• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

These aren't normal cold and flu symptoms though are they?

In fact, in the *cough* decades I've been alive, I've never once seen anyone with these symptoms who didn't have pneumonia - and they didn't.

There is so much we still don't know about this virus, which is why I think it's right to remain cautious about it. This is interesting; it details what I suppose would be recorded as mild symptoms, given there was no hospitalisation involved.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...advent-calendar-covid-19-symptoms-paul-garner
 
Interesting that the r-rate in London is now thought to be significantly lower than most other regions.

Given that London was ahead of the rest of the country at the front end of the epidemic does this suggest a 'natural' peaking of infections, rather than being largely influenced by the lockdown? If the lockdown were responsible for the drop (or at least, for the bulk of it), why are other regions signifcantly higher after close to two months of restrictions?
 
Last edited:
Interesting that the r-rate in London is now thought to be significantly lower than most other regions.

Given that London was ahead of the rest of the country at the front end of the epidemic, does this suggest a 'natural' peaking of infections rather than being largely influenced by the lockdown? If the lockdown were responsible for the drop (or at least, for the bulk of it), why are other regions signifcantly higher after close to two months of restrictions?

It's clear the situation in London has improved, but it's unlikley to be as positive as painted in some media quarters. In the article below, SAGE seem to be wary.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...fter-rising-over-past-week-sage-says-11988983
 
Interesting that the r-rate in London is now thought to be significantly lower than most other regions.

Given that London was ahead of the rest of the country at the front end of the epidemic, does this suggest a 'natural' peaking of infections rather than being largely influenced by the lockdown? If the lockdown were responsible for the drop (or at least, for the bulk of it), why are other regions signifcantly higher after close to two months of restrictions?
If you allow for the fact that being infectious leads symptoms by up to two weeks, the peak was around a week or two before the lockdown started anyway.

That's from the figures we have seen published and assuming there isn't a large number of people who have had it without symptoms.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Forgive me if I’m miss understanding

But are they including infection rates in care homes?

Shouldn’t that be done differently - we all know there is an issue in care homes - but these people don’t go/hardly out.

We need the stats based on the public out side these homes otherwise it’s pretty worthless
 
Interesting that the r-rate in London is now thought to be significantly lower than most other regions.

Given that London was ahead of the rest of the country at the front end of the epidemic, does this suggest a 'natural' peaking of infections rather than being largely influenced by the lockdown? If the lockdown were responsible for the drop (or at least, for the bulk of it), why are other regions signifcantly higher after close to two months of restrictions?

Or is it that us London lot are smarter than the peasants elsewhere and have taken it more seriously?

;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
Worth pointing out that's a cumulative graph. As far as I can see that's not mentioned anywhere on the tweet or the graph - somewhat misleading.

So it's the function that shows the rate.
 
Just excess deaths? Not explicitly coronavirus?
So could be people dying of things that were treatable but ended up fatal due to staying away from hospital.
Possibly, but you have to factor in the reduction in deaths because people aren't driving their cars into things, etc.
 
Possibly, but you have to factor in the reduction in deaths because people aren't driving their cars into things, etc.

I suppose normal flu isn’t included because this has replaced it in terms of deaths? Aka all flu like deaths are counted as CV so that’s 20,000 accounted for
 
Possibly, but you have to factor in the reduction in deaths because people aren't driving their cars into things, etc.

I think some of the people who drive their cars into things are the type of idiots who don't listen overly to government guidelines about lockdown and social distancing. And so will still drive into things.
 
Possibly, but you have to factor in the reduction in deaths because people aren't driving their cars into things, etc.
I see that registered deaths fell below average for the time of year at the end of April, presumably due to less people out and about during lockdown as you say.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
I see that registered deaths fell below average for the time of year at the end of April, presumably due to less people out and about during lockdown as you say.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


I'm pretty sure that other during the covid outbreak the death rate has been below average for quite a while.
 
I'm pretty sure that other during the covid outbreak the death rate has been below average for quite a while.
Looks like there was a bit of a spike at the start of the year...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Official explanation is that it was due to a nasty Influenza A strain which was doing the rounds last winter...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Last edited:
Back