How is my maths 
Using the Govt published numbers on the UK population covid figures
UK POPULATION 67.800,000
TOTAL COVID CASES 281,660
TOTAL COVID DEATHS 39,900
worldometers.info/coronavir … %20%5Cl%20
ROUGHLY …
1 in 240 had the virus
1 in 1700 died from the virus
1 in 7 who had the virus died from it
My view is that PEOPLE CAN RELATE BETTER TO THESE 1 IN SO MANY FIGURES does anyone else agree
Viruses don’t just go away.
It’s still there.
No absolute proof of future immunity after catching it.
1 in 240 have ( so far ) caught it within a time frame of less than 6 months.
1 in 7 who caught it ( so far ) died from it.
No guarantee that not died from it means the damage it has done to organs won’t kill later.
Notice they are very cagey about recovery and the exact definition of recovery.
Wait until winter returns UV levels drop and lock down has to end one way or another.
ROG:
How is my mathsUsing the Govt published numbers on the UK population covid figures
UK POPULATION 67.800,000
TOTAL COVID CASES 281,660
TOTAL COVID DEATHS 39,900
worldometers.info/coronavir … %20%5Cl%20ROUGHLY …
1 in 240 had the virus
1 in 1700 died from the virus
1 in 7 who had the virus died from itMy view is that PEOPLE CAN RELATE BETTER TO THESE 1 IN SO MANY FIGURES does anyone else agree
Dunno what “Maths Folks” are, and I’ll emphasise I claim no expertise, but will comment.
If you find the odds/chances/fractions An easier to understand form, then, no harm I can see.
However saying 1in 1,700 died from COVID isn’t really relevant, I reckon.
…
…
Edit hit send button too soon, sorry.
.
ROUGHLY …
1 in 240 had the virus
1 in 1700 died from the virus
1 in 7 who had the virus died from it
Well those figures are easier to understand, other than the last two? Shouldn’t one say “died with the virus” as they are both saying the same thing but with different numbers.
Died “with” the virus and died “from” the virus are two whole different ball games. I broke my right arm 10 years ago, I doubt if I died now they’d say “he died with a previously broken arm” although that would be true.
the maoster:
Died “with” the virus and died “from” the virus are two whole different ball games. I broke my right arm 10 years ago, I doubt if I died now they’d say “he died with a previously broken arm” although that would be true.
Yes but if someone has underlying health issues and tested positive for covid 19, they may have died from a heart attack but died with covid although covid didn’t kill them. that is why I assumed one should read died from and the other died with. They could also die with any other underlying health problems but still die with a positive test.
UKtramp:
Yes but if someone has underlying health issues and tested positive for covid 19, they may have died from a heart attack but died with covid although covid didn’t kill them. that is why I assumed one should read died from and the other died with. They could also die with any other underlying health problems but still die with a positive test.
It’s obvious that as of March 4 no one had died with or of Covid.
Cases were 87.
By March 24 deaths were 508.
Cases were 8,077.
By April 4 Deaths were 5,221.
Cases were 41,903
April 24 Deaths were 22,792
Cases were 143,464
Whatever they were dying of/with it was obviously something different to what they were dying of/with on/before March 4 and Covid seems to be the issue.
Those are some uncomfortable figures.
Lets go back to square one.
ROG:
How is my mathsUsing the Govt published numbers on the UK population covid figures
UK POPULATION 67.800,000
TOTAL COVID CASES 281,660
TOTAL COVID DEATHS 39,900
worldometers.info/coronavir … %20%5Cl%20ROUGHLY …
1 in 240 had the virus
1 in 1700 died from the virus
1 in 7 who had the virus died from itMy view is that PEOPLE CAN RELATE BETTER TO THESE 1 IN SO MANY FIGURES does anyone else agree
Total COVID cases 2811,000. ?
That is only the lab test confirmed number. Due to many people having minor symptoms only, many who have had the virus are not being counted there.
So, saying 1 in 7 who had the virus died, is far too high a figure.
This link (28th May) says the ONS estimates 7% (1 in 15)(4.5million) of the UK population have had C19, and currently 0.25% (1 in 400)(170,000) currently have it.
bbc.com/news/health-52837593
Note at 7% possibly recovered, “herd immunity” is currently irrelevant.
“1 in 1700 [of UK population] died from the virus”? is also misleading.
Imagine a long supermarket shelf, it has 100 items on it; as you walk along you collect every tenth item. After walking past 20 items you have got 2. But you can`t say you are only getting two, as you continue you collect more, and eventually will have ten.
“1 in 1700” assumes that is the end figure, but clearly it is a changing figure.
Again it may be better to look at the “Excess Morbidity” figures?
These try to avoid the misreporting of cause of death. As said some COVID deaths are not primarily due to the virus, equally some with COVID, if older, may just be listed as natural causes. The excess deaths during the outbreak is about 55,000 deaths.
theguardian.com/world/2020/ … k-says-ons
(Guardian article using ONS stats)
And although it is an ongoing and changing situation the UK seems to be doing poorly
voxeu.org/article/excess-mortal … 9-pandemic
And all of these figures looking at ONLY morbidity is ignoring the other COVID costs.
There is financial and human cost to the virus. Some who become seriously ill seem to have longer term damage. Anyone who needs to be put on a ventilator could have chronic illness afterwards.
Hospital and other medical costs are associated with those who recover, either partly or totally. Plus there is the loss of their productivity. Becoming ill and recovering, is also a cost.
No one yet knows if there is any long term effects from having the virus, after all it has only been here a few months.
…
…
…
Personally, I prefer looking at percentages.
I do get very annoyed at mixed units in articles. Mixing “less than half”, “most”, “2 in ten”, with “x%”, winds me up.
