But where are the deaths???

[Lockhouse]

The death figure quoted is still "anyone who's tested positive in the last 28 days". It's not accurate. People that are already ill are going to be more susceptible.

Even that is going to be dwarfed by the amount of people who are "baked in" non-Covid deaths still to happen because they've not come forward or had their treatment delayed.

I'm not for or against anything just that everyone's got an angle.

[mattster]

Even that is going to be dwarfed by the amount of people who are "baked in" non-Covid deaths still to happen because they've not come forward or had their treatment delayed.

Treatments are getting delayed because hospitals are busy with Covid patients, and likely to get much busier; one current prediction is 25,000 in hospital within a month. It's not an either/or proposition - you can't just ignore the virus and start treating all the other patients again unless you simply stop treating people with Covid and let them die in their homes. Some of the anti-lockdown brigade (I'm not suggesting you are one) seem to miss this last point.

[jayn200]

Treatments are getting delayed because hospitals are busy with Covid patients, and likely to get much busier; one current prediction is 25,000 in hospital within a month. It's not an either/or proposition - you can't just ignore the virus and start treating all the other patients again unless you simply stop treating people with Covid and let them die in their homes. Some of the anti-lockdown brigade (I'm not suggesting you are one) seem to miss this last point.

That's not what's happening though or what happened in first lockdown. Lots of specialists sitting at home not treating patients, that's what happened. They weren't busy treating covid-19 patients. They didn't cancel treatments because the beds were needed or because the doctors were busy they did so because they were told they weren't allowed to treat anyone. It's unfortunate and lots of people needlessly died. Now of course we were dealing with a pretty new situation at that point but there is literally no excuse for that to happen again.

[Paralytic]

If you have a cough stay home, get tested, go to work only if it's negative and you need to be at work (false negatives are much more prevalent than false positives)

What's the scientific evidence behind this?

[shaunbhoy]

Wife: "Did I put on much weight during Lockdown?"

Hubby: "Difficult to tell, you weren't all that slim before"

Time of Death: 11:15pm

Cause of Death: COVID


HTH

[jayn200]

What's the scientific evidence behind this?

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/...-2020081020734

Here they state the rate of false negatives is anywhere from 2 - 37% (yeah that's a huge margin but it's a hard metric to capture and will vary widely depending on where/how it was calculated) where as false positives are close to 0%.

I also personally (non scientific lol) know someone personally this happened to that was symptomatic (cough mild fever), tested negative, then a week later took another test and tested positive.

I would also like to state I am against a lot of the current restrictions and think they go too far in violating our basic freedoms.

But I am also not so ignorant to understand that it's very reasonable for the government to expect us to take basic precautions to help slow down the spread. Those who won't even do the most fundamental things like stay home and away from other people when they're sick are really messing this up for the rest of us.

[d000hg]

The death figure quoted is still "anyone who's tested positive in the last 28 days". It's not accurate. People that are already ill are going to be more susceptible.

That's always been the case. It might be that it gives a systemic inflation to reported CV deaths, but when those deaths jump from 30 to 300 it still suggests whatever the true figure is has jumped dramatically.

Excess deaths still seems more reliable and will certainly back up the trends we're seeing.

[jayn200]

That's always been the case. It might be that it gives a systemic inflation to reported CV deaths, but when those deaths jump from 30 to 300 it still suggests whatever the true figure is has jumped dramatically.

Excess deaths still seems more reliable and will certainly back up the trends we're seeing.

Problem with excess deaths is that it lumps in deaths caused by covid-19 with deaths caused by interventions.

So if you had an excess 20,000 cancer deaths due to hospitals doing less treatments and if you looked at excess deaths alone you might want to lock down further or extend it resulting in even more deaths.

It's a very dangerous metric to look at and it could easily end up becoming a self fulfilled prophecy.

[WTFH]

Problem with excess deaths is that it lumps in deaths caused by covid-19 with deaths caused by interventions.

So if you had an excess 20,000 cancer deaths due to hospitals doing less treatments and if you looked at excess deaths alone you might want to lock down further or extend it resulting in even more deaths.

It's a very dangerous metric to look at and it could easily end up becoming a self fulfilled prophecy.

What would you prefer as a measure of the impact?

Maybe your bank account?

If you reject everything medical or science based, then there's not much left. Unless you are Boris/Trump.

[SueEllen]

People who are sick and still trying to go to work or go about their lives like nothing is happening is a big reason why we are in this mess.

If you have a cough stay home, get tested, go to work only if it's negative and you need to be at work (false negatives are much more prevalent than false positives)

I have a cough throughout winter.

Similarly I know other people who have frequent colds throughout winter.

Are we suppose to get Covid tests every week?