Numbers and positives

[Poolie girl]

I have looked and saw a rise of hundreds new cases today hoping for less obvs saw this numbers the. other day and thought positive no deaths only there was but didn't report this later I wonder why they don't say well this many have mild symptoms and this many blah blah because my reasoning on depends how iam thinking I panic and think the don't what the public to know cos not many have it mild and we would all panic they must know of some figures were people are recovering I think they should tell the public to give us some positives but then I think maybe not as it may come across insensitive to those who are battling this or who have lost loved ones what do you think?

 

[trophywench]

No they honestly don't know Elaine, for the simple reason that no central record is being kept of how many people have mild symptoms and are self isolating. Hence they can't report it!

 

[trophywench]

Those mild cases MUST have been tested Martin, otherwise it is and can only be, a complete guess.

 

[trophywench]

Yeah, as I assumed. Other people seem to want to know the mild cases who've successfully recovered at home too - not ME. LOL

 

[grovesy]

If they are trying to get the younger folk to do social distancing, giving out the message most have it mild, seems to be missing the mark. I dont suppose all the celebs posting pics and saying I have got and I am alright Jack does not help.

 

[rebrascora]

Since they are not routinely testing people suspected of having the virus, the numbers are meaningless.
It is sad for each and every one who dies with it but to be honest even publishing the deaths doesn't help much as the temptation is to look at how many people "have it" (which in reality is unknown because they are not testing) and how many die and work out a percentage, which is almost certainly hugely inflated, because there are likely many thousand more people who have the virus but are undiagnosed. I think reporting the deaths helps to keep us focussed on how serious the problem is so that we follow the advice but by qualifying it with info that those fatalities had underlying health issues makes the majority of people feel a little less panicky. It is a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't as regards the reporting of it. I don't think you can draw any serious conclusions from the figures, at least with regard to the UK. It may be more comforting to look at the figures for China and see that the first phase is petering out and, fingers crossed, there is no second phase or they are on top of it more quickly and people are more prepared and isolate more rapidly.

 

[Poolie girl]

No they honestly don't know Elaine, for the simple reason that no central record is being kept of how many people have mild symptoms and are self isolating. Hence they can't report it!

 

[mikeydt1]

for every 2000 infected the death rate is running above 5% but could also go up and down pending how the virus pans outs.

 

[Docb]

for every 2000 infected the death rate is running above 5% but could also go up and down pending how the virus pans outs.

Sorry mikeydt, but that is misleading. Nobody knows how many people are infected so quoting a percentage death rate is not possible, especially if quoting UK data where the only people being tested are those who have been hospitalised because they need specialised treatment. Most who are infected will never be tested because they will recover on their own, without intervention, just like with other respiratory tract infections.

Better estimates of death rates can be found in Eddy Edsons posts where he has been keeping us up to date on WHO figures.

Not trying to trivialise the importance of the potential effects of this particular virus but I wish all would retain a sense of perspective and stop over reacting. It makes good copy for the media but does not help overall.