When will this shit end?

[Toilet Duck]

10 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Me too, If covid isn't killing people with acute respiratory infection how is it killing them?

A lot due to coagulation problems, the virus makes their blood really sticky. Cardiac events too (the virus really does a number on heart muscle). There’s receptors for the virus on loads of different tissues in the body and we’re only starting to get to grips with what it can do (neurological stuff too). Basically, it’s nasty and can kill you in a number of ways

[Havors]

3 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

In which case covid hasn't actually killed anyone who wouldn't have died anyway, that's why it doesn't make sense unless covid kills by another method.

There is obviously a crossover in the people who are dying. Back in March April you cant deny that Covid killed a lot of people who probably wouldnt have died just yet.. the excess deaths where way up! Currently though the excess deaths are where they are expected on average...

That may well change over the next few weeks with the lag from positive tests to deaths. 

[ace56blaa]

7 minutes ago, Havors said:

Some stats guy posted it on twitter. Its simple enough to understand haha.... the bars show the number of excess deaths due to acute respiratory illness over the year so far. The grey bars show there has been minus excess deaths from May to October.. so less than the normal yearly average. 

Hopefully it stays like that... it will help the NHS cope this winter.  

Seems to be sourced from the CEBM website, in a study breaking down the data of excess deaths. 

This is the graph with excess deaths overall. 

So covid complications are happening more with over conditions like diabetes and heart or cardiovasculars diseases according to the rest of the data. 
 

[Havors]

1 minute ago, Toilet Duck said:

A lot due to coagulation problems, the virus makes their blood really sticky. Cardiac events too (the virus really does a number on heart muscle). There’s receptors for the virus on loads of different tissues in the body and we’re only starting to get to grips with what it can do (neurological stuff too). Basically, it’s nasty and can kill you in a number of ways

That is another good point. Treatment has massively improved since March/April.. 

something that should be tracked is patients discharged from hospital after covid... we can see then how effective the treatments are and how the hospitals are actually coping

[Havors]

1 minute ago, ace56blaa said:

Seems to be sourced from the CEBM website, in a study breaking down the data of excess deaths. 

This is the graph with excess deaths overall. 

So covid complications are happening more with over conditions like diabetes and heart or cardiovasculars diseases according to the rest of the data. 
 

Yeah thats the one for over all deaths. Without sounding morbid it will be really interesting to see how the graph plays out over the next month to see if truly are in a second wave or if its more of a ripple.

[Ozanne]

3 minutes ago, Havors said:

Yeah thats the one for over all deaths. Without sounding morbid it will be really interesting to see how the graph plays out over the next month to see if truly are in a second wave or if its more of a ripple.

You’d probably find the ONS weekly study into deaths quite interesting mate. It’s out towards the end of every week. 

[Toilet Duck]

6 minutes ago, Havors said:

That is another good point. Treatment has massively improved since March/April.. 

something that should be tracked is patients discharged from hospital after covid... we can see then how effective the treatments are and how the hospitals are actually coping

Yeah, daily discharges weren’t reported here in the first wave, now they are (and some days we have more discharges than admissions). Discharges from ICU also reported along with admissions. Gives a bit better perspective on what is happening. 

[gizmoman]

9 minutes ago, Havors said:

There is obviously a crossover in the people who are dying. Back in March April you cant deny that Covid killed a lot of people who probably wouldnt have died just yet.. the excess deaths where way up! Currently though the excess deaths are where they are expected on average...

That may well change over the next few weeks with the lag from positive tests to deaths. 

Yes, and back then we were told it was a respiratory disease,

https://www.webmd.com/lung/what-does-covid-do-to-your-lungs#1

If that is not the primary cause of disease and death the call for ventilators etc. was pointless. If it still the main problem the chart seems wrong.

[Fuzzy Afro]

1 minute ago, gizmoman said:

Yes, and back then we were told it was a respiratory disease,

https://www.webmd.com/lung/what-does-covid-do-to-your-lungs#1

If that is not the primary cause of disease and death the call for ventilators etc. was pointless. If it still the main problem the chart seems wrong.

I’m sure one of the main human errors made in the first wave was overuse of ventilators right? Seen some arguments that more died unnecessarily because the doctors got them put on ventilators which were unhelpful. 

[gizmoman]

1 minute ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

I’m sure one of the main human errors made in the first wave was overuse of ventilators right? Seen some arguments that more died unnecessarily because the doctors got them put on ventilators which were unhelpful. 

Yep, which means the number of deaths in the first wave would have been less with the correct treatment (not blaming anyone it was all new), which also means this virus as it stands now is not as deadly as first feared (I understand it's stlll a nasty disease and we should take measures to avoid it's spread) so there is a perfectly valid argument about the cost and benefit of lockdowns and other restrictions and the total cost to society in the long term.

[Havors]

7 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Yes, and back then we were told it was a respiratory disease,

https://www.webmd.com/lung/what-does-covid-do-to-your-lungs#1

If that is not the primary cause of disease and death the call for ventilators etc. was pointless. If it still the main problem the chart seems wrong.

Im not sure what your saying to be honest? What chart is wrong? 

 

[Havors]

5 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Yep, which means the number of deaths in the first wave would have been less with the correct treatment (not blaming anyone it was all new), which also means this virus as it stands now is not as deadly as first feared (I understand it's stlll a nasty disease and we should take measures to avoid it's spread) so there is a perfectly valid argument about the cost and benefit of lockdowns and other restrictions and the total cost to society in the long term.

That is a valid concern yes. Requires investigation and we will know more in a few weeks once we pass the "lag" of the current increase in cases.... and we will also see data from Wales lockdown and be able to determine the effectiveness of a "circuit breaker" lockdown. 

Edited October 28, 2020 by Havors

[Lycra]

8 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

I’m sure one of the main human errors made in the first wave was overuse of ventilators right? Seen some arguments that more died unnecessarily because the doctors got them put on ventilators which were unhelpful. 

Putting a patient on a ventilator is a serious decision and one which is not taken if there is an alternative. If a patient requires ventilation in order to get enough oxygen into the body to survive then prospects without it are extremely low. It can be seen as the option of last resort. Fortunately since March/April much has been learnt about covid and new treatments have come on board which have reduced the need to go there.

[gizmoman]

5 minutes ago, Havors said:

Im not sure what your saying to be honest? What chart is wrong? 

 

The chart suggests no excess deaths at all so far this year from respiratory infections despite a pandemic involving a respiratory disease, either the chart is wrong or what we have been told about covid is wrong. (or i'm just dense).

[Havors]

2 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

The chart suggests no excess deaths at all so far this year from respiratory infections despite a pandemic involving a respiratory disease, either the chart is wrong or what we have been told about covid is wrong. (or i'm just dense).

Because there are no excess deaths it does not mean there are no deaths. But yes... from May ish to now there have been no excess deaths from respiratory disease. 

Covid is separated out for obvious reasons

[Ayrshire Chris]

The head of the vaccine task force on BbC news sounds optimistic and speaks very clearly and concisely. Early next year for a roll out hopefully. Not as good as our expert  @Toilet Duckof course! 

[gizmoman]

1 minute ago, Havors said:

Because there are no excess deaths it does not mean there are no deaths. But yes... from May ish to now there have been no excess deaths from respiratory disease. 

Covid is separated out for obvious reasons

Is it? it's mentioned on the chart, what is the yellow area then? what are the figures mentioning covid at the bottom? This is why it's confusing.

[Lycra]

15 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Yep, which means the number of deaths in the first wave would have been less with the correct treatment (not blaming anyone it was all new), which also means this virus as it stands now is not as deadly as first feared (I understand it's stlll a nasty disease and we should take measures to avoid it's spread) so there is a perfectly valid argument about the cost and benefit of lockdowns and other restrictions and the total cost to society in the long term.

The treatment in the first wave was the best available at the time but medicine moves on. Compare HIV/AIDS 1985 to 2020. Just because we are currently seeing lower deaths doesn't mean it's impact on health isn't severe. If health professionals time is taken up with Covid patients then other treatments/services cannot be rendered.

 

[gizmoman]

1 minute ago, Lycra said:

The treatment in the first wave was the best available at the time but medicine moves on. Compare HIV/AIDS 1985 to 2020. Just because we are currently seeing lower deaths doesn't mean it's impact on health isn't severe. If health professionals time is taken up with Covid patients then other treatments/services cannot be rendered.

 

And if the economy collapses and the government cut funds to public services and the NHS that will also have an affect on peoples treatment and quality of life in the long term, this is what i mean by having a debate on this, there is no easy solution and no decision is without cost, we all have our own view but I believe the long term cost of this will be severe, and not just financially.

[JoeyT]

Apparently Bristol is moving in to Tier 1+. As far as I can see that means there will be Covid marshals but not a lot else?!

This government love making it up as they go along 

[Fuzzy Afro]

10 minutes ago, Lycra said:

The treatment in the first wave was the best available at the time but medicine moves on. Compare HIV/AIDS 1985 to 2020. Just because we are currently seeing lower deaths doesn't mean it's impact on health isn't severe. If health professionals time is taken up with Covid patients then other treatments/services cannot be rendered.

 

It’s horrendously wrong that cancer patients in their 20s-50s are being ignored to give treatment to covid patients in their 80s. Horrendously wrong. 

[Lycra]

5 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

And if the economy collapses and the government cut funds to public services and the NHS that will also have an affect on peoples treatment and quality of life in the long term, this is what i mean by having a debate on this, there is no easy solution and no decision is without cost, we all have our own view but I believe the long term cost of this will be severe, and not just financially.

Correct no easy solution. 

Virus rife = hospitals overloaded = covid deaths + deaths from other potentially treatable missed diseases = cost to economy

Virus rife = lots absenteeism from work & population avoid spending = cost to ecomony

 

[efcfanwirral]

6 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

Apparently Bristol is moving in to Tier 1+. As far as I can see that means there will be Covid marshals but not a lot else?!

This government love making it up as they go along 

I've heard nothing about covid marshals in the Tier 2 or 3 areas round here - it's laughable. Tier 1+

[stuartbert two hats]

3 hours ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Ireland apparently seeing some encouraging numbers since they imposed the strictest lockdown in Europe. Interesting. 

Anyone have any idea if things have changed in Lancashire or Liverpool yet?

[Havors]

5 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

It’s horrendously wrong that cancer patients in their 20s-50s are being ignored to give treatment to covid patients in their 80s. Horrendously wrong. 

Not sure if that is the case now but it was back in March/April etc... the knock on effect will be awful. A friend of ours lost his wife last week to cancer... she was diagnosed last autumn and wasnt able to get any treatment for most of this year. When she finally went in for treatment it was too late. They gave her a few months to live she lasted a week.

I hope things are different this winter as they now know a lot more....