Beware estimates quoted to 2 or more decimal places! That is 99.999% sure nonsense.
Those UK journalists who say “the man weighed 210lbs,” should be shot. The UK use the S.I. system of weight and it should be measured as kilos, and even if not, the older UK tradition was to use stones and lbs for weights. (15stone)
.
.
UK population… 68 million…68,000,000
Excess deaths during C19…55,000…55,000
Total cases…4.5 million…4,500,000
Current cases…170,000…170,000
.
I`m only using two places as these are all estimates.
You have picked up why I posted these figures
The Govt is not giving us a reasonably ESTIMATED number of the people who have had it
I know this because we have a close of about 200 and I know of at least 10 who had it with only 1 tested so that is 1 in 20
OK, that is only a small sample but it shows how far out the Gov numbers could be
ROG:
You have picked up why I posted these figures
The Govt is not giving us a reasonably ESTIMATED number of the people who have had itI know this because we have a close of about 200 and I know of at least 10 who had it with only 1 tested so that is 1 in 20
OK, that is only a small sample but it shows how far out the Gov numbers could be
Struggling with this, Rog…
You say you know a group of 200 people?
10 have had COVID?
Only 1 has been tested though?
.
Is that it?
Franglais:
ROG:
You have picked up why I posted these figures
The Govt is not giving us a reasonably ESTIMATED number of the people who have had itI know this because we have a close of about 200 and I know of at least 10 who had it with only 1 tested so that is 1 in 20
OK, that is only a small sample but it shows how far out the Gov numbers could beStruggling with this, Rog…
You say you know a group of 200 people?
10 have had COVID?
Only 1 has been tested though?
.
Is that it?
Yes - just using my close as a tiny example of the reality we are not being informed of
ROG:
Franglais:
ROG:
You have picked up why I posted these figures
The Govt is not giving us a reasonably ESTIMATED number of the people who have had itI know this because we have a close of about 200 and I know of at least 10 who had it with only 1 tested so that is 1 in 20
OK, that is only a small sample but it shows how far out the Gov numbers could beStruggling with this, Rog…
You say you know a group of 200 people?
10 have had COVID?
Only 1 has been tested though?
.
Is that it?Yes - just using my close as a tiny example of the reality we are not being informed of
t a "random sample", and there are reasons why you cant extrapolate into the whole country.1, first. Your have chosen an area, your close. It isnt a valid sample. Taking your 200 individuals is clearly worse than the 855 used by the ONS survey. If there is a case of an infectious disease it seems reasonable to assume that there is a heightened likelihood of another case(s) nearby. It is more likely to see a few cases in one close` and none in another close, rather than an even distribution between all closes: hotspots and clear areas.
2, next. C19 is a coronavirus and the symptoms are similar to other coronaviruses. Not identical, but if you want to make a definitive statement about it, you really should be sure about the facts, and have a sure diagnosis. You can`t really say that 10 have had the virus without tests.
.
Franglais:
How can you state that 10 people have had C19, if they haven`t been tested for it?
EASY
There are two ways to determine things rather like the differences between crown court and civil court
The first is beyond reasonable doubt and the second is by a preponderance of the evidence
If for example a person had a consistent dry cough and sweating for a week then why should it only be covid if they had a test
ROG:
Franglais:
How can you state that 10 people have had C19, if they haven`t been tested for it?EASY
There are two ways to determine things rather like the differences between crown court and civil court
The first is beyond reasonable doubt and the second is by a preponderance of the evidenceIf for example a person had a consistent dry cough and sweating for a week then why should it only be covid if they had a test
Why can it not be flu or another virus?
If they had, a dry cough, high temp, eye problems, and loss of taste, then the weight of evidence may well be C19.
A cough and a temp? Dunno so much. Could be summat else, and with the heightened awareness, C19 would be on everyones radar. Im not suggesting they are all hypochondriacs, by the way!
But again, even if they all were in contact with a known and tested C19 patient, that would help suggest, yes it is C19. But you cant expand one small pocket into a nation. The evidence suggests a virus yes, but doesnt suggest to me, it can ONLY be C19.
ROG:
Franglais:
How can you state that 10 people have had C19, if they haven`t been tested for it?EASY
There are two ways to determine things rather like the differences between crown court and civil court
The first is beyond reasonable doubt and the second is by a preponderance of the evidenceIf for example a person had a consistent dry cough and sweating for a week then why should it only be covid if they had a test
Murder and Manslaughter will both be tried in Crown Court but the respective crimes and penalties are different and the difference will depend on proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The cases figures are probably close enough and the ‘rate’ of infections like the 0-100,000 figure v time and the ‘way’ in which it kills ( rejection response not immune response ) not just how many, were/are scary enough and what matters.
Franglais:
The evidence suggests a virus yes, but doesn`t suggest to me, it can ONLY be C19.
What is that saying used by a judge … if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck … its a duck
ROG:
Franglais:
The evidence suggests a virus yes, but doesn`t suggest to me, it can ONLY be C19.What is that saying used by a judge … if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck … its a duck
Even Civil personal injury cases often founder because causation couldn’t be proved just on balance of probabilities.
Basically 10 possibles here or 10 others there doesn’t extrapolate across the population.It’s a drop in the Ocean.
Anything which can accelerate at the rate and kill in the way that this thing has shown capable of doing is serious zb.That’s what scared the crap out of the government’s advisors and it might not be over by a long way yet if ever.
ROG:
Franglais:
The evidence suggests a virus yes, but doesn`t suggest to me, it can ONLY be C19.What is that saying used by a judge … if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck … its a duck
Yes, but to find the exact breed of duck (virus) you’d need an expert to do some tests as not all ducks are mallards (covid 19) but do walk and sound like them
Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk