Leeds to lock down

I’m far more interested in the survival rates for the over 60s

 

But how many deaths? Surely that’s the grim marker for another lockdown and not confirmed cases? Should we lockdown for flu cases aswell in this case? Flu kills thousands every year too. I know it’s not exactly the same however still a coronavirus but the death rate has hardly been affected in this so called ‘second wave’ yet.
To me, More testing means more confirmed cases, it’s that plain to see or am I missing something?

 

Greetings from Headingley. It's COVID-crazy here. You can only do it from behind & only in groups of 6. That seems to be the only message on the ground.

JP, reporting live from opposition territory.

 

Just driven through, all eateries are packed, inside and out every table is taken in every place (and as you know, there are a lot of places). There was a long queue outside the Oak too, all bunched up with no social distancing whatsoever and a couple of masks. Probably about 50 people in the queue, no idea what it’s like inside as can’t see in from outside.

 

I've not been in since lockdown. I know the manager & normally go in a bit in the summer. Not a place I'd go at these times.

 

Well if that behaviour is mirrored throughout the country expect another total lockdown in two weeks once infection rates Sky rocket.

 

Agreed, I’ve read today that the number of cases in New York has increased significantly as the virus has mutated to become more infectious but it’s also become less deadly.

 

Tbh, if its less deadly then we do need to get back to normal. But obviously this will depend on how "less" is defined .

 

Be for just three weeks to flatten the curve.

 

You are fkd.

 

Thanks for your reassuring words mate

 

You’re missing something...

Cases should be viewed as an early warning sign that more deaths are coming. If you let cases get out of control, deaths will get out of control very soon after.

Also yes more testing means more cases, but there’s a higher percentage of positive cases, which is the metric to look at.

 

It has been busy all along. It always seems a bit surreal reading about places struggling to reattract customers on here as since the beginning of August all the places have had loads of customers and there’s always people walking around visiting them. Today was the first day I’ve seen it look dangerous though (with the queue). The only thing I saw before was three guys in their 50s stumbling out of a pub laughing and one of them holding the other one up. He was wearing a rosette so I guess it was his birthday.

 

Youve missed something too... How many negative tests.
eg if they are testing 100000 samples a day how many are returning negative.

Additionally, how many of those cases (which the tests are showing dead virus upto 76? days old) turn into actual infections.

 

I said the percentage of positive tests. That covers both positive and negative. The percentage is rising. That's a cause for concern.

I've yet to see any evidence that the tests are showing a dead virus. Please give me a source. And please let the source be reputable, not some crackpot facebook conspiracists please.

 

Its on the Beeb website somewhere. TM, dreamboy and myself have all provided a link to it.

Basically the testing was that sensitive it picks up dead virus which was a couple of months old.

And percentages against what?

If you test 100k and only 6k are positive tests for Covid. That means that means that 94k are negative.

Once you flip the numbers about it kind of ruins the end of the world narative.

For example and if i am reading it right on my phone.

Between the 10th and 16th of Sept 587,173 people were tested for Covid with 19278 people returning a positive result.

So that means 97% of people tested didnt have Covid.

 

That's not actually correct. Using your figures it means 97 percent of those tested had no trace of the virus. Because of the nature of the test, the fact that it returns a positive result if it detects fragments of the virus, 'dead' samples of the virus, and live samples in such small quantities it's not considered an infection, means that a positive test result is not a good indicator that you have Covid-19. The test is excellent at what it was developed to do: indicate this particular strain of coronavirus is present. It is highly sensitive and a fantastic example of human ingenuity. And the scientists who developed it were unequivocal in their warning that it should not be used as diagnostic test. That's not what it is. It's a lab test to indicate the presence of a virus, it doesn't diagnose the disease. The two things aren't even remotely the same. You can say those who test negative don't have Covid-19, but you can't say those that test positive do. That such a large proportion of people who test positive never display symptoms doesn't mean they're asymptomatic, it means they never had it. It's like testing for cancer by looking for trace elements of carcinogenic substances in your body. That they cause cancer is no indication at all that you have cancer.

 

This is an interesting video, puts it in a clear way- we aren’t in April 2020 of the first wave, were more like in Jan/Feb -

 

Nobody said it would be three fckin weeks. Stop repeating this ****.

 

I’m sure you didn’t mean that as I read it