship of under reporting to estimates of the growth in infection:
https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2020/critical-care-beds-uk-and-differences-reporting-symptomatic-cases (https://www.lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/news/2020/critical-care-beds-uk-and-differences-reporting-symptomatic-cases)
It was based on this paper of the 22nd March, but it has been updated:-
https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/current-patterns-transmission/ICU-projections.html (https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/current-patterns-transmission/ICU-projections.html)
The author puts our critical care bed capacity at 4,123 beds, at the commons the head of NHS committed to delivering 30,000 - not sure what the difference is there, suspect the head of the NHS was referring to all beds?
The article makes the point that data appears to be being delayed and under reported (system starting to break down?).
We can only hope the worst case projections are wrong!

No mention of Dr Julian Peto at LSHTM - suspect he has been fired or buried for daring to challenge the governments position on testing.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: The Thing on Mar 31, 2020, 11:13:01
Quote from: NoelC on Mar 31, 2020, 10:44:13
Roger; mosquitoes rule!  Interesting that they haven't been identified as a vector for diseases other than malaria (why not ebola or HIV?).


Because malaria is a parasite caused disease (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria) not a virus or bacteria. Had it in Papua New Guinea when I was working there many many years ago.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: The Thing on Mar 31, 2020, 11:15:09
We're all guinea pigs in the laboratory of life. Better a cute guinea pig than a lab rat!
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Mar 31, 2020, 11:27:08
Malaria is spread by Mosquitoes, the mosquitoes themselves don't cause Malaria etc it's a parasite that some of them carry that causes the illness which gets into your blood when they bite you.

Carole
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: MarkS on Mar 31, 2020, 20:32:46
Have you heard of the Global Health Security Index?  It's an index of the preparedness of countries around the world to the outbreak of some new pathogen: https://www.ghsindex.org/

It's really comforting(?) to know that the UK is second only to the US in terms of its readiness for a pandemic.  Not just on one measure but all six: Prevent, detect, respond, health, norms, risk.

I think someone, somewhere needs to be asking some very serious questions when this is all over ...

Mark
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Mac on Apr 01, 2020, 19:23:45
Another interesting site on covid, where they have been plotting & logging the spread as well as sequencing the RNA of the virus.

https://nextstrain.org/ncov?d=tree,map&p=grid (https://nextstrain.org/ncov?d=tree,map&p=grid)
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: MarkH on Apr 01, 2020, 20:38:26
It seems to me that the fatality influence has a genetic relationship.Let's see how stats progress from here.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: MarkS on Apr 01, 2020, 20:45:08
Quote from: Mac
Another interesting site on covid, where they have been plotting & logging the spread as well as sequencing the RNA of the virus.

https://nextstrain.org/ncov?d=tree,map&p=grid (https://nextstrain.org/ncov?d=tree,map&p=grid)

So it's mutating?  That throws another unwanted random element into the mix  :!

Mark
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Apr 01, 2020, 20:52:35
That map could be the flight paths of passenger aircraft before it started , i always thought they should have grounded all aircraft worldwide a lot sooner.Heard of a man who went home from GB to hunan , China recently and hes got it,
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 01, 2020, 23:06:15
Quote from: The Thing on Mar 31, 2020, 11:13:01Because malaria is a parasite caused disease (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria) not a virus or bacteria. Had it in Papua New Guinea when I was working there many many years ago.

Yellow fever is a viral disease transmitted by mosquitos. There's an effective vaccine for it, though, so it's no longer the killer it once was. There are a bunch of other diseases (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito#Vectors_of_disease) transmitted by infected mosquitos. Some are viral...
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Mac on Apr 02, 2020, 16:43:46
Another interesting read on the BBC from Imperial college.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654)

Mac.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 03, 2020, 10:03:41
This, from the Grauniad:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/02/wrong-coronavirus-world-scientists-optimism-experts
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 03, 2020, 10:07:50
Quote from: Mac on Apr 02, 2020, 16:43:46
Another interesting read on the BBC from Imperial college.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654)

That's by the BBC's Health correspondent, pulls numbers from all over the place, not just from ICL, and it seems to be trying to make them more confusing rather than less. It's not the first article from him I've seen that has seemed rather wooley.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 04, 2020, 09:44:43
The one thing that's certain while the pandemic is still spreading is that the reported figures will be a proportion of the real figures.

The tricky question is "How much below the real figures are the reported figures?".

