Altyfans.co.uk - Altrincham Football Club Fans Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

PLEASE JOIN THE ALTRINCHAM FC PATRONS SCHEME TODAY
* HELP THE CLUB THROUGH THE COVID-19 SHUTDOWN
* HELP FUND THE CLUB TO BIGGER AND BRIGHTER THINGS
* HELP THE MANAGERS ATTRACT THE PLAYERS THEY NEED TO PUSH THE CLUB FORWARD

https://www.altrinchamfc.com/club/the-patrons-scheme

+ Altyfans.co.uk - Altrincham Football Club Fans Forum » General Category » Non Altrincham FC Talk
 COVID-19 and associated discussion
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]

Author Topic: COVID-19 and associated discussion  (Read 2184 times)

Hugh

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
    • View Profile
Re: COVID-19 and associated discussion
« Reply #60 on: November 10, 2020, 11:22:33 PM »

Here's some relevant stats. The story so far: Figures from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Deaths per million population
Norway52, Denmark 129, Finland 65, Estonia 57, Latvia 55, Sweden 598.
So four times worse than Denmark and ten times worse than the rest.

I think we have to grit our teeth and continue with the current strategy until the vulnerable groups can access a vaccine.

108 Belarus. If you believe them.

See previous post for more on Finland. I understand Denmark and Norway took a similar route. Basically we locked down for too long in the Summer. What we need is historians, economists and other experts on SAGE rather than apparently epidemiologists with a narrow focus on one disease being mainly responsible for these huge decisions.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2020, 12:50:11 AM by Hugh »
Logged

Hugh

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
    • View Profile
Re: COVID-19 and associated discussion
« Reply #61 on: November 10, 2020, 11:29:15 PM »

Belgium and South Dakota

Latest worldometer numbers:

South Dakota - one more death

Belgium - 347 more deaths.

Still not convinced, I'm afraid. Will try and keep an eye on it.

Hugh, you've either wildly misread or misrepresented the figures. The number you quoted for Belgium there is for two days. They had 199 deaths yesterday and 148 today which presumably is where you got your 347 from. The figure for South Dakota isn't "one" and it doesn't say that on Worldometer anywhere. Indeed, the latest daily death tolls it gives are both 13 for November 7th and 8th. They haven't even released today's numbers so you can't compare them. Belgium does indeed have a slightly higher death rate in recent days, although it's not nearly the difference you indicate above.

You talked about cherry picking numbers earlier but you put a lot of stock in figures from very short time frame and compare random countries to one another. Statisticians don't work this way. They look at as much data as possible to get an idea of things. I'm not actually arguing with any of your other points RE economy, personal freedoms, projections. I'm just pointing out that your numbers are dead wrong and the areas you're promoting as doing well are objectively not.

That's why I've been doing this weekly.

South Dakota as of now is 540 deaths total. Let's check again next week.

Obviously the global rate is much lower as most of the countries I've been tracking have a severe demographic crisis of aging populations.
Logged

cheshire cat

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1024
    • View Profile
Re: COVID-19 and associated discussion
« Reply #62 on: November 12, 2020, 06:11:57 PM »

You still seem to be avoiding the fact that Sweden is doing far worse than all the countries that surround them.
Logged

cheshire cat

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1024
    • View Profile
Re: COVID-19 and associated discussion
« Reply #63 on: November 12, 2020, 06:32:21 PM »

567 deaths in South Dakota and yet they have a death rate of 641 per million people. Clearly no-one lives there.

Just checked, population is 900, 000 of which the largest city is Soiux Falls, similar size population to York.

Their death rate is comparable with ours despite most of them being a good deal more than two metres apart

Logged

RageAgainstTheFirstTeam

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2535
  • Oh, Twiss off!
    • View Profile
Re: COVID-19 and associated discussion
« Reply #64 on: November 15, 2020, 10:42:28 PM »

You still seem to be avoiding the fact that Sweden is doing far worse than all the countries that surround them.

He's also ignored the fact half his numbers were simply made up (ie the Worldometer figures above where he claimed South Dakota had a death rate of 1 for a certain day when it was in fact 13 according to his own source). He pivots from point to point and clearly isn't engaging in good faith. I don't have the time or patience to sit here fact-checking him ad infinitum but I think it's clear to any observers he's either got an agenda or his reasoning abilities are way off.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2020, 10:45:46 PM by RageAgainstTheFirstTeam »
Logged
"You have to be something in life, so you might as well just be what you want." Keith Davey at Histon, 2012.

Hugh

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
    • View Profile
Re: COVID-19 and associated discussion
« Reply #65 on: November 18, 2020, 12:18:47 AM »

Belgium and South Dakota

Latest worldometer numbers:

South Dakota - one more death

Belgium - 347 more deaths.

Still not convinced, I'm afraid. Will try and keep an eye on it.

Hugh, you've either wildly misread or misrepresented the figures. The number you quoted for Belgium there is for two days. They had 199 deaths yesterday and 148 today which presumably is where you got your 347 from. The figure for South Dakota isn't "one" and it doesn't say that on Worldometer anywhere. Indeed, the latest daily death tolls it gives are both 13 for November 7th and 8th. They haven't even released today's numbers so you can't compare them. Belgium does indeed have a slightly higher death rate in recent days, although it's not nearly the difference you indicate above.

