Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

The UK response to Covid-19 [MOD WARNING 1ST POST]

1…120121123125126…331

Comments

  • #3662
    brickster69
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,666 ✭✭✭brickster69


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    IHME Seattle, 10 days ago, revised their projected deaths in the UK by August downwards to a tragic 37,000 as the UK government released more data. This 37k figure has remained constant since. Unfortunately, there is still a possibility of this being much higher according to their graph. Presumably, they are factoring true numbers as against the UK government numbers. Sadly, a figure of 49,000 is being predicted by King's College London in this research (click preview PDF).

    Is that the same IHME as this one

    http://www.healthdata.org/news-release/new-covid-19-forecasts-europe-italy-spain-have-passed-peak-their-epidemics-uk-early-its

    "if you get on the wrong train, get off at the nearest station, the longer it takes you to get off, the more expensive the return trip will be."



  • #3663
    blinding
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,462 ✭✭✭blinding


    Cupatae wrote: »
    Gotta lift the restrictions and restart the economy

    The virus isn't going anywhere..

    Keeping the economy closed will kill more than the virus

    They ll just have to learn to live with it
    And Die ! Can you Volunteer for a frontline Medical Position or even Hospital Orderly . We could do with a worthless sacrifice , right about now ! !


  • #3664
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 11,912 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    Apparently the total is 450 for today, but Monday's data is always even more of an outlier than that presented on Sunday historically.


  • #3665
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,337 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    IHME Seattle, 10 days ago, revised their projected deaths in the UK by August downwards to a tragic 37,000 as the UK government released more data. This 37k figure has remained constant since. Unfortunately, there is still a possibility of this being much higher according to their graph. Presumably, they are factoring true numbers as against the UK government numbers. Sadly, a figure of 49,000 is being predicted by King's College London in this research (click preview PDF).




    But wasn't it adamantly "proven" (or at least put forward as fact) by posters on here about a week ago that a projection of 20k deaths by August was unrealistic and that there was no way it was going to get that high.


    Which is great news of course. It means that between now and August the UK will have less than 4,000 more deaths from it (minus whatever is coming in today).


  • #3666
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    devnull wrote: »
    Apparently the total is 450 for today, but Monday's data is always even more of an outlier than that presented on Sunday historically.

    It is the lowest number on any day since 6th April though.


  • Advertisement
  • #3667
    ArmaniJeanss
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,943 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    devnull wrote: »
    Apparently the total is 450 for today, but Monday's data is always even more of an outlier than that presented on Sunday historically.

    Would it be worthwhile to compare it to the last few Mondays, and tomorrows figure be compared to the previous few Tuesdays etc?
    Arguably as good a guide as day to day figures, as each day seem to have it's consistent idiosyncrasies.

    Although the bank holidays might throw that as well :confused:


  • #3668
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Donald Trump wrote: »
    But wasn't it adamantly "proven" (or at least put forward as fact) by posters on here about a week ago that a projection of 20k deaths by August was unrealistic and that there was no way it was going to get that high.


    Which is great news of course. It means that between now and August the UK will have less than 4,000 more deaths from it (minus whatever is coming in today).

    It was adamantly proven that IHME had their numbers wrong. There look to still be some inconsistencies as well. They are showing only 17k beds available and there are apparently over 30,000 before the Nightingale hospitals are taken in to consideration.

    If, as they suppose, today is the peak, then you would expect the temporary hospitals to be full. As it stands the London one has seen only a limited number of patients and the others not yet in use


  • #3669
    Donald Trump
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,337 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump


    Aegir wrote: »
    It was adamantly proven that IHME had their numbers wrong. There look to still be some inconsistencies as well. They are showing only 17k beds available and there are apparently over 30,000 before the Nightingale hospitals are taken in to consideration.

    If, as they suppose, today is the peak, then you would expect the temporary hospitals to be full. As it stands the London one has seen only a limited number of patients and the others not yet in use




    Well we are all still hoping that your prediction that 20k deaths will not be reached by August 4th is correct!!


  • #3670
    theological
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,831 ✭✭✭theological


    Aegir wrote: »
    It was adamantly proven that IHME had their numbers wrong. There look to still be some inconsistencies as well. They are showing only 17k beds available and there are apparently over 30,000 before the Nightingale hospitals are taken in to consideration.

    If, as they suppose, today is the peak, then you would expect the temporary hospitals to be full. As it stands the London one has seen only a limited number of patients and the others not yet in use

    It's obvious that it isn't the peak because hospital admissions have reduced and recorded death numbers are slightly lower than the 900+ we were seeing about a week ago.