Even the count of deaths will lag reality because of lag in the reporting system, so that "died today" headline figure is really a "deaths reported today" one, and with the cases still on the rise that will inevitably be lower than reality.

An "admitted to hospital" figure might do a bit better, but even that's going to be skewed by decisions on whether to take a patient to hospital or not, and that's going to be affected by how busy the hospitals appear to be.

There's no chance of doing more than guessing how many people have the infection in the population at large until decent samples of cross-sections of the population can be tested. Even then, the accuracy (or lack of it) in the tests will also skew things.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: NoelC on Apr 05, 2020, 11:49:12
Mac - an interesting article but somewhat confusing in it's conclusions.
Rick - Groinuad article: I agree with most of his comments - very poor performance by Boris, and almost certainly career limiting.

It appears to me that there is no clear strategy from the Government, far from being lead by the science they are being chased by it!  What was clear from the outset I feel was that containment and aggressive contact tracing was the only solution until vaccine's could become an option (if they ever do - we are still waiting for one for HIV). The Chinese had 1800 teams working on contact tracing.  For that reason testing is the only solution to lockdown (as lockdown arguably will cause more damage than COVID-19).

On your point about case figure reliability; here is an interesting analysis based on Case Fatality Ratios (CFR):-
https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/severity/global_cfr_estimates.html (https://cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19/severity/global_cfr_estimates.html)
The pertinent point is the table half way down which puts our case figure reliability at 5% (i.e. the error is 95%).  The US are late to the party (as usual) but are ramping testing at an astounding rate (17% and rising) - something we should learn from.

There is a danger that as countries get this under control; they will  keep borders closed to countries that have inadequate controls, with consequent effects to economic recovery.

Concerning as this all is; spare a thought for those in sub-saharan Africa and South America with no medical support.  We needed to halt this sooner for their sake.  If they had adopted this approach to Ebola we'd be blaming them for the consequences.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 05, 2020, 13:38:31
I have family in sub-Saharan Africa. At the moment most of them are on a relatively remote ranch, but sooner or later they'll come into contact with the virus. The bigger effect at present is the complete cessation of the tourist trade. That's usually a huge earner for Kenya, not just in tour companies and hotels, but in small market traders and all the rest, and a lot of people are already, just a fortnight in, near enough destitute as a result of the sudden complete lack of income. If the virus gets hold, I expect the death rate to be somewhat higher than it is here, because there in't the medical care. The effect on the country will not be pretty. :(
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Apr 05, 2020, 13:42:58
i am not sure about other people but in our whole extended family spread out over the whole south east we have only heard of 1 confirmed case 58yrs (survived) and a 4 year old child slight symptoms.
Is this similar to other peoples experience so far ?
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Apr 05, 2020, 14:48:48
Quotejust a fortnight in, near enough destitute as a result of the sudden complete lack of income. If the virus gets hold, I expect the death rate to be somewhat higher than it is here, because there in't the medical care. The effect on the country will not be pretty. :(
That's extremely sad to hear.

Quotei am not sure about other people but in our whole extended family spread out over the whole south east we have only heard of 1 confirmed case 58yrs (survived) and a 4 year old child slight symptoms.
Is this similar to other peoples experience so far ?
My niece's husband has had it and got over it.

My uncle (aged 90) died of pneumonia just as this whole thing was starting in the UK,  but I don't think it was CV related.  However by the time of his funeral only 5 were allowed to go.

I think I have heard of another non related person who has had it.

If you check in your area, you will find There are 216 confirmed cases in West Sussex, out of a local population of 858,852  (I didn't know your postcode)

There are 434 confirmed cases in Bromley, out of a local population of 331,096

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Apr 05, 2020, 16:38:06

If you check in your area, you will find There are 216 confirmed cases in West Sussex, out of a local population of 858,852  (I didn't know your postcode)

There are 434 confirmed cases in Bromley, out of a local population of 331,096

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274
[/quote]
The map lower down is very interesting , it seems that the very high cases seem to be clustered around the cities near to major airports London , Liverpool ,Manchester , Newcastle ie the HUBS.
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 05, 2020, 18:14:18
Quote from: Apophis on Apr 05, 2020, 13:42:58Is this similar to other peoples experience so far ?

I'm certain that in the UK at least, the "confirmed cases" figure is a small fraction of those actually infected. We'll know more if the testing becomes more widespread.

