captkrisma
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
The lack of testing is a huge issue, because without testing, all the models are lacking. All we are doing is inferring number of cases from the number of people needing treatment. We need to rest for current AND past infection because without that we simply do not know what the fuck is happening. In the last few days we’ve seen all the horrific models, then a study from a group at oxford which uses the key assumption that 0.1% of cases need hospitalisation. It’s embedded in this article
“ In the most extreme scenario they estimate that if the virus had started being transmitted 38 days before the first confirmed death then 68 per cent of the UK population would have been infected by March 19.”
Please could someone archive the actual pdf of this study? It’s on this article on the archive link above, under the hyperlink text ‘Oxford study’
All the models vary widely, because they using Flawed assumptions as input. We need to know a. How many currently have the disease and b. How many have HAD it and recovered. Once we know that, we can combine with the actual clinical data and have a far more accurate picture of what’s happening. Testing is expensive on that scale, but it’s vital and compared to the cost to the economy as lives it’s pocket money.
Another issue are the groups that refuse to test outright. I've been told that the military's response to this is a 14 day quarantine and then immediate treatment if symptoms persist. They won't even bother testing because all it would do is add a tick mark to the statistics and use up a test that could be of better use to the general public. The only ones I've seen tested were guys coming in from NYC off leave and that's only about 4.
Deaths would be added to statistics, but that's after the fact. Of course, military docs being military, they prescribed one of my bubbas mucinex and aspirin.