  • #3671
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    robinph wrote: »
    The chart on that first link is 4 days out of date, but clearly shows how out of whack their modelling is. Even allowing for the weekend stats being off their numbers predicted for the last four days are 1200+ per day when the reported numbers have been in the 500-700 range for those days.

    Maybe they are adding in the care home numbers as well, but why are they then not added into their historical data if that is what they are using for their predictions? All of their charts seem to predict upticks in the numbers for the days 16-20th April, which isn't what has happened.

    I suspect they are adding in the real figures as against UK figures. Haven't dug into their methodology. The 37k figure has been constant for the past 10 days though so they don't seem to feel the need to revise.


  • Advertisement
  • #3672
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Donald Trump wrote: »
    Well we are all still hoping that your prediction that 20k deaths will not be reached by August 4th is correct!!

    I made no predictions, other than the UK and France would be broadly similar


  • #3673
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I suspect they are adding in the real figures as against UK figures. Haven't dug into their methodology. The 37k figure has been constant for the past 10 days though so they don't seem to feel the need to revise.

    no it hasn't. they dropped it to 23,000 on the 13th and have now revised it back up to 37,000


  • #3674
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    I suspect they are adding in the real figures as against UK figures. Haven't dug into their methodology. The 37k figure has been constant for the past 10 days though so they don't seem to feel the need to revise.

    Which would be fine if they are adding on the real figure for their predictions, but their historical figures show the government announced daily totals. If they wanted they could use the even more accurate, but several weeks old figures from the ONS and then test if their predictions were actually any good at showing the difference between the daily and ONS numbers.

    They just seem designed to show the US numbers in a better light and divert attention... but then that is what we are all up to.


  • #3675
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    robinph wrote: »
    Which would be fine if they are adding on the real figure for their predictions, but their historical figures show the government announced daily totals. If they wanted they could use the even more accurate, but several weeks old figures from the ONS and then test if their predictions were actually any good at showing the difference between the daily and ONS numbers.

    They just seem designed to show the US numbers in a better light and divert attention... but then that is what we are all up to.

    the French must be relieved though. Apparently 2,000 people there will die between now and the end of the month and after that, no one else will.


  • #3676
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    robinph wrote: »
    Which would be fine if they are adding on the real figure for their predictions, but their historical figures show the government announced daily totals. If they wanted they could use the even more accurate, but several weeks old figures from the ONS and then test if their predictions were actually any good at showing the difference between the daily and ONS numbers.

    They just seem designed to show the US numbers in a better light and divert attention... but then that is what we are all up to.

    But if this organisation were trying to show the US in a 'better light', why is the UK such an outlier for Europe? Their figures for France, Spain, Italy and Germany are much lower than those for the UK. Why aren't they inflated?


  • #3677
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Aegir wrote: »
    no it hasn't. they dropped it to 23,000 on the 13th and have now revised it back up to 37,000

    Data changes and updates from the UK government no doubt.


  • #3678
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    But if this organisation were trying to show the US in a 'better light', why is the UK such an outlier for Europe? Their figures for France, Spain, Italy and Germany are much lower than those for the UK. Why aren't they inflated?

    Dunno, their predicted deaths per day charts just seem to go in random directions for various countries though. Some countries they just seem to have extended the line along the route of the last two days direction that they have included numbers for, and seemingly not being aware of the noise in some of the data. France mentioned above being a good example where the noisy data showing a flatish trend for the last couple of weeks varying around 700, but they have made a prediction for 15th - 20th April of a sudden drop in numbers whilst it's actually just hovered around the 700 mark still for those days.

    They just extended the curve from the 833 on the 14th to the 676 on the 15th and kept going with that.


  • #3679
    theological
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,831 ✭✭✭theological


    I think given that they revised their figures down by nearly 50% recently enough that inclines me to want to follow the figures and estimates that are closer to the ground.


  • #3680
    normanoffside
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,256 ✭✭✭✭normanoffside


    Christy42 wrote: »
    That would be great news. Antibodies would indicate some level of immunity and that many people having indicates a much smaller death rate than previously believed.

    However I would express caution about reading too much into a single result.

    There's already been a similar antibody test done in Scotland.

    On the date of blood donations (21st-23rd March) official figures seem to be under reports by about x150

    https://covmodel.org/2020/04/17/sars-cov-2-preliminary-serology-test-reports-from-scotland-denmark-and-finland-give-contradictory-results-on-infection-fatality-ratio/


  • #3681
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    robinph wrote: »
    Dunno, their predicted deaths per day charts just seem to go in random directions for various countries though. Some countries they just seem to have extended the line along the route of the last two days direction that they have included numbers for, and seemingly not being aware of the noise in some of the data. France mentioned above being a good example where the noisy data showing a flatish trend for the last couple of weeks varying around 700, but they have made a prediction for 15th - 20th April of a sudden drop in numbers whilst it's actually just hovered around the 700 mark still for those days.

    They just extended the curve from the 833 on the 14th to the 676 on the 15th and kept going with that.

    But that doesn't explain why their figures are so high for the UK and relatively low for other European countries. Their modelling is certainly respected, here's a Professor of Structural Biology in Oxford:

    “The IHME are high quality scientists who are explicit about the limitations and uncertainties in their models. I strongly support the publication of their models and ranges – ‘all models are wrong, and some are useful’. The IHME graphs are easily understood by anyone with any claim to scientific knowledge and the IHME models for the UK improve with more data – I hope media coverage of their models does too.”

    I sincerely hope that they are completely off the wall with their prediction. Yet King's College's research is even more scary at 49,000 which also puts the UK as an outlier in Europe.


  • Advertisement
  • #3682
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 43,876 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Christy42 wrote: »
    That would be great news. Antibodies would indicate some level of immunity and that many people having indicates a much smaller death rate than previously believed.

    However I would express caution about reading too much into a single result.
    Sorry to rain on your parade but: 'No evidence' of virus immunity in recovered patients - WHO


  • #3683
    Cupatae
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭Cupatae


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Do you read the garbage you spout?

    Woah man why so hostile? I just want the economy to reopen because hospitals cant function without funding.

    And everyone knows the virus is going now where we just gotta live with it.


  • #3684
    RobMc59
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,831 ✭✭✭RobMc59


    Just as promised,testing has been ramped up with over 19,000 tests in the last 24 hours,if it stays anywhere near that rate that's very impressive.


  • #3685
    Leroy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,136 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    RobMc59 wrote: »
    Just as promised,testing has been ramped up with over 19,000 tests in the last 24 hours,if it stays anywhere near that rate that's very impressive.

    Very impression compared to what?


  • #3686
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    But that doesn't explain why their figures are so high for the UK and relatively low for other European countries. Their modelling is certainly respected, here's a Professor of Structural Biology in Oxford:

    “The IHME are high quality scientists who are explicit about the limitations and uncertainties in their models. I strongly support the publication of their models and ranges – ‘all models are wrong, and some are useful’. The IHME graphs are easily understood by anyone with any claim to scientific knowledge and the IHME models for the UK improve with more data – I hope media coverage of their models does too.”

    I sincerely hope that they are completely off the wall with their prediction. Yet King's College's research is even more scary at 49,000 which also puts the UK as an outlier in Europe.

    Their predictions of low numbers for the last week for France are as incorrect as their prediction of high numbers for the UK.

    Does anyone have a screen grab of what they were predicting a couple of weeks ago for any country? Their week old predictions are clearly wrong for today's numbers.


  • #3687
    Cupatae
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,915 ✭✭✭Cupatae


    blinding wrote: »
    And Die ! Can you Volunteer for a frontline Medical Position or even Hospital Orderly . We could do with a worthless sacrifice , right about now ! !

    Woah whats with all the hostility ?

    Most people on boards want the restrictions lifted and we need our economy man, because..hospitals need funding and an article said we will be facing a great depression, plus alot of people have show lots of graphs and stuff that show we cant beat the virus so we just got to live with it from now on man.


  • #3688
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    robinph wrote: »
    Their predictions of low numbers for the last week for France are as incorrect as their prediction of high numbers for the UK.

    Does anyone have a screen grab of what they were predicting a couple of weeks ago for any country? Their week old predictions are clearly wrong for today's numbers.

    Apparently France fed in some extra deaths outside hospitals which lead to a jump in their figures.


  • #3689
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    Apparently France fed in some extra deaths outside hospitals which lead to a jump in their figures.

    Thought that was a couple of weeks ago where they jumped from a couple of hundred to over a thousand for a day adding in previous uncounted deaths, but since then they have included the outside hospital deaths.


  • #3690
    Tokyo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,655 ✭✭✭✭Tokyo


    Cupatae wrote: »
    Woah whats with all the hostility ?

    Mod: Fair point. People, get your points across without the snarky comments please.


  • Advertisement
  • #3691
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    robinph wrote: »
    Thought that was a couple of weeks ago where they jumped from a couple of hundred to over a thousand for a day adding in previous uncounted deaths, but since then they have included the outside hospital deaths.

    There was a spike about 10 days ago, France's daily deaths graph since has been encouraging. IHME's graph/projections reflect that. Which is good news for France.

    What do you make of the King's College research? Incidentally, they put Ireland at about 1200 deaths.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement