If CV turns out to be less deadly than flu...

[TheDailyCarbuncle]

do you think you will still feel the restrictions were worth it?

Just asking out of curiosity really.

The death rate is based on number of people tested not number of people infected
And OP do you really think the scientists and WHO haven’t thought of this? Also- how do you think the death rate of flu is calculated?

herecomesthesun even if they aren’t, you can’t have any form of social distancing if the schools are full again. And a significant number of school staff have asthma or other underlying conditions so would need to stay at home. How on earth could we send children back safely?

No, we really are trying to suppress the fatality rate. In fact, that's the main objective! If we didn't flatten the curve we would have a huge peak that would overwhelm the hospitals and MANY more people would die and hence move the fatality rate higher. If the hospitals stay at or below capacity they can save lots and lots more people.

I'm with you all the way on this OP @TheDailyCarbuncle

We are trying to suppress the rate of fatalities (deaths per day) and the percentage fatality rate (deaths per 100 infections). The first by slowing transmission by reducing interactions, the second by giving more protection to the most vulnerable; the old and those with underlying conditions. If we were going by the data we would be protecting men more than women too, since they have, on average, worse outcomes.

@CaptainBrickbeard

Exactly, and then the kids will bring the germs home to parents who are vulnerable infection. I caught what's very likely COVID-19 from my DD2 (8); she developed a nasty infection which lasted 4 days of high temperature, headache, chest pain and was achy all over. I went down with this 5 days later and it's now been 3 weeks. (I'm on the mend now thankfully.)

I'm vulnerable because I had pneumonia last year resulting in me developing Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. I wouldn't want my DDs to go back to school before DD2 and I have the antibody test, as I what I have isn't COVID, I'll be very vulnerable.

And there are parents and grandparents much more vulnerable than me.

@ShieldPrintersNeeded I think we are arguing over the difference between the case fatality rate (which we can change) and the mortality rate!

Yes we are trying to suppress the former but the risk of the latter wont change!

www.britannica.com/science/case-fatality-rate

@crazydiamond222 You quoted a figure of 0.6% from the Timothy Russell report on the Diamond Princess.

However, the report itself gives an all ages case fatality rate of 1.3%. Here is the table from that report giving the conclusion.

I read the link to your news article, which did indeed quote the report as giving a CFR of roughly 0.5% in China and on the Diamond Princess, but the actual report itself gave no such figure. I am quite disturbed that articles are being published with this kind of incorrect information and wonder at the agenda behind this false information.

For anyone who wants to compare and contrast:

article quoting 0.5% www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-outbreak-diamond-princess-cruise-ship-death-rate

The actual research being quoted in the article above, giving figure of 1.3% www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.12.2000256

Healthcare workers are overwhelmed and are getting sick themselves, due to sheer number of known infections.

Even if you don't care about the dead and the deadly ill, have some thought for the overworked nurses and doctors who are working on the frontline and can't even get enough PPE right now to keep themselves and their families safe.

To my mind it is definitely less than flu

So in your mind, presumably, every year we have overflowing ICUs, we build field hospitals with huge capacity and have doctors dying from flu?

I'm with you all the way on this OP

The OP has gone and says she won’t be answering questions, but perhaps you will. What should we do with all the additional folks who will require critical care all at the same time? How will you decide who gets treatment?

No because we have capacity to cope with flu. The problem is that this is on top of flu so we don't have the capacity.

I've not RTFT but has it been discussed that social distancing is likely to mean that if people do get infected it's with a lower initial viral load, and that is likely to result in a less severe infection?

I'm not sure social distancing has much effect on reducing the viral load, ErrolTheDragon, it's more about reducing transmission. I believe you are more likely to be infected with a high initial viral load if you catch the virus in a healthcare setting or in your household (because you are repeatedly being exposed to the virus in a short time frame), which is why self isolating within your household if you have symptoms and maintaining good hygiene at home, even if no one has symptoms, is important.

Do you realise just how offensive it is to say "was it worth it" to the NHS staff who have working round the clock to save people. We have already lost doctors and nurses and many more would have died if we hadn't suppressed this virus. They aren't even prepared now. They have fuck all PPE in lots of hospitals. One in South London had all the anesthaesiologists SHARING 3 pair of goggles while intubating COVID patients. So fuck them right. We just should have let a tsunami of patients wash over them.

Shield absolutely

We are thinking of other ways to protest - ringing into radio, trying to get support from more people, contacting media with the stories of people suffering etc etc

Yeah, good luck with that - you're going to get sod all support with it as the death rates go into the multiple hundreds each day, the NHS starts having to ration ITU provision and more doctors/ nurses/ young people die.

@starlightgazers If my calculation is inaccurate, please provide the correct one

Nope - I'll stick with the ones from the WHO/ other experts not some random on Mumsnet, thanks ...

Is that you, Dominic? Nice username.

Some of the ignorance on here is actually pretty scary.

This is not flu. It is much worse, hence the response. Follow the fucking guidelines like everyone else is having to and thank your lucky stars if you're not one of those working on the frontline in horrendous conditions with inadequate protection.

How is that so hard to grasp for some? Rioting and protesting - dear God, you'd have to be bloody thick to think that will go well.

@starlightgazers hundreds each day?

14 people have died from the Coronavirus in ireland

Surely the biggest argument against what you are saying is that Trump truly agrees with you that the cure is worse than the disease. And yet he is backtracking. Either he has been convinced by the science, or he knows that it is an election loser on a massive scale that even he can’t spin to let the virus run rampant regardless if the cost.

Anyone also thinking that the hospitals are overwhelmed because up to a quarter of its staff are SI, not because of Covid?

Staffing is an issue yes, but believe me - so are cases of COVID-19. It is and has been spreading around many hospitals at an alarming rate.

46 people have died in Ireland.

If the measures save the NHS from being overwhelmed, then they’re worth it, surely, OP? An overwhelmed NHS=a far higher death rate than necessary. And it’s irritating to compare it to flu deaths each year, given the fact flu deaths don’t all bunch together in such a short space of time and require the sudden creation of new hospitals. Or do you think Italian doctors have been pretending they’re overwhelmed with cases?