Two of my friends, who live in Eltham and work in central London, have had an unusual illness. One had a cough that felt like "a nest of wasps in my chest" and the other just felt a little low and lost her sense of taste and smell for a while. (The second would have caught it from the first, and though they've not been tested, I'd guess they've probably had CV-19.) Another friend got to work (in London) earlier in the week to hear that a young colleague had just died of CV-19 complications, and a young friend who's an ambulance paramedic (in South-East London) said that everyone he's sent to is dying, by which I think he means he's probably had at least one of them die in the ambulance, and he doesn't think the survival chances of the others are particularly good.

Over in the US, a couple of my friends just reported that one of their social circle, who'd been recovering from complicated surgery, died yesterday. They said that "COVID-19 was the one thing too many for him".
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 06, 2020, 14:24:10
Some relatively raw data from ICNARC (Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre) on recent COVID-19-related deaths in the U.K.

https://www.icnarc.org/DataServices/Attachments/Download/76a7364b-4b76-ea11-9124-00505601089b (https://www.icnarc.org/DataServices/Attachments/Download/76a7364b-4b76-ea11-9124-00505601089b)

Plenty of tables and graphs. A couple of the the things I noticed were:

1) that over 90% of patients who died were "Able to live without assistance in daily activities" before falling ill, and only about 7% had other severe "comorbidities". That suggests that the "would have died soon anyway" line being pushed elsewhere is a load of fetid dingoes kidneys (thanks, Douglas Adams, for that phrase).

2) Roughly two thirds of those who died were men.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 06, 2020, 21:27:53
Oh, and about half of those entering critical care end up dead.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Apr 06, 2020, 23:42:05
Hope Boris isnt one of them,
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Hugh on Apr 07, 2020, 11:19:18
Some good information from a couple of medics this morning on TV.  A Consultant giving a realistic report on the potential ways forward after infection.  He emphasised that this is not flu and the early reports that it is a worse form of that are totally wrong ~ this is something completely different.  Comparison with other countries with high mortality is difficult as differing health impactors, especially the rate of smoking, is important. 

One speaker indicated that the initial viral load is all important.  A casual interaction giving a small viral load enables the body to deal with the virus more effectively whereas a number of collective interactions are more likely to lead to a worsening later on ~ perhaps as per the PM?  Perhaps also as other countries, Italy for instance, where families live together.  It does seem that if you are not seeming to clear the symptoms over 7-10 days, then however you feel, you should be getting yourself introduced to the health system as it may be more likely to worsen quickly.

I've seen several interesting reports recently about the efficacy of breathing exercises ~ some from doctors via social media ~ which I'm probably going to start.  They revolve around deep breathing exercises lasting a few minutes ~ the couple named Abel, who featured quite early on on TV reporting from the cruise ship and who ended up in hospital as positive ~ have also reported via social media on recovery that they had used them and it had helped.  Part of the exercises require you laying on your front as this opens up the airways more effectively.  Laying on your front is also a position that is used in hospitals as treatment when hospitalised.

If anyone is interested, text/Whatsapp me and I'll forward for you.

Keep well my friends and and wash your hands!

Hugh

Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Apr 11, 2020, 15:01:20
Quotei am not sure about other people but in our whole extended family spread out over the whole south east we have only heard of 1 confirmed case 58yrs (survived) and a 4 year old child slight symptoms.
Is this similar to other peoples experience so far ?

Just heard of a death in the "sort of family" due to Coronavirus.  My husband's sister in law's partner (she is divorced from Adrian's brother donkeys years ago) died in Lewisham Hospital.  He wasn't young and had other health issues, but still a blow for my sister in law who is 80+ and no-one knows how he got it as neither of them have been out for 4 weeks.  Just wondering if something was transmitted on deliveries, (friends helping them with shopping)!!!

We are now worried for sister in law although she has not developed any symptoms as yet (day 8 apparently).  Nieces are keeping us informed.

Carole
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Mac on Apr 11, 2020, 18:01:46
QuoteI've seen several interesting reports recently about the efficacy of breathing exercises ~ some from doctors via social media ~ which I'm probably going to start.  They revolve around deep breathing exercises lasting a few minutes ~ the couple named Abel, who featured quite early on on TV reporting from the cruise ship and who ended up in hospital as positive ~ have also reported via social media on recovery that they had used them and it had helped.

Hmmmm, i thought the breathing myths were debunked.

If not, it would be interesting to see how many musicians have caught this and gone in to intensive care, only the fact that we do this type of breathing exercise all the time, normally for a few hours a day.

Just wondering.

Mac.

