Jump to content

Coronavirus (COVID-19)


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, beefybake said:

It's your choice whether to be illuminated, or not.  And actually you used the US as a reference point.

The link is there for you to read and digest, and draw conclusions from, or not.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52234061

Thanks for the link. 

6.8% of German spending is by the govt compared to 79% on the uk. The balance is pretty much insurance.

29% of German spending is on hospitals compared to 42% of the UKs. 

The overall difference could be easily accounted for by Germans paying insurers dividends and using proportionally more higher margin discretionary services. Might not be though, maybe they just provide more through community channels and maybe private provision is more efficient. 

Given the difficulties in compiling any economic measure i'm inclined to think that the headline difference of 13% doesn't show a significant difference in healthcare provision, and that consequently it is more likely that it's testing levels that are making the most difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Rodhull said:

The UK’s much lower rate of testing and it’s inefficient methods of statistical recording of data not giving a true measure of the numbers of related deaths is also important.

Whilst not a comparison to Ireland there are a lot more countries than Germany with high population density similar to the UK that are performing far better than the UK is so I’m not sure London’s population is quite the scapegoat people want it to be.

Agree on the testing - it has been inadequate but in itself is not a silver bullet. 

The data is indeed a total shambles and it is indefensible. 

Population density is a tricky one for the UK. The only countries in Europe with a higher population density (excluding the microstates and Channel Islands etc) are Malta, the Netherlands and Belgium. None of these have a city anywhere near the size of London either despite the population densities. England taken on its own is significantly more densely populated than Belgium. There isn't a country with the population size of England that can match it for population density, and indeed there are few that match it for population density at all. Even Belgium is around 65 people per square Km less densely populated. 

Thing is, the mass gatherings referred to were around 4 weeks ago and so arguably we are seeing the consequences of them now. I don't really recall much opposition to these being held at the time. It is clear in hindsight that this was a huge mistake. 

Edited by Michael W
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're never going to have an accurate figure for Covid-19 deaths in the UK. Whenever this is all over - if it ever is - we will get a death tally, let's say 25,000 for the sake of a figure. This will immediately be dismissed by most folk with reactions ranging from an "Aye, right" to full on CONSHPIRACY theories complete with graphs, videos and personal accounts from "my mate's a nurse/mortuary attendant/funeral director/bin man/timber merchant/unemployed fantasist like I am and he says..."

"Authoritative" guesstimates ranging from twice the official figure to six times the official figure will be bandied about and get accepted as gospel and regurgitated for years to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Michael W said:

Agree on the testing - it has been inadequate but in itself is not a silver bullet. 

The data is indeed a total shambles and it is indefensible. 

Population density is a tricky one for the UK. The only countries in Europe with a higher population density (excluding the microstates and Channel Islands etc) are Malta, the Netherlands and Belgium. None of these have a city anywhere near the size of London either despite the population densities. England taken on its own is significantly more densely populated than Belgium. There isn't a country with the population size of England that can match it for population density, and indeed there are few that match it for population density at all. Even Belgium is around 65 people per square Km less densely populated. 

Thing is, the mass gatherings referred to were around 4 weeks ago and so arguably we are seeing the consequences of them now. I don't really recall much opposition to these being held at the time. It is clear in hindsight that this was a huge mistake. 

Everybody has the answers now, but as you say, did they have the answers then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:

Boris is off to Chequers to recuperate.

Great news.

Surely that's a second home and not a necessary journey?

Asking for a Ms Calderwood.

Edited by Jacksgranda
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

Everybody has the answers now, but as you say, did they have the answers then?

It was pretty much bang on 4 weeks ago that folk were being told not to go to pubs, not to go to clubs, not to gather in large groups. Needless to say large swathes of the population just ignored the f**k out of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Gaz said:

It was pretty much bang on 4 weeks ago that folk were being told not to go to pubs, not to go to clubs, not to gather in large groups. Needless to say large swathes of the population just ignored the f**k out of that.

We did however allow Cheltenham and other events to go ahead despite that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve given up watch the news.
The MSM are not great at best of times but have sunk to a new low during this crisis with their lack of scrutiny.
As other have said a couple of weeks ago Italy and France were being portrayed as disaster areas yet the equivalent death rate in the UK is being reported completely differently.
ETA also how the government is getting away with the same bullshit about PPE and ventilators every day virtually unchallenged is appalling.
 


It’s embarrassing

Even by their own ridiculously low standards they have really outdone themselves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, coprolite said:

Thanks for the link. 

6.8% of German spending is by the govt compared to 79% on the uk. The balance is pretty much insurance.

29% of German spending is on hospitals compared to 42% of the UKs. 

The overall difference could be easily accounted for by Germans paying insurers dividends and using proportionally more higher margin discretionary services. Might not be though, maybe they just provide more through community channels and maybe private provision is more efficient. 

Given the difficulties in compiling any economic measure i'm inclined to think that the headline difference of 13% doesn't show a significant difference in healthcare provision, and that consequently it is more likely that it's testing levels that are making the most difference. 

Testing makes a huge difference.  However, the rest of your statement is obfuscation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Out on Easter Sunday. I never saw that one coming.

He's speaking remarkably well, must have put him at an open window. 

Link to comment
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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...