Well that was effing irresponsible - coughing in an unprotected manner on a forum visited by so many!Snowball wrote:We have to do SOMEthing for Leeds.Zip wrote:It’s potentially very messy. There remains the prospect of the games being played behind closed doors just to bring the season to a conclusion. I don’t like the idea of points being carried over to next season.
Cough
RoyalBlue wrote:Well that was effing irresponsible - coughing in an unprotected manner on a forum visited by so many!Snowball wrote:We have to do SOMEthing for Leeds.Zip wrote:It’s potentially very messy. There remains the prospect of the games being played behind closed doors just to bring the season to a conclusion. I don’t like the idea of points being carried over to next season.
Cough
The only way this season gets finished, IMO, is with games played at training grounds not stadiums. Probably with squads having to be tested 24 hours before kick off to ensure limited risk to infection. Games will also kick off at random times i.e. Merseyside derby at 11am on a Thursday.Zip wrote:It’s potentially very messy. There remains the prospect of the games being played behind closed doors just to bring the season to a conclusion. I don’t like the idea of points being carried over to next season.
90,000 die every year from the Flu, but please do keep buying into the fear-mongering being peddled left and right.Snowball wrote:Wow
Uk deaths jump from 11 to 21 in a single day
Think it will be the latter. Maybe £50 off the price of the new ST. Attendances are down year on year again so this would be a way of keeping hold of STH’s for another season.CountryRoyal wrote:Reckon we will get partial refund on season tickets if the season is abandoned? Or at least reduced season ticket cost for next season *if all this shit is over by then.
Check your facts. There was an article in The Lancet explaining howOne87One wrote:90,000 die every year from the Flu, but please do keep buying into the fear-mongering being peddled left and right.Snowball wrote:Wow
Uk deaths jump from 11 to 21 in a single day
In the UK, 1700 died (est. 34k global deaths) n the last flu season we have records for. If more or less people end up dying from this is academic. These will be extra deaths that wouldn't have otherwise occurred.One87One wrote:90,000 die every year from the Flu, but please do keep buying into the fear-mongering being peddled left and right.Snowball wrote:Wow
Uk deaths jump from 11 to 21 in a single day
Deaths will always lag behind cases as well, as it takes quite a few days before people die.Stranded wrote:In the UK, 1700 died (est. 34k global deaths) n the last flu season we have records for. If more or less people end up dying from this is academic. These will be extra deaths that wouldn't have otherwise occurred.One87One wrote:90,000 die every year from the Flu, but please do keep buying into the fear-mongering being peddled left and right.Snowball wrote:Wow
Uk deaths jump from 11 to 21 in a single day
tmesis wrote:Deaths will always lag behind cases as well, as it takes quite a few days before people die.Stranded wrote:In the UK, 1700 died (est. 34k global deaths) n the last flu season we have records for. If more or less people end up dying from this is academic. These will be extra deaths that wouldn't have otherwise occurred.One87One wrote:
90,000 die every year from the Flu, but please do keep buying into the fear-mongering being peddled left and right.
And it's inevitable that the number of actual cases is far higher than the number of reported cases, simply because many with milder symptoms won't get tested, but can still spread the disease.
According to the data, every person on the Diamond Princess cruise ship has been been infected. 696 people, 7 deaths, with 32 still critical. Given that there are no unknown cases on board, that gives a mortality rate of 1% as a minimum, 10 times more deadly than normal flu, and seeing that rise to 2% doesn't seem unreasonable. 2% is approaching Spanish Flu mortality levels.
The big danger comes from a big spike in cases, because there simply won't be the capacity to treat the critical cases with out health system.
They are mostly older, but I would suspect they are also people without existing health conditions, i.e. relatively healthy for their age. How that balances out the stats, I couldn't say.Snowball wrote:tmesis wrote:Deaths will always lag behind cases as well, as it takes quite a few days before people die.Stranded wrote:
In the UK, 1700 died (est. 34k global deaths) n the last flu season we have records for. If more or less people end up dying from this is academic. These will be extra deaths that wouldn't have otherwise occurred.
And it's inevitable that the number of actual cases is far higher than the number of reported cases, simply because many with milder symptoms won't get tested, but can still spread the disease.
According to the data, every person on the Diamond Princess cruise ship has been been infected. 696 people, 7 deaths, with 32 still critical. Given that there are no unknown cases on board, that gives a mortality rate of 1% as a minimum, 10 times more deadly than normal flu, and seeing that rise to 2% doesn't seem unreasonable. 2% is approaching Spanish Flu mortality levels.
The big danger comes from a big spike in cases, because there simply won't be the capacity to treat the critical cases with out health system.
Good points. One small redeeming factor is that the age-demographic of those cruising is mostly 60+
and (for example) the death rate for 80+ is 15%
As you hint at, it's not Infected minus deaths. There are as many seriously unwell as there are recovered. We should expect the same death rate (possibly higher) for all those currently critical. Also older people may technically scrape through but have seriously compromised organs. They may well die 6/9/12 months down the line and possible not be recorded as CV19 victims.
The trouble is you're obsessed with stats and it seems to be your answer to everything.Snowball wrote:tmesis wrote:Deaths will always lag behind cases as well, as it takes quite a few days before people die.Stranded wrote:
In the UK, 1700 died (est. 34k global deaths) n the last flu season we have records for. If more or less people end up dying from this is academic. These will be extra deaths that wouldn't have otherwise occurred.
And it's inevitable that the number of actual cases is far higher than the number of reported cases, simply because many with milder symptoms won't get tested, but can still spread the disease.
According to the data, every person on the Diamond Princess cruise ship has been been infected. 696 people, 7 deaths, with 32 still critical. Given that there are no unknown cases on board, that gives a mortality rate of 1% as a minimum, 10 times more deadly than normal flu, and seeing that rise to 2% doesn't seem unreasonable. 2% is approaching Spanish Flu mortality levels.
The big danger comes from a big spike in cases, because there simply won't be the capacity to treat the critical cases with out health system.
Good points. One small redeeming factor is that the age-demographic of those cruising is mostly 60+
and (for example) the death rate for 80+ is 15%
As you hint at, it's not Infected minus deaths. There are as many seriously unwell as there are recovered. We should expect the same death rate (possibly higher) for all those currently critical. Also older people may technically scrape through but have seriously compromised organs. They may well die 6/9/12 months down the line and possible not be recorded as CV19 victims.
Think of Swine Flu, Bird-Flu, SARS and MERS. The isolation/restrictions etc for those were nothing like this time round.
And I think MERS though it didn't spread too much, had a ridiculously-high mortality rate (35%) BUT DIDN'T SPREAD OUTSIDE HOSPITALS
2,494 CASES - 800 DEATHS - 35% - - - MERS
8,096 CASES - 774 DEATHS - 9.56% - - SARS
150,000 RECORDED cases, 5,610 Deaths = Death rate (for recorded cases) of 3.73% COV-19
We are fast-approaching 6,000 Deaths, virtually FOUR TIMES SARS & MERS combined and this pandemic is nowhere near its peak
If the government-linked experts are correct (that 80% will get it)
and if the overall death rate is just 1% (note above it's currently 3.7%
of confirmed cases) then that equates to 1,000,000 deaths in the UK alone.
That's not a typo.
So if miraculously the death rate in the UK is only half a per cent
63 Million * 0.8 * 0.5% is still half a million people.
Germany has ordered 10,000 new medical ventilators (cost $170 Million)
and Italy has ordered 5,000. How many has the UK ordered?
You see, no-one knows that and the FACT it is spreading from person to person in places like Singapore and Australia at the mo suggest it may not be seasonal. We all hope it is of course to buy time before the 2nd wave.Mid Sussex Royal wrote:The trouble is you're obsessed with stats and it seems to be your answer to everything.Snowball wrote:tmesis wrote: Deaths will always lag behind cases as well, as it takes quite a few days before people die.
And it's inevitable that the number of actual cases is far higher than the number of reported cases, simply because many with milder symptoms won't get tested, but can still spread the disease.
According to the data, every person on the Diamond Princess cruise ship has been been infected. 696 people, 7 deaths, with 32 still critical. Given that there are no unknown cases on board, that gives a mortality rate of 1% as a minimum, 10 times more deadly than normal flu, and seeing that rise to 2% doesn't seem unreasonable. 2% is approaching Spanish Flu mortality levels.
The big danger comes from a big spike in cases, because there simply won't be the capacity to treat the critical cases with out health system.
Good points. One small redeeming factor is that the age-demographic of those cruising is mostly 60+
and (for example) the death rate for 80+ is 15%
As you hint at, it's not Infected minus deaths. There are as many seriously unwell as there are recovered. We should expect the same death rate (possibly higher) for all those currently critical. Also older people may technically scrape through but have seriously compromised organs. They may well die 6/9/12 months down the line and possible not be recorded as CV19 victims.
Think of Swine Flu, Bird-Flu, SARS and MERS. The isolation/restrictions etc for those were nothing like this time round.
And I think MERS though it didn't spread too much, had a ridiculously-high mortality rate (35%) BUT DIDN'T SPREAD OUTSIDE HOSPITALS
2,494 CASES - 800 DEATHS - 35% - - - MERS
8,096 CASES - 774 DEATHS - 9.56% - - SARS
150,000 RECORDED cases, 5,610 Deaths = Death rate (for recorded cases) of 3.73% COV-19
We are fast-approaching 6,000 Deaths, virtually FOUR TIMES SARS & MERS combined and this pandemic is nowhere near its peak
If the government-linked experts are correct (that 80% will get it)
and if the overall death rate is just 1% (note above it's currently 3.7%
of confirmed cases) then that equates to 1,000,000 deaths in the UK alone.
That's not a typo.
So if miraculously the death rate in the UK is only half a per cent
63 Million * 0.8 * 0.5% is still half a million people.
Germany has ordered 10,000 new medical ventilators (cost $170 Million)
and Italy has ordered 5,000. How many has the UK ordered?
The Spring equinox is next week (in case you don't know what that is it's when days become longer than nights) andthe warmer weather that follows will kill off the spread from person to person pretty quickly. FACT. Please stop scare mongering. You're as bad as Piers Morgan.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 859 guests