I’m confused. Not quite sure what argument you and @lindisfel each are making.
It is quite unlikely to have saved many lives.
Hi HSSS,Isn’t the r rate how many people each infected person infects? Not a days thing?
Well a man must preach his faith, however science driven it proves to be.I and many others (although rarely reported in the main stream news outlets) think that the virus deaths/infections had already started to decline before "lockdown" was instigated thus it was for the most part unnecessary and costly.
It has caused both economic tragedy and has instilled hysteria and fear into the general population.
It is quite unlikely to have saved many lives.
Others disagree.
Well a man must preach his faith, however science driven it proves to be.
I dont go in for gurus myself.
I'll be interested in your take on the second lock downs affecting the States, you'll be telling us next they are unnecessary?
D.
Well a man must preach his faith, however science driven it proves to be.
I dont go in for gurus myself.
I'll be interested in your take on the second lock downs affecting the States, you'll be telling us next they are unnecessary?
D.
Does he ever interview people he disagrees with? It would be much more interesting if there was some debate.I don't go in for gurus myself either, but that's the great thing about Ivor.... he interviews the people who really know their stuff. Worth checking him out.
they are still over 500 per week at last count.
Its not that lock downs dont work its our lock down was too late.
Good question - I don't know the answers but it is something I have thought a lot about myself ?Has anyone seen any data about outcomes for diabetics in the Uk who have tested positive eg what proportion need hospitalisation, recover at home, etc.
Well the mainstream narrative has switched from counting the total number of deaths to the number of "cases". You may not have noticed but that's what has happened.
The more testing that goes on the more cases will be uncovered but hospitalisations and deaths are what we should be worried about.
Only time will tell if the second lock downs work but they weren't necessary in Sweden (no lock down at all) so it may be down to something else.. like metabolic health maybe?
The US probably being one of the unhealthiest countries in the world?
Although their deaths per million of pop (395) are still way behind ours (647) and Belgium (842).
Many people with diabetes have reacted to yesterday's news that 25% of people who died from Covid-19 in UK hospitals also had diabetes. This is both understandable and scary, but it is not really unexpected.
Let me try to explain. I am T2, a scientist and I have been following what the epidemiologists and statisticians are learning about Covid. For example we are being told the daily death tolls. According to this 34,000 people have died in the UK from Covid by today 15 May. However, this number includes the deaths in hospitals, but not all deaths in care homes and at home. This number can be calculated by comparing the total number of deaths in the UK with the long-term average and sadly by 1 May there have already been 50,000 excess deaths in the UK. These deaths are mostly due to Covid.
A few days ago I found a paper by the group of Ben Goldacre, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.06.20092999v1. It studies the in-hospital deaths by potential risk factors. For diabetes they find the following. For the group with "controlled Diabetes", defined as HbA1c<58 mmol/mol) the risk of death was between 1.40 and 1.60 times that of non-diabetics.
For the group with "uncontrolled diabetes" defined as HbA1c>=58 mmol/mol the risk of death was between 2.18 and 2.56 times that of non-diabetics. For the group with no recent Hb1Ac measure the risk was between 1.63 and 2.16 that of non-diabetics.
In summary, depending on the severity of our diabetes the risk of death is a factor 1.5 to 2.5 higher than for non-diabetics.
In the UK almost 4 million people or 6% of the population are diagnosed with diabetes. While diabetes is increasing in younger people, we know that the rate is higher for elderly people and is probably at least twice that high (12%) in the over 65 age group. We now need to multiply this number with the 1.5 to 2.5 and can estimate that between 18% and 30% of people who died from Covid also had diabetes. This is in agreement with yesterdays announcement of 25%.
If you have other questions on the science of Covid, please feel free to ask on this thread and I'll try to answer these.
update 20 May: In this thread in post #96 I discuss the latest paper by the group of Jonathan Valabhji, see the direct link Covid/Coronavirus and diabetes - the numbers
You have said, many times, that you distrust the way COVID figs are collated and interpreted.
So why are you assuming that the deaths/mil for the UK, US and Belgium are accurate enough to support your argument?
Only study if this nature I've seen was from the US in type 1s. Over 50% dealt with the condition at home. Few issues with the study such as small data set and didn't break down if this correlated with other things such as weight or control etc.Has anyone seen any data about outcomes for diabetics in the Uk who have tested positive eg what proportion need hospitalisation, recover at home, etc.
They aren't but they are all we have at the moment?
Why are members here usually so happy to question the narrative on T2 and weight loss suddenly so accepting of the "norm" that any attempt to present a different point of view gets attacked?
I've simply presented alternative views from a significant number of smart people.
If members don't like it then they can simply ignore my rantings.
The stats that are there simply do not support the narratives that we are being sold.
So maybe its not the stats but the stories that are wrong.
I don’t agree with your point of view but I am interested in it and how you arrive at it. It’s easy to see only those things that confirm a point of view already held. If nothing else it helps me understand why I hold my view, and makes me question it. That’s never a bad thing and we will never all agree. Just because we don’t agree on all you say doesn’t mean we agree on all the press say either. In moments of fear and panic reading an opposing view can shed a ray of light (today I found my region has one of the lowest /million rates in the U.K. and boy that helps!)They aren't but they are all we have at the moment?
Why are members here usually so happy to question the narrative on T2 and weight loss suddenly so accepting of the "norm" that any attempt to present a different point of view gets attacked?
I've simply presented alternative views from a significant number of smart people.
If members don't like it then they can simply ignore my rantings.
The stats that are there simply do not support the narratives that we are being sold.
So maybe its not the stats but the stories that are wrong.