Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Barnfred 55 said:
I was working on the basis it was positive tests, not an estimate, which is why I thought 50 per 100k was a high bar.
Click to expand...

The ONS estimate is based on a sample of roughly 20,000 tests a week ( or fortnight, I forget which ) so it's based on positive tests and isn't just a guess. The estimate part of it involves :-

  • Adjusting for the sample not being 100% representative and
  • To take into account false positive, and false negative tests.
 
Catfish Blues said:
The ONS estimate is based on a sample of roughly 20,000 tests a week ( or fortnight, I forget which ) so it's based on positive tests and isn't just a guess. The estimate part of it involves :-

  • Adjusting for the sample not being 100% representative and
  • To take into account false positive, and false negative tests.
Click to expand...
I was referring to Germany not here. How they work their figures
 
Barnfred 55 said:
I was referring to Germany not here. How they work their figures
Click to expand...

Ah, fair enough, I got the wrong end of the stick there.

Their testing regime seems to be pretty similar to ours, so, in general, they'll test anyone with symptoms, so, apart from when they're blanket testing hotspots they'll be missing asymptomatic infections. Chances are then, that, roughly speaking, their number of positive tests per day or week will be broadly comparable to ours.

Their 50 per 100,000 incidence rates is based on positive tests per week in an area.

We're running at about 8,000 positive tests per week
UK population is about 65 million

So our overall incidence rate per 100,000 is

100,000 * 8000/65,000,000

which is roughly 12 per 100,000

Although R is pretty consistent across the UK, incidence rates vary an awful lot, so I'd be surprised if we don't have a few areas at above 50 per 100,000

As a comparison, the overall incidence rate in Germany is currently 4.7, but, at state level, it's as high as just under 14, so threefold.

If that ratio was repeated in the UK, then our worst counties ( I'm counting places like Merseyside and Gtr Manchester as counties ) would be at 35. Get a little finer grained, and it's hard to believe that we don't currently have hotspots at >= 50 per 100,000.

Hopefully we know about them, and are dealing with them, but until Dido Harding's team starts to issue data at a relatively low ( say town ) level, then we, the general public, are very much in the dark.
 
Tea_drinker said:
If not why are we being told to wash our hands all the time?
Click to expand...

To stop infection via surfaces.

However, getting a shower isn't going to matter if someone on the treadmill a few metres away has a coughing fit and releases an aerosol.

You don't seem to get how any of this works.
 
Tubey said:
To stop infection via surfaces.

However, getting a shower isn't going to matter if someone on the treadmill a few metres away has a coughing fit and releases an aerosol.

You don't seem to get how any of this works.
Click to expand...
In that case washing your hands anywhere would be a waste of time and anyway anyone could have a coughing fit in a pub, arcade, shop, model village... I completely get it. The rules we are being given have absolutely no common sense. What is the point of directing people via arrows through Liverpool 1 when people have been street drinking all weekend and theres no arrows on church street or bold street? I reiterate the fact that these rules we are being given are not based on any wisdom.
 
Tea_drinker said:
In that case washing your hands anywhere would be a waste of time and anyway anyone could have a coughing fit in a pub, arcade, shop, model village... I completely get it. The rules we are being given have absolutely no common sense. What is the point of directing people via arrows through Liverpool 1 when people have been street drinking all weekend and theres no arrows on church street or bold street? I reiterate the fact that these rules we are being given are not based on any wisdom.
Click to expand...

Bloody hell.
 
Catfish Blues said:
Ah, fair enough, I got the wrong end of the stick there.

Their testing regime seems to be pretty similar to ours, so, in general, they'll test anyone with symptoms, so, apart from when they're blanket testing hotspots they'll be missing asymptomatic infections. Chances are then, that, roughly speaking, their number of positive tests per day or week will be broadly comparable to ours.

Their 50 per 100,000 incidence rates is based on positive tests per week in an area.

We're running at about 8,000 positive tests per week
UK population is about 65 million

So our overall incidence rate per 100,000 is

100,000 * 8000/65,000,000

which is roughly 12 per 100,000

Although R is pretty consistent across the UK, incidence rates vary an awful lot, so I'd be surprised if we don't have a few areas at above 50 per 100,000

As a comparison, the overall incidence rate in Germany is currently 4.7, but, at state level, it's as high as just under 14, so threefold.

If that ratio was repeated in the UK, then our worst counties ( I'm counting places like Merseyside and Gtr Manchester as counties ) would be at 35. Get a little finer grained, and it's hard to believe that we don't currently have hotspots at >= 50 per 100,000.

Hopefully we know about them, and are dealing with them, but until Dido Harding's team starts to issue data at a relatively low ( say town ) level, then we, the general public, are very much in the dark.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I imagine North Wales will be up there after that food processing plant outbreak

Plus you would think that the TTI team have the localised information. They just don't release it. They seem to do a much better job generally in keeping people informed in Germany.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top