You talked about cherry picking numbers earlier but you put a lot of stock in figures from very short time frame and compare random countries to one another. Statisticians don't work this way. They look at as much data as possible to get an idea of things. I'm not actually arguing with any of your other points RE economy, personal freedoms, projections. I'm just pointing out that your numbers are dead wrong and the areas you're promoting as doing well are objectively not.

That's why I've been doing this weekly.

South Dakota as of now is 540 deaths total. Let's check again next week.

South Dakota now reading 644 total deaths, an increase of 104 since a week ago. Still a lower rate than Belgium, just. For what it's worth.

Of course, high population density and interconnectivity could be a factor in Belgium's high IFR (though perhaps not in Peru, who also locked down hard, long and diastrously).

To be honest, I'm not particularly surprised if other people couldn't find the "one" figure for S Dakota deaths mentioned last week (and I will cheerfully retract it), the numbers seem to jump about in odd ways occasionally, and the figure was given for illustrative purposes only, probably not particularly helpful, thinking about it, with the numbers involved. So far as I know, I did see the "one", but have no way of verifying it now. The only reason I referred to it is because some sort of a terrifying surge in cv deaths was mentioned in S Dakota, so I simply looked at the total and new additional deaths given by a Bing search, which usually corresponds to Worldometer figures (I mostly check Bing's figures against the Worldometer page but may not have done so in this instance). The above figures should hopefully give a better idea, and clearly shows that, whilst not particularly low, it is not any sort of "Professor Ferguson" disaster, which is one of the main points I've been trying to make about not locking down - that even disregarding all other considerations, it still works better than some countries. Finland was also addressed in another post, and, as stated, they have in any case handled this better than the UK.

And according to my source,Sweden's higher death rate is largely due to a run of mild flu seasons. See   https://www.aier.org/article/swedens-dry-tinder-accounts-for-many-covid-19-deaths/


Something I probably should clear up is, I said "see below for more on Finland" last week, whereas "see previous page" would have been more accurate, where I had just posted a long post, which, among other things, made the point that locking down so long into Summer was stupid, that Finland had had a (soft) lockdown at the right time and finishing before Summer, and that this was a better approach than some other countries.

The point about demography is, many developing world countries with a much smaller elderly population have, as a result, a lower IFR (and some, of course, have more sunshine and therefore more vitamin d). It is worth repeating, the average age of death globally from cv is over 80 - 82.4 years, the last I heard.

And I would certainly encourage fact checking in general, that is how we arrive at (hopefully) accurate information. And I would welcome a few more facts from the authorities as well, who, along with sections of the media, have behaved disgracefully through this.

It is a legitimate point that I have not been covering countries with low IFR's, so to clarify, what I am attempting to do is:

1) Look at places which have not locked down (Sweden and Brazil). Quite frankly, the yardstick, and my starting point is the ICL computer model which informed the original lockdown (we had more dodgy data for this one apparently), which as I remember, had Sweden having about 85,000 cv deaths from the course they followed;

2) Look at places that have done the opposite and locked down too  long and too hard (Belgium and Peru);

3) look at large European countries (France, Spain, the UK) for fairly obvious reasons. Spain and France had been said to be where the UK was headed (in terms of IFR) at the time I started discussing them.

Obviously any detailed information on other countries or other approaches would be welcome. The first thing is to find out how to deal with this bug. And then to establish if the price is worth it.

For my part, I haven't got time to cover endless countries and approaches, but will instead (hopefully) update later under the same format. At any rate, this rolling weekly approach should provide fairly accurate information. Whilst countries can update at different times or revise figures, hopefully it will average out over a number of weeks.
« Last Edit: November 18, 2020, 04:47:36 AM by Hugh »
Logged

Hugh

  • Regular First Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 378
    • View Profile
Re: COVID-19 and associated discussion
« Reply #66 on: November 21, 2020, 05:37:41 AM »

I see UK cv deaths now appear to be dropping, as well as "cases" (positive test results), this time even sooner after lockdown was imposed than in March. Cases were also dropping in Manchester well before tier 3 restrictions were imposed. What we need is an end to lockdown, that ruinously expensive denial of basic human rights with its catastrophic collateral damage. Or if we are going down the no risk route, perhaps we should have a 4mph speed limit, close those problematic night clubs permanently, stop the sale of alcohol, tobacco, chocolate, energy drinks....

If last Friday 13th turns out to be the highest reported deaths, turns out my "4 weeks" prediction until deaths peak that I made on 13th October wasn't too far off (yes, technically another failure, but how close were other people's predictions? And what about some of the dodgy predictions we've had from the authorities?)

So deaths never got anywhere near 4,000 per week and, let's face it, were never going to, as was clear before 5th October, lockdown day.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]
+ Altyfans.co.uk - Altrincham Football Club Fans Forum » General Category » Non Altrincham FC Talk
 COVID-19 and associated discussion