Jump to content
idlerboat

Corona virus statistics and reality

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Black Panther said:

I saw an interesting comparison with Connecticut.  Similar population and in a similar position to us at lockdown.  That comparison says with no lockdown we would be in the hundreds of deaths by now.

Our low death rate is linked to our higher proportion of  infected sample being in the 20 -  40 year old group.

I think Connecticut has more elderly in its tested sample which translates to the death sample.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Los Angeles county joins the random testing parade . . 

looks like blood tests are the way to go - to get at the numbers of those with antibodies 

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-10/coronavirus-antibodies-testing-los-angeles-county

If Trump (or Jacinda) really wants to open up the country - random tests can reveal when it is safe to do so. 

Otherwise, one is flying blind 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Los Angeles county joins the random testing parade . . 

looks like blood tests are the way to go - to get at the numbers of those with antibodies 

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-10/coronavirus-antibodies-testing-los-angeles-county

If Trump (or Jacinda) really wants to open up the country - random tests can reveal when it is safe to do so. 

Otherwise, one is flying blind 

Correct, to open the country you need to know, at the time of opening that there are no lurkers mingling amongst the healthy community.

If you just test people who present you only get results that suit

Cindy should have started random testing  14days before L4 change inorder to know what's what.

Another basic mistake.

This Govt is driving by  looking in the rear vision mirror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using current Testing swab and application of swaps has shown big inaccuracies in results.

"Comparing testing data across countries is inaccurate. Many people are using the test swabs incorrectly"

 

"Expert's believe up to 30% of people with C19 are testing negative"

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2020-04-11/false-negative-coronavirus-test-results-raise-doctors-doubts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yip. A perfect explanation.

50% of carrier's show no symptoms and are not tested.

Blood will show what nasal swab don't.

A must watch ... brilliant 

Also a +ve patient can carry the vurus for 11 days after last of symptoms have gone 

So 14 day self isolation ai not long enough.... As I said a weeks ago you need 28 days.

Cindy and Bloomfield ( bad name for this pandemic)  are following WHO guidelines which are outdated by recent data from live analysis by people in the field.

Also, We have spare test in  Our allocation... Use them up on random testing then go to blood to drill down on true infection rate.

The window forr randomdon testing (before L4 to K

K3 change) has closed.

We will be in L4 forward a while... Or should be.

I now believe this Covid19 Management team are just relying on their current process of low testing low cases system and hope it works.

The world has moved on to random and blood...

C19 ain't going away while the heads are buried in the WHO sand.

Great video SJB

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sailing NZ said:

The world has moved on to random and blood...

I wish you were correct, cannot believe it is being adopted so slowly. 

As is so often the case nowadays, Viking Nation leads the way. 

(But again, to be fair, accurate and tests that get at antibodies are recent) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SloopJohnB said:

Nausal test for the first 10 days then blood test after.

Thank you Mr. Sloop for the informative post. 

Boise, BTW, has some outstanding Basque and Vietnamese restaurants - oops, closed now I presume . .   sniff !! 

image.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thornley said the evidence thus far showed eradication of the virus in New Zealand, the Government's stated aim, was not necessary. 

"Lockdown was appropriate when there was so little data...but the data is now clear, this is not the disaster we feared and prepared for. Elimination of this virus is likely not achievable and is not necessary."

Thornley said the risk to most working people was low and likened it, for most people, to a seasonal influenza virus. 

He said the plan was developed amid concern the Government's strategy was over-the-top and likely to "substantially harm the nation's long term health and well being, social fabric, economy and education".

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/120984583/coronavirus-lockdown-rules-should-be-relaxed-health-experts-say

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...