They are seeing a significant uptick in ICU patients at the moment. It isn't yet being reflected in the death rate but that might come. The regions that got off lightly in the Spring are seeing more cases now, which is to be expected I guess.
Meanwhile, in Sweden...
- Thread starter borolad259
- Start date
- Status
Corcaigh_the_Cat
Well-known member
It's easy for islands....oh hang on a minute.
Here is the data for disastrous Sweden. Right hand graphs. Top is detected cases (note, much higher rates of testing including home test kits). Middle is intensive care admissions per day. There has been a rise following a few localised outbreaks. Currently 59 in ICU at the moment.
Bottom graph is daily deaths.
They are expecting to see some rise in line with what is usually expected in Autumn when the weather is colder, people gather indoors more and respiratory illnesses gain more traction as community immune health declines.
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa
Bottom graph is daily deaths.
They are expecting to see some rise in line with what is usually expected in Autumn when the weather is colder, people gather indoors more and respiratory illnesses gain more traction as community immune health declines.
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/09f821667ce64bf7be6f9f87457ed9aa
Frozen Horse
Well-known member
The objection to the Swedish approach is usually their high mortality rate.
However, their deaths per million is still better than the UK, US, Spain, Italy and Belgium; France is catching them up, and the others are pulling away.
I note Sweden recorded 9 deaths yesterday, their highest for several months. That said, they recorded 0 for the 2 previous days, so possibly yesterday's figure includes delayed results from previous days.
However, their deaths per million is still better than the UK, US, Spain, Italy and Belgium; France is catching them up, and the others are pulling away.
I note Sweden recorded 9 deaths yesterday, their highest for several months. That said, they recorded 0 for the 2 previous days, so possibly yesterday's figure includes delayed results from previous days.
Their daily announcements are usually historic deaths along with new ones. They are only announcing 3 times a week now, so Tuesday to Thursday reflect the longer 7 day period.
They have negative excess deaths at the moment.
Alvez_48
Well-known member
Putting the UK can't do Sweden approach to one side.
If nothing else surely Sweden's results show that 1) it's a seasonal respiratory infection - the UK is in rhinovirus season.
2) the claims that we are at 7% immunity and everyone is basically still vulnerable - can't be correct.
3) the estimates of 4,000 deaths a day that is leading to this decision are completely unfounded.
It just blows my mind there is no transparency from the Tories and labour aren't pushing for any. What are these doomsday predictions based on?
Where are the comparisons on how full hospitals are now compared to last year?
Where is an easy accessible chart which allows you to search for hospital occupancy in your area?
I'd be able to accept what's going on if we were being told openly the situation but we are given opaque data sets (which then get torn apart by people smarter than me on twitter), given what sound like absurd forecasts and then a completely supine media that talks round the fringes of the issues.
Not a single paper has asked why are we testing anyone that dies for covid?
If nothing else surely Sweden's results show that 1) it's a seasonal respiratory infection - the UK is in rhinovirus season.
2) the claims that we are at 7% immunity and everyone is basically still vulnerable - can't be correct.
3) the estimates of 4,000 deaths a day that is leading to this decision are completely unfounded.
It just blows my mind there is no transparency from the Tories and labour aren't pushing for any. What are these doomsday predictions based on?
Where are the comparisons on how full hospitals are now compared to last year?
Where is an easy accessible chart which allows you to search for hospital occupancy in your area?
I'd be able to accept what's going on if we were being told openly the situation but we are given opaque data sets (which then get torn apart by people smarter than me on twitter), given what sound like absurd forecasts and then a completely supine media that talks round the fringes of the issues.
Not a single paper has asked why are we testing anyone that dies for covid?
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
I was thinking about this. 2 points is like to make.
first around the figure, it’s clear that this was my me of many figures used. They did not say if we leave things uncheck will reach 4000 a day
that said
we had all these ranges on that graph that showed us where this could go without further restrictions. I would have like to see a model if the whole country was in tier 3 and also what this new lockdown will do. Also I would have liked to seen models around different levels of compliance with the lockdown measures, it is clear they won’t be any many people complying as last time
Another thing on my while I remember is why aren’t the nightingales hospitals being used to ensure all other services remain open
Last edited:
Frozen Horse
Well-known member
Thanks, that does make sense of the recent results.
Konrad_the_Barbarian
Well-known member
Lack of staff.
It's relatively easy to bring 10,000 beds into operation, however it's not quite so easy to to magic up the 1000's of staff, doctors, nurses, ICU trained ... etc. required to run them.
bear66
Well-known member
4 days anounced this week. 20 deaths anounced from Wednesday to Friday. No idea about Tuesday as they did a historic reduction so there was a net negative figure.
ICU hospitalisations have doubled in a week.
ForssAwakens
Well-known member
Why not transfer itu staff to the nightingales so services can remain open
on another not Boris was on tv stating we had more doctors and nurses the other day, can these be diverted?
bear66
Well-known member
There was someone on R4 yesterday saying they were diluting ICU staff by having one experienced nurse in each team. It was in answer to a question about preparation for the second wave.
Jonny_Rondos_Disco_pants
Well-known member
Whitty and Valance produced a graph to show deaths will reach 200 per day by September. It was mocked as some sort of scare tactic. Well, we reached that figure before the end of October. Leave it in the hands of those who have a clue what they are doing. We shouldn’t hit 4000 a day (worst case model) as we’ve now implemented tougher restrictions.
It is so obvious Alvez. 7% immunity........ Sweden's figures just blow that nonsense away. If everyone in the UK was susceptible when the virus picked up in Feb/March we'd have been picking dead people from the streets. It may sound flippant but that's what would have happened. The likes of John Edmunds actually seem to believe the 7% figure, that is frightening.
The virus has shown the usual patterns for a seasonal coronavirus in the European countries and in the US states and in the south american countries. We introduced mandatory masks in shops and transport, in summer!
Scrutiny from Labour has been utterly woeful. Truly truly woeful. The likes of John Ashworth have been happy to unquestioningly berate the government without questioning the science. The press, wow. What on earth has happened to the BBC?
I don't the details of the models but if inputs are based around a limit number of people being infected then we're screwed. They'll be little way out of this nonsense until the population has had enough or we look at certain other countries and people begin to ask "what's happening over there?".
This lockdown will achieve nothing as rates are already slowing, "cases" falling in the worst affected areas though I'm sure SAGE will be using it to point out the benefit of restrictions. If the government had just resisted longer more of the nonsense would have been exposed.
Tim Spector's view (he behind the ZOE app) ..............
Alvez_48
Well-known member
Ok I'll take your point re the 4,000 but why is this left open for us to interpret.
My whole point is, you guys think we're cherry picking we think you guys are cherry picking.
It's the duty of the press to ask the hard questions of people on both sides of the aisle and the scientists on all sides.
If it's a simple matter of one of us is wrong then have it out in interviews on BBC 1 at 9pm every Monday, bring the data, bring the arguments have the debates. Every decision is costing deaths, billions, livelihoods, freedoms, mental health we need better than look at this graph here and 'so what time on Thursday will we be getting locked down exactly?'.
It's not happening, that's why we're getting divided so badly.
Jonny_Rondos_Disco_pants
Well-known member
Sorry, typo
bear66
Well-known member
I totally agree with your point regarding the "4000". There was no justification of the number as to the assumptions made. Or what assumptions were necessary to reduce the figure. Has anything been learnt in survival rates? What hospitalisation rates would lead to 4000 deaths per day? In reality it was just "a number" to frighten / justify and the panel of questioners haven't the nous to put these guys under the spotlight.
- Status