Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UK coronavirus death toll up 381 in a single day – the worst y
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UK coronavirus death toll up 381 in a single day – the worst yet
UPDATE on coronavirus (#COVID19) testing in the UK:As of 9am 31 March, a total of 143,186 people have been tested of which 25,150 tested positive.As of 5pm on 30 March, of those hospitalised in the UK, 1,789 have sadly died. pic.twitter.com/ctiAd1ty9p
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The figure seems to have been revised upwards to 393. Even more disturbing is that according to Sky they included 28 patients with no underlying health conditions, one of whom was a 19 year old.
This is grim, grim, grim.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-another-367-die-in-england-after-testing-positive-for-covid-19-11966273
"We're massively increasing the testing to see whether you have it now and ramping up daily testing from 5,000 a day, to 10,000 to 25,000 and then up at 250,000," he said.
Presumably misspoke or misled
Being Rimmer is his crime. It is also his punishment.
Will 'The bomber always get though' well yes and no.
It was defiantly the prevailing theory in most places both the UK and to some extent Germany in the late 1930s. and may explain why fighters where to some extent neglected, relative to bombers.
A lot of books I read tent to ridicule that thought, but looking at the numbers the bombers nearly always did get through. in the Battle of Britten, on a good day Fighter command could shot down 3% on average it was a bit below 2%. so largely the statement is correct. the problem for the bombers, was they were not as effective as expected and as popularly remembered and needed to fly a lot of missions, to achieve there aim, a 2% change of being shot down is manageable as a one off, a 2% change every mission ones or possibly twice a day for weeks or months is something else. for Command, on top of this was a damaged % normally close to or slightly over the shot down % so 5% a day was not unusual.
The problem with the 'boomer will always get though' is not that the stament is totally incorrect, but that it focuses on one mission not a campaign, and there for not a helpful planing focuses.
A bit like saying, 99.8% of healthy people will recover OK form COVID even if they need an ICU Bed, forgetting that this % may not hold when there are lots of people wanting to get in to ICU beds.
They’ll see today’s horrible death numbers and wonder what the hell is going on . Not sure these daily briefings are really warranted especially as the governments advisers aren’t normally used to this level of media scrutiny.
And sometimes don’t realize that what they say even if true and understandable in science quarters can be misinterpreted by the wider public .
We have also had the 4th biggest increase in Covid 19 cases after the USA, Spain and Iran (with Germany, Portugal, Belgium and the Netherlands next on the list)
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
The RAF system meant that nearly 100% of the scrambled fighters ended up finding enemies to shoot at - something which the calculations previously had dismissed as impossible.
This had an important effect on the German bomber crews - they were *alwys* attacked. On virtually every mission.
Then you had people like Sailor Malan - who like to find a damaged bomber on the way back, and shoot it up - avoiding the engines and pilot. So that when it crash landed back in France, the ground crews would have to hose out the remains of the crew.....
I live on my own and am pretty fit, mid-50's, female. So I have fair odds. But I've also applied a Maslow hierarchy of needs to my life. What's my most basic need? The answer is not to get the virus. If I have to sacrifice other 'needs' above that one at the base then so be it.
So I'm taking lockdown seriously, disinfecting everything that comes through my door, going out rarely and, when I do, I'm wearing full protective gear.
It might not work and I might get the bloody thing, but that's just my approach. I also feel it's my responsibility to others.
It's an obvious point but we need a vaccine and/or we need a cure. Until we get them no-one is safe.
What a time, 'eh?
Shouldn't that read "One thing is for sure the more old people are losing their lives the more old people are taking note of the government warnings."?
The Chinese didn't lockdown a whole city region just to save 70+ year olds. The Italians haven't, the Spanish haven't, we haven't. When the reality that this virus is deadly in all age-groups smacks people in the face, then they will wake up. Until then we have to listen to their drivel.
While 'killed' didn't necessarily mean their plane was shot down, being a PoW did.
Call me a sentimentalist but I think I preferred the lads who felt a twinge of discomfort while trying to kill their fellow airmen, or simply didn't think about it as young men tend not to.
the urge to control everything is understandable but wrong. IMO, letting dicition making be local and letting people on the ground change policy when appropriate with out heaving to get permition form the governor is a strength not a weakness.
https://twitter.com/jessbrammar/status/1245018117257887744
Worth a read of this from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.
Was a Chinese source suggesting there were issues when people lived in the same space as someone who was infected - swab might find get RNA from viruses that got in the nose etc but hadn't actually caused an infection. This got a bit of an airing on PB but seems the paper was withdrawn.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32133832/
Today's figures made me think of this.
https://twitter.com/citizen_sane/status/1244242696832778240
https://twitter.com/ProfTomkins/status/1245014379063541762?s=20
Tomkins supports most of ScotGov's proposals, except for suspension of trial by jury, and exempting ScotGov from FoI requests.
He's basically a bloke with a blog who's got it syndicated in a national paper. No one would give a shit what he said if he didn't have the prestige of being published in a paper.
We don't want to get to a Man made global warming situation were a group tells us no discussion is allowed.
As will Keith Starmers.
https://twitter.com/SteveHiltonx/status/1244673648717213696?s=20
It isn't an organism or a cell. Is it just called a virus?
The wonders of communism eh ?
Brings in a grey man in a grey suit with a grey voice.
Not sure which excuse will be wheeled out !
Active cases: 77.635 (+2.107 net)
Deaths: 12.428 (+837)
Healed: 15.729 (+1.109)
Total cases: 105.792 (+4.053)
Don't mix up number of tests with number of people - many people who get tested get tested more than once.
Sorry.
Lockdown.
https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1244347639006547968?s=20
https://twitter.com/steve_hanke/status/1244687837460455431?s=20
I am looking for a shrub with early flowers to go into the bed below to peak over the wall in a few years.
The wall is about 1.5m, and there is wind shelter but the planting will be on the North side of the wall.
Any suggestions are most welcome.
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/1245022294818291713
If Mr Young were receiving none , outlets would not use them.
Anyway, the current understanding seems to be that this disease basically works as a multiplicative scale to your general risk factor. Current best guess is that it exposes you to a year's worth of mortality during the month after you start showing symptoms. In life actuarial terms, qx (probability of dying in the next year, as a function of age) is roughly doubled. So a 30 year old might have a 0.2% (1 in 500) chance of dying this year, instead of 0.1% (1 in 1000). Whereas for a 60 year old, it increases from say 1% to 2%.
Therefore, although it can affect anyone, in overall number terms the vast majority of deaths will be among the elderly. The profile of deaths by age band for the UK as a whole during 2020 should be similar to other years, excluding hard-to-model knock-on effects like improvements to road safety and better air quality. Therefore, in proportional terms, it's clearly wrong to say this is a disease of the elderly, but in absolute terms, it's a bit more murky. The issue is probably that people tend to underestimate the rate at which younger people die - it happens infrequently, but usually there's some cause (road or industrial accident, underlying medical condition) that allows people to file it away under "exception - doesn't apply generally".
This is substantially different to the previous major pandemic to hit Europe (Spanish Flu in 1919 onwards), which showed more as an additive increase to mortality - so everyone in the UK had say a 0.6% chance of dying from it, irrespective of age or other risk factors. This would have changed the profile of deaths considerably, since it sits on top of the normal death pattern which is predominantly older people.
Plant something native that is good for wildlife.
Friday and Saturday are here too both below 10,000 (9114 & 8278) no matter how you measure it.
Show your evidence / workings
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/uk-ministers-accused-of-overstating-scale-of-coronavirus-testing
Are our numbers of healed being under reported?