Also on a completely different but relevant tangent.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/adhocs/10714deathsregisteredweeklyfrom1993to2018byregionenglandandwales (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/adhocs/10714deathsregisteredweeklyfrom1993to2018byregionenglandandwales)

Weekly statistics on the total uk deaths per week since 1993 from the national office of statistics.

The average is 10'000 per week

The highest was 20566 per week in 2000
The lowest  was  6583  per week in 2013

Mac
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Hugh on Apr 11, 2020, 18:53:36
Hi Mack,

Your right that you should be cautious about things like breathing exercises and their efficacy in times like these but this information has been reported on the TV and within the Times newspaper ~ the link, which I hope will work if you want to view, is as below: ~

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-breathing-video-helped-my-coronavirus-symptoms-7lrr3tt8z

It's clearly not right for everyone and the cough part should be used appropriately.  The advice apparently revolves around the fact that it opens up all your lungs which are mostly contained within your back area.  The treatment for the virus in hospital does involve some who are on breathing support to be on the their front to assist breathing (conscious and on CPAP) at times and those on ventilators are turned, over a 16 hour period, onto their backs and front.

It might be nothing new in terms of this sort of exercises, I certainly know nothing of singers breathing exercises, but it seems that undertaken judiciously it's a 'shot to nothing' that just might help at a later time of adversity?

Keep washing your hands!

Best

Hugh
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Apr 11, 2020, 18:55:42
Made me really sad to see the mass graves in New York,  allegedly only the poor who cant afford a funeral ,  it reminded me of some scenes in WW2 ,
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 13, 2020, 10:49:06
A little more on the reliability (and otherwise) of the numbers being thrown at the media (and then on to us) regarding the course of the pandemic:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/coronavirus-statistics-what-can-we-trust-and-what-should-we-ignore

As for breathing exercises; the most severe stage of COVID-19 infection targets the lungs. It seems to me that anything you can do that increases your lung capacity and ability to get rid of congestion will help you if it gets that bad. (I remember hearing an interview many years ago with a celebrity opera singer who'd had a close call with something respiratory, and who put his survival down to the exercises he did for his singing, but that's just another anecdote.)
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Apr 13, 2020, 11:38:31
They should also be showing the figures of presumed Coronavirus (i.e. with symptoms but untested) to get a better picture.

Just heard a brother of a friend is in intensive care.

Also the BBC website says There are 724 confirmed cases in Bromley, out of a local population of 331,096, I have been watching this double in the last week.

Carole
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Hugh on Apr 13, 2020, 12:15:17
To put a bit of context to that, the 724 represents just 0.22% of the 300+ thousand in the Bromley area.  Of course, the actual number is probably much larger as those with it are still hidden within the community.  However, it will still be a small percentage which one hopes the lock down will help keep manageable.

Hugh
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Apr 13, 2020, 12:37:30
Quote from: Hugh on Apr 13, 2020, 12:15:17
To put a bit of context to that, the 724 represents just 0.22% of the 300+ thousand in the Bromley area.  Of course, the actual number is probably much larger as those with it are still hidden within the community.  However, it will still be a small percentage which one hopes the lock down will help keep manageable.

Hugh
Even smaller percentages the further you get from towns ie west sussex .045% , Kent .095%.
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: NoelC on Apr 14, 2020, 13:33:59
Very interesting article on the reliability of the stats Rick.
This blog by the statistician in charge of the Covid-19 tracking data is also quite revealing:-
https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2020/03/31/counting-deaths-involving-the-coronavirus-covid-19/ (https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2020/03/31/counting-deaths-involving-the-coronavirus-covid-19/)
In it she posts the following chart:
(https://blog.ons.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2020/03/weekly-deaths-graph-630x470.png)
As you can see the picture of how many people had died on the 20th of March was totally different to that 5 days later, 50% of the deaths being reported 5-10 days after they occured.  It appears paperwork is still coming in for deaths which occurred over a month previously. The figures for the first day deaths are still going up on the latest data. So when the government announced that the first person had died from Covid-19, ONS are now saying 8 people had died on that day and the figure may go up further.

While a statistical fact of life for ONS; it really means there are no meaningful stats to do epidemiology on, and consequently all the 'we are nearly over the peak' announcements need to be treated with extreme caution.  If we aren't at the peak, we are in a far worse position in terms of the risk of getting infected; don't be tempted to ease off any of your precautions.

In all the stats I've read the most worrying factor is the suggestion that anything up to 50% of those infected are asymptomatic (carriers only).  You now have to treat everyone you meet as if they are infected.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Rick on Apr 14, 2020, 18:17:40
I figure the number of confirmed cases is a tip-of-the-iceberg number. There's no widespread systematic testing, so all they're really doing is saying how many of the relatively few tests they have done have actually come out positive. Want a smaller number? Just test fewer people. I, for one, won't trust or be reassured by it.

The nearest you can get to an accurate figure at present is still the number of deaths, because deaths have to be registered, but for all sorts of reasons even it's a somewhat suspect number. For one, it seems only deaths that happen in hospitals make it into the figure the government issues each day, and it's becoming clear that there are plenty of people who die of the virus elsewhere who therefore don't get counted. Care homes are today's focus. (See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52275823 for example.) The graph Roger posted is interesting because you can see how, as the reports come in over time, the recorded numbers rise.

I think the best indication of the true scale of the epidemic at present is probably the report from the Office of National Statistics. They reported that the overall death rate in the week up to April 3rd was the highest weekly death rate they'd recorded since they started doing weekly counts in 2005. It's a pity they havn't gone back and produced comparable counts further into the past, but even that's a hint.

For more details about the figures, see https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/14/coronavirus-pushes-england-death-rate-to-highest-level-ever and note the way the proportion of deaths associated with the virus is changing. It was 5% of the 11141 deaths in the week up to 27th March, and 22% of the 16387 deaths in the week up to 3rd April. What's interesting there is that 22% of 16387 is considerably less than the 5246 deaths' difference between the two weeks. I suspect that both the 5% and the 22% figures simply reflect the fact that the virus, despite being a notifiable disease, is being confirmed as involved in only a proportion of the cases for which it is actually responsible. I'd not be at all surprised if the actual count was more than double the reported figures.

I'll treat all the numbers with caution, especially if they seem to be trying to make me think the situation is less serious than it seems, and keep up with all the precautions I can manage.

Stay safe and healthy, folks.
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: MarkS on Apr 23, 2020, 11:23:53
The government might recommend wearing face masks when we go outside for shopping etc.

So buy yours here before they sell out:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Johnson-Politician-Celebrity-Single-Elastic/dp/B07XF1CQL3

Mark
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Apr 23, 2020, 11:55:01
 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I didn't take any notice regarding not wearing a mask right from the outset, just doesn't make sense to me, a barrier even sub-standard has to be better than no barrier at all, so have been making my own.

Might not be Medical standard but IMO better than nothing and they go straight in the wash after one wear, being careful how they are taken off.  Hands washed at the same time.

Having said that I stopped going out even to walk the dog  a few weeks ago (we have a dog walker now), but Adrian goes to get a daily paper and any quick to grab item we might have run out of from the corner shop with a mask on.

Even in the house I had reason to wear a mask when we took delivery of a new fridge freezer when I went into the hall to collect where they has deposited it (just inside the door), with mask and rubber gloves on while I washed it down with soapy water and disinfectant. 

I even made one out of a bra cup.  Caused some hilarity on other forums and FB. 
Bit of thin garden wire accross the bridge of the nose so it can be pinched around the nose.

Adrian refuses to wear this version.  lol

Not sure if you can see this copied from FB:
(https://scontent-lhr8-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/92703065_10159282628706037_3766613974162866176_o.jpg?_nc_cat=107&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_oc=AQmwsGNygGyX_PdvfJjoDzWbId61iQFPmasL4Tg5hDRxwmUqhA4FEzQknwRmY5Mr05A&_nc_ht=scontent-lhr8-1.xx&_nc_tp=7&oh=e506495c66dca14788bd8707afef818a&oe=5EC66FB3)
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: NoelC on Apr 23, 2020, 14:03:06
Excellent
I think you should send that to Matt Hancock - he can then keep abreast of the PPE crisis!
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Apr 23, 2020, 15:40:16
 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: ApophisAstros on Apr 23, 2020, 19:12:44
I saw this and thought of you. :lol:
(https://stargazerslounge.com/uploads/monthly_2020_04/IMG-20200409-WA0003.jpg.591fb1a9138d1cbe6cd04954b565eb6c.jpg?fbclid=IwAR2GwkG6ukrwHnLma9vjF_I2hNYM0zJhf5TFwJSUbQv2NDX6mISp2i3lLp8)
Enough said...LoL :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Roger
Title: Re: The Maths of Coronavirus
Post by: Carole on Apr 23, 2020, 21:40:56
 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: