I wonder if weâd all be panicking more, or if weâd be more critical of the governmentâs handling if the graphs we saw were linear instead of logarithmic?
The data are the same in each but one is dry and scientific, the other is scary as fuck.
The plateau that weâre hearing about looks a long way away in the linear world and yet in the logarithmic world (which we see nearly all of the time) we feel like the lockdown should surely be lifted soon.
Thing is we do need to also not give the âpanicâ message which misinterpretation of data can easily lead to as well. The data those graphs show is the âtotal deathsâ which will only ever âplateauâ once there are no more deaths. The log scale is more sensitive which shows an early indication that the 'rate of increase â in deaths is slowing - eg, we are still seeing more deaths each day, but less than we would see if there were no measures in place⊠its tricky as its easy to get confused between downturn in number of deaths (which there is not) and the slowing in the rate of increase in deaths (which the log scale graph clearly shows)
Both are useful, but the log scale shows signs of hopeâŠand that the measures being taken are working. Key is not so much in what data is shown/shared, but in ensuring people understand it. ⊠and continue to stay the at home.
Maybe its better to show the public the simple plot that shows the deaths per day⊠would still show high numbers but also that measure are working⊠and should continue.
Problem is not with the data, but with ignorant or selfish people who either donât understand it or donât care and do as they please.
Horrifying, on the face of it. However, I spotted two things immediately;
1/ the username is âflak magnetâ.
2/ itâs on twitter.
Now, I readily admit to being biased against the medium of social media and usually afford twitter/facebook information a credibility rating of zero to 20%. But this piece screams Look At Me bullshit at the top of itâs lungs.
Just reading some posts from our more paranoid Chinese and Russian friendly posters on here, I wonder what they think now?
Barry feeling smug as normalâŠ
Itâs not the FlakMagnet handle that concerns me.
However, just step back and marvel at that #FBPE tag and contrast it with the complaints.
This is someone that enabled Boris Johnsonâs government now complaining about it. Whatever else the Tweeter might now, big picture isnât something he/she/it can see.
See my point about there obviously being an agenda - possibly more than one.
Yep, itâs right to be sceptical - it serves you well. But when I read the piece it didnât scream that at me. It screamed here are some facts, Iâm going to make political capital with them.
I recognised I could be wrong about the facts, though.
That was a good watch and great to see Channel 4 doing what they do best.
It provided a lot of information I didnât already know and posed a number of questions.
For those of us that are time poor, the key takeaways for me wereâŠ
Care home deaths are not included in the figures we see daily
As @pap said, the typical death rate in care homes has risen from 25% to 41% in the year to April 2019 versus the same period in 2020
NICE has published updated guidelines about who should and who should not be admitted to ICU. They (perhaps understandably) put younger/fitter people in ICU beds at the expense of older/more infirm people.
These guidelines effectively limit the chance of survival for older people. We are choosing to not give everyone the same treatment - again PERHAPS understandably. Would we be doing the same outside of COVID-19?
Many GPs are certifying the cause of death in care homes, often without having seen the patient, as non-COVID related
Even if a care home wanted to move a patient to a hospital ICU bed, in all likelihood they would be turned away (age, complications, etc.)
Care homes have struggled to get PPE - often run out towards the end of the day
I found myself asking whether Italy became overrun with cases because a) they have an older population and/or b) they attempted to resuscitate/make better everyone where we are not.
Is the fact that we chose not to admit older people to ICU, and then we chose to not publish the details of those deaths allowing our hospitals to cope and government to not be held to account?
I need to be clear here that this might be an absolute necessity, but I think itâs important to know what is going on and for that to be explained to lay people like me.
So higher than an 8 means you get ward care and not ICU care.
Was the 8 arrive at because a) there is no expectation that the patient would survive and there would be zero additional benefit of admission to ICU or was the 8 arrived at because b) it allows us not exceed ICU capacity?
If itâs a) then all good (well, you know what I mean).
If itâs b) then weâre planning to let some die to save others.
Again, perhaps understandable in a pandemic and hence the advice for older people to isolate, but I feel we need to know what is going on.
My birdâs 91 year old aunt lives in a residential block on hill lane. Not quite a care home, but private flats with onsite carers if needed. She and others in the place have been contacted by government health care staff asking what they want if they contract it; resuscitation, hospitalisation, what treatment, etc. Very comprehensive list of questions, and they called back twice for further verification and to get confirmation from a relative. Iâm assuming this isnât restricted to that particular residence, so I wonder how many of the elderly whoâve succumbed might have actually had a say in whatâs happened to them. Itâs a bit glib to just dismiss the deaths as the result of the uncaring government, most of the health systems across the world have been overwhelmed by this event.
Several companies have complained that offers were not taken up to provide some of the additional machines needed to save the lives of people with acute respiratory difficulties caused by Covid-19. âThey could have had probably 500 ventilators if they got back to me straight away,â Andrew Rayner, managing director of MEC Medical, ventilator parts maker, told the Financial Times. âTheyâve missed the boat.â
This a direct response to the article from the government - a denial.
The response weâve had from British industry has been nothing short of incredible, with an overwhelming response from companies offering help including designing and building new devices, manufacturing components or transporting them to NHS hospitals. To say we have ignored suppliers is wrong â we have responded to all companies that contacted us with offers of help. We are working with a number of firms to scale up production of existing UK ventilator manufacturers, as well as designing and manufacturing new products from scratch, and procuring thousands more machines from overseas.
So these things are being said on Twitter and in the press.
It makes me less sceptical of the things I read on Twitter - perhaps we both suffer from confirmation bias?
