So those of you who are good with figures - what percentage of us are likely to get it?

[ShesGotBetteDavisEyes]

And what percentage will die? In the UK I mean?

I’m really scared right now and need some perspective I think. What do you think the chances are of being really ill or dying from it realistically?

My ds is coming home from uni in a major city on Saturday and I’m scared he might bring it with him (the rest of us are self-isolating apart from other ds who has had to go to school til tomorrow). But obviously he has to come home. He and dh don’t get on and I’m terrified of what it’s going to be like for the next god knows how long.

DH isn’t taking it as seriously as me and was telling kids earlier how many people die from flu each year etc., MIL is still going out to the leisure centre and god knows what else and posting me “hilarious” memes.

Had a big go at the kids earlier about how they are going to have to eat less food so dh and I don’t have to go to the shops so often. Then il hear one of them rustling in the cupboard!
Shouted at ds who wanted to go to the supermarket for a certain snack he likes as he was arguing back at me.
Dd asking can we go to Mac Donald’s drive through when I’ve explained a million times today why we need to be staying inside.
My sister (nurse) crying on the phone and dh saying “she’s a drama queen though”

I feel like I’m in the twilight zone. I’m the only one in this house who gets it. Dh says it’s because I’m spending too much time on mumsnet and scaring myself. I hope to god he’s right but I know he isn’t.

Sorry, I’m just venting really. It’s nothing compared to those who are sick and people in the front line.

The legislation published today suggests 80% is the number they are planning for.

The worldwide stats suggest between 1-5% will die: I think 3.4 is the general best guess but no other health system is so poorly prepared.

One of the experts said 20,000 dead will be a good result so I expect it will be many more than that

enough that one London hospital is already overwhelmed and we haven't even started yet - nowhere near peak.

The simulations without lock down or distancing was for 250,000 people dead I think.

60-80% of us from.prof Witty. He said last week 80% with 1% death rate. That's 550,000 dead.

Over how long we dont know. But gusding 12 weeks from.now to peak, not stop. It peaks once either we have good herd immunity- or when isolution measures work. But if isolation works we peak again until we hit that 60% 80% figure or a vaccine works.

Its youthful I would bet on mass vaccination before we get herd immunity

Why are we not in lockdown yet? I don’t understand. Someone on another thread claiming to be in the know said they think the government are allowing us to carry on as a sort of “social cleansing”. I’m starting to believe it..

Youthful? Doubtful

If 80 percent of the population get it and 3 percent who get it die, then by my calculations that means 1 million will die.

But they suspect the true death rate is lower because many people get it and never realise.

Presumably that 250,000 figure is assuming a death rate of below 1 percent.

80% of a population of 67million is 53.6million. 3% mortality would be 1.6 million.

That’s worst case scenario of course.
Your chances of dying are very dependent on age/medical conditions and and are not as scary as the stats make it sound. But still, high enough to make me wonder why more people aren’t avoiding the pub!

“social cleansing”

Doubt it I think it’s costing the government too much.

Worryingly from Italy the death rate from closed cases (either die or recover) is 43%

Obviously there will be more people who have had it and not been tested and recovered but these stats are worrying. 38% of Americans needing hospital treatment are age 30-54. 7% of French on life support are under 60, some with no health issues.

In Italy so far less than 1% of their entire population is confirmed to have had covid.
Same in Wuhan.
So it is entirely dependent on the steps the government take next to stop the spread.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/03/19/younger-adults-are-large-percentage-coronavirus-hospitalizations-united-states-according-new-cdc-data/%3foutputType=amp

Take a look at the death count numbers when Italy started to lock down, so 17 deaths then they started locking down... we haven’t locked down yet!!

Death count numbers...Italy v Uk

not everyone exposed to it will develop noticeable symptoms so I think we need figures for the percentage of the population who are exposed and then we could further subdivide that according to the intensity of the exposure.
Also the percentage of those exposed who developed symptoms (further divided by severity of symptoms)
I think much will depend on the underlying health of the lung tissues and older people have just had more time for their lungs to accumulate damage that comes from everyday living

In Italy are they testing everyone? Or just the ones who are poorly enough to end up at the hospital?

This guy explains the Imperial College's recent report
#staythefuckhome

mobile.twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1240629424871047168

Can someone e plain to me why, if both the UK and Italy has their first case a day apart, ie 30th Jan and 31st Jan we are considered weeks behind them?

The early stages of exponential growth are harder to compare (e.g. both countries have one case, then one country still has one, the other has two, then one may have one and the other has three - of course we can't say one country is doing worse , its more about who is being tested). Once both countries have a larger number of cases its easier to follow the trends. So most graphs begin with each country having the same number of cases or deaths, say 10, 50 or 100. Then we say :
Day 1 of the graph shows both countries having ~100 cases
But actually Day 1 for Italy happened two weeks before day 1 for the UK.
Then we look at what happened 3 days later, 5 days later etc to set if we're following. These graphs are a few days old but they show the principle.

And here's Thursday's graph :

mobile.twitter.com/jburnmurdoch

If 80 percent of the population get it and 3 percent who get it die, then by my calculations that means 1 million will die.But they suspect the true death rate is lower because many people get it and never realise.Presumably that 250,000 figure is assuming a death rate of below 1 percent

Yes basically it's not 1% of the population that would die, its 1% of that 80% or whatever infected.

If you look at italys stats, the positive cases to death is 14% today.

Do 40% die? No. Because it only includes those with a positive test, possibly like us only the worse cases get tested. So it looks alarming but it could be 1 or 3%. Only time will tell.

So I contend to minimise those numbers it's very alarming but 1-3 % is a lot less terrifying than 14%.

Still very little comfort to those involved