CORONAVIRUS 2020: RHYTHM OF THE DEATH THE SECOND

[purlieu]

Yesterday, a mate of mine posted a screencap of his progress on the Universal Credit application website, showing him in a queue, placed at just over 39,000. He said he was expecting it to take a couple of days.

Send him a message this afternoon to see how it was going. The reply: "I got logged out and now it's 80,000".

[pancreas]

Imagine if all those 100k people got together and started setting fire to shit.

[jobotic]

England figures very late....

[kalowski]

The latest patients to die in England were aged between 47 and 93 years-old and all except the 47-year-old had underlying health conditions.

Scary. I don't have underlying health conditions and I'm 48.

[jobotic]

Same here and I'm 47

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Diagnosed underlying health conditions.

Average age of death from patients with Covid-19 remains about 79. That it could happen at 47 is concerning in the same way the prospect of a heart attack or a stroke at that age would be.

[kalowski]

The brilliant David Spiegelhalter explained it quite simply. If you have Covid 19 your chance dying over the two week period is the same as it normally is of dying over a year.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

The brilliant David Spiegelhalter explained it quite simply. If you have Covid 19 your chance dying over the two week period is the same as it normally is of dying over a year.

That's simply statistical trivia though. I can't see how that's remotely helpful. Is that consistently true up and down the age ranges? Thanks David.

[popcorn]

That's simply statistical trivia though. I can't see how that's remotely helpful. Is that consistently true up and down the age ranges? Thanks David.

Yes, according to David it is.

[kalowski]

That's simply statistical trivia though. I can't see how that's remotely helpful. Is that consistently true up and down the age ranges? Thanks David.

Yes, it pretty much is...on average, of course.
https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196

[kalowski]

Prof. Spiegelhalter, please.

[popcorn]

That's simply statistical trivia though. I can't see how that's remotely helpful. Is that consistently true up and down the age ranges? Thanks David.

To clarify, the chance of you dying if you get the virus does indeed go up with age and other health problems. So the younger and healthier you are, the better your odds are at beating the virus if you get it.

According to Prof. Spiegelhalter, if you're 30 and have no health conditions then you have, on average, say (to make a figure up completely) 0.5% chance of dying in the next 12 months. If you catch the virus then your chance of dying from it (which would take about 2 weeks) is also 0.5%.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

The article above interesting and helpful , as is:



Still think the glib little statoid promoted is fairly useless, and being fair, the wording is different to what was posted, either way :

So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year's worth of risk into a week or two

[popcorn]

Hmmm

So, roughly speaking, we might say that getting COVID-19 is like packing a year's worth of risk into a week or two

I think this is accurate? It's much better to spread that X% risk of dying over as long a period as possible. If you could live your whole life at that percentage you'd basically NEVER FUCKEN DIE

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

To clarify, the chance of you dying if you get the virus does indeed go up with age and other health problems. So the younger and healthier you are, the better your odds are at beating the virus if you get it.

According to Prof. Spiegelhalter, if you're 30 and have no health conditions then you have, on average, say (to make a figure up completely) 0.5% chance of dying in the next 12 months. If you catch the virus then your chance of dying from it (which would take about 2 weeks) is also 0.5%.

Thanks for the clarification (genuinely)

I am still not finding the idea behind it remotely helpful or practical above it being sheer statistical coincidence.

[popcorn]

Thanks for the clarification (genuinely)

I am still not finding the idea behind it remotely helpful or practical above it being sheer statistical coincidence.

It basically is a statistical coincidence, but I personally find it a useful and instructive bit of information, because it a) helps illuminate how risk works in these kinds of things 2) reminds us that if we're young and healthy we have little to worry about personally (despite the sad and widely shared stories of young healthy people dying) 3) reminds us that we must do all we can to protect more vulnerable people.

In any case any distillation of these big numbers I find interesting and useful on their own terms. It stops things just being headlines, gives you a clearer sense of the bigger picture.

[Pearly-Dewdrops Drops]

The article above interesting and helpful , as is:

Yes, wish this kind of thing would be broadcast more widely. I get that it's important to scare selfish morons into taking it seriously and stay indoors, but the global mental health toll cannot be good given the number of people I see who feel like if they step foot outdoors or get within 100 meters of Covid-19 they will drop dead. (Myself included at times.)

[popcorn]

Oh, and I forgot maybe the most important thing! By compressing a year's average worth of deaths into two weeks, it is absolutely murdering our health services. So I found this a clear and instructive explanation of how that's going to work. Imagine if everyone who ordinarily dies over a 12 month period all fucking die on the same afternoon.

[kalowski]

Thanks for the clarification (genuinely)

I am still not finding the idea behind it remotely helpful or practical above it being sheer statistical coincidence.

It's not coincidence, it's a system for explaining the increased risk, and it's a simple way if explaining it. Coupled with the fallacy of composition it says to me: your individual risk continues to be small, but everyone who gets the virus has an increased risk of dying. By increasing the likelihood of them catching it, you risk damaging the health systems of the country.
Then, the risk of dying goes up.

[Dewt]

And then multiply that by the millions of people who live in your country and you're going to start seeing the outliers as headlines.

[poo]

This is not a binary ok dead mate everyone else great. It's a health continuum with a hell of a lot of suffering and misery in between mild and grave.

[massive bereavement]

Yes, wish this kind of thing would be broadcast more widely. I get that it's important to scare selfish morons into taking it seriously and stay indoors, but the global mental health toll cannot be good given the number of people I see who feel like if they step foot outdoors or get within 100 meters of Covid-19 they will drop dead. (Myself included at times.)

I've managed to convince myself that wanking on a regular basis will help ward it off.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

It's not coincidence, it's a system for explaining the increased risk, and it's a simple way if explaining it. Coupled with the fallacy of composition it says to me: your individual risk continues to be small, but everyone who gets the virus has an increased risk of dying. By increasing the likelihood of them catching it, you risk damaging the health systems of the country.
Then, the risk of dying goes up.

Which I concede would be helpful if it was novel, which it isn't, we know this. I have already said plenty of the rest of the article was interesting to read.

[JamesTC]

I've managed to convince myself that wanking on a regular basis will help ward it off.

Masturbation boosts your immune system, helping you fight off infection and illness.

Wank for Britain.

[kalowski]

Which I concede would be helpful if it was novel, which it isn't, we know this. I have already said plenty of the rest of the article was interesting to read.

It was interesting, I agree, and the fact was novel to me.

[popcorn]

Tell you what else is novel - the coronavirus.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Tell you what else is novel - the coronavirus.

Boom. At least we got that out of this.

[popcorn]

*nods*

[chveik]

This is not a binary ok dead mate everyone else great. It%u2019s a health continuum with a hell of a lot of suffering and misery in between mild and grave.

poo is the sanest cunt on this damn forum

[Dewt]

Guess who lives in that little sliver of NOT RED between Maine, Vermont and Massachusetts.