• Before posting anything about COVID-19, READ THIS FIRST! COVID-19 and Misinformation (UPDATED)
    Misinformation and/or conspiracy theories about this topic, even if intended as humor, will not be tolerated!

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
5,531
Last edited:
Last edited:
An acquaintance who keeps databases as a hobby sent me the table below showing deaths and accumulated infections of C-19 in Ireland below.

MONTHDEATHSINFECTIONS
march543447
April113620612
May48924990
June6625473
July1828760
August1428881
Total1777

Given the lag of about four weeks between infections and deaths, the collapse in deaths in June to August and as a ratio of infections in previous months is explained by the following possibilities or a combination of them: the virus which has mutated has become far less lethal;hospitals have become hugely more efficient in preventing C-19 deaths;and the high risk population over age 60 has been increasingly following preventive measures,unlike Irish youth.

An Imperial College,London study Evaluating the effects of SARS-CoV-2 Spike mutation D614G on transmissibility and pathogenicity based on a large statistical base for the UK concluded that claims the virus had become less lethal were invalid because they hadn't taken into account the age differences of the fatalities. Still, it's hard to believe that the collapse in deaths was largely down to increased preventive measures by the over 60 population.

Similar collapses in deaths have occured in Europe and US states after the initial large surges in infections have tapered off. Media reports and governments need to pay more attention to this development.
 

A Voice

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
9,743
Someone I was taking to online (a virologist and ICU doc) said they have implemented best practice in old folks' homes so the death rates there have plummeted; and it's mostly young people presenting now in hospitals with the Wuhan virus, and they're more robust and very unlikely to die unless they have certain underlying conditions.
 

artfoley56

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
10,258
An acquaintance who keeps databases as a hobby sent me the table below showing deaths and accumulated infections of C-19 in Ireland below.

MONTHDEATHSINFECTIONSmarch543447April113620612May48924990June6625473July1828760August1428881Total1777
Given the lag of about four weeks between infections and deaths, the collapse in deaths in June to August and as a ratio of infections in previous months is explained by the following possibilities or a combination of them: the virus which has mutated has become far less lethal;hospitals have become hugely more efficient in preventing C-19 deaths;and the high risk population over age 60 has been increasingly following preventive measures,unlike Irish youth.

An Imperial College,London study Evaluating the effects of SARS-CoV-2 Spike mutation D614G on transmissibility and pathogenicity based on a large statistical base for the UK concluded that claims the virus had become less lethal were invalid because they hadn't taken into account the age differences of the fatalities. Still, it's hard to believe that the collapse in deaths was largely down to increased preventive measures by the over 60 population.

Similar collapses in deaths have occured in Europe and US states after the initial large surges in infections have tapered off. Media reports and governments need to pay more attention to this development.
the "low hanging fruit" was wiped out in the early months of the virus. the total failures to mitigate the risk to the most vulnerable to the disease lead to the high figures
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
26,347
I think lock downs meant the most vulnerable were shielded.
 

owedtojoy

Moderator
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
54,829
An acquaintance who keeps databases as a hobby sent me the table below showing deaths and accumulated infections of C-19 in Ireland below.

MONTHDEATHSINFECTIONS
march543447
April113620612
May48924990
June6625473
July1828760
August1428881
Total1777

Given the lag of about four weeks between infections and deaths, the collapse in deaths in June to August and as a ratio of infections in previous months is explained by the following possibilities or a combination of them: the virus which has mutated has become far less lethal;hospitals have become hugely more efficient in preventing C-19 deaths;and the high risk population over age 60 has been increasingly following preventive measures,unlike Irish youth.

An Imperial College,London study Evaluating the effects of SARS-CoV-2 Spike mutation D614G on transmissibility and pathogenicity based on a large statistical base for the UK concluded that claims the virus had become less lethal were invalid because they hadn't taken into account the age differences of the fatalities. Still, it's hard to believe that the collapse in deaths was largely down to increased preventive measures by the over 60 population.

Similar collapses in deaths have occured in Europe and US states after the initial large surges in infections have tapered off. Media reports and governments need to pay more attention to this development.
It is no great mystery ....
  1. The most vulnerable are now self-isolating, protecting themselves, and being protected.
  2. There is more availablility of testing and early detection.
  3. Treatment has improved, doctors and hospitals can provide improved care because they are focused on less patients.
  4. Society is coping better, maintaining better discipline, though there is some way to go.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
35,992
They say it has to do with the age profile of those infected. It may be too soon to start speculating, today's figures showed a bigger % of over 65 than has been happening. It may mean that the virus has started to build up among the older group which are more vulnerable to serious infections.
 

gijoe

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
15,692
An acquaintance who keeps databases as a hobby sent me the table below showing deaths and accumulated infections of C-19 in Ireland below.

MONTHDEATHSINFECTIONS
march543447
April113620612
May48924990
June6625473
July1828760
August1428881
Total1777

Given the lag of about four weeks between infections and deaths, the collapse in deaths in June to August and as a ratio of infections in previous months is explained by the following possibilities or a combination of them: the virus which has mutated has become far less lethal;hospitals have become hugely more efficient in preventing C-19 deaths;and the high risk population over age 60 has been increasingly following preventive measures,unlike Irish youth.

An Imperial College,London study Evaluating the effects of SARS-CoV-2 Spike mutation D614G on transmissibility and pathogenicity based on a large statistical base for the UK concluded that claims the virus had become less lethal were invalid because they hadn't taken into account the age differences of the fatalities. Still, it's hard to believe that the collapse in deaths was largely down to increased preventive measures by the over 60 population.

Similar collapses in deaths have occured in Europe and US states after the initial large surges in infections have tapered off. Media reports and governments need to pay more attention to this development.
The low hanging fruit in terms of those coming close to death with underlining conditions from the first wave have past through. We have already seen the excess deaths, which is the true overall measure of COVID's-19 impact has already fallen from 1100 to 800. By year end it might be a very small figure relative to suicides etc and we are going to be scratching our heads about how we got ourselves into this!
 

Finbar10

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
3,054
Last edited:
Last edited:
An acquaintance who keeps databases as a hobby sent me the table below showing deaths and accumulated infections of C-19 in Ireland below.

MONTHDEATHSINFECTIONS
march543447
April113620612
May48924990
June6625473
July1828760
August1428881
Total1777

Given the lag of about four weeks between infections and deaths, the collapse in deaths in June to August and as a ratio of infections in previous months is explained by the following possibilities or a combination of them: the virus which has mutated has become far less lethal;hospitals have become hugely more efficient in preventing C-19 deaths;and the high risk population over age 60 has been increasingly following preventive measures,unlike Irish youth.

An Imperial College,London study Evaluating the effects of SARS-CoV-2 Spike mutation D614G on transmissibility and pathogenicity based on a large statistical base for the UK concluded that claims the virus had become less lethal were invalid because they hadn't taken into account the age differences of the fatalities. Still, it's hard to believe that the collapse in deaths was largely down to increased preventive measures by the over 60 population.

Similar collapses in deaths have occured in Europe and US states after the initial large surges in infections have tapered off. Media reports and governments need to pay more attention to this development.
I guess it's possible. However, a lot of it would be explained by the significantly lower age profile of those now getting it. I actually did a quick statistical exercise, out of curiosity, about 2 weeks back to look at this. The data is a little old now but I'll give a summary anyway.

I looked at a 3-week period (5th August to 26th August). One can find out a lot by looking at the daily tables on the HPSC website and doing some subtraction. I looked at stats from the start and end of this period.

The following table gives the age profile of cases (the second column gives the proportions for my 3-week period and the third column prior to 5th August ).

Age CategoryCases from 5/8/20 to 26/8/20Cases Prior to 5/8/20
0-4yrs3.4%0.8%
5-14yrs7.5%1.4%
15-24yrs21.7%7.8%
25-34yrs21.7%17.1%
35-44yrs16.9%17.6%
45-54yrs14.4%17.8%
55-64yrs8.4%12.6%
65-74yrs3.9%7.0%
75-84yrs1.5%8.8%
85+yrs0.5%9.1%

The proportion of over 75s is drastically reduced (9 times less). 65-74yrs is 55% of what it was. Under 25s are way up (more than 3 fold).

I tried to estimate what the case fatality rate (CFR) should be give the new age profile of cases. Age-based CFRs were available in the HPSC stats, e.g. for example what was the case fatality rate for 35-44 year olds so far.

The overall CFR prior to my time period I estimated to 5.74% (doing a weighted average of age cohorts by their age-related CFRs). This is exactly the same as the HPSC's overall estimate for this (so I'm calculating this correctly).

Then I did a weighted average to predict what the overall CFR should now be in this 3-week period given the changed age profile. I calculated it to be 1.28%, which is about 4.5 times lower. The number of deaths reported in that 3-week period was 12 and the number of cases was 2196, which gives apparently a 0.55% actual CFR (slightly less than half what I predicted).

There are another of possible reasons for that. It's possible the virus really is a bit less fatal (perhaps due to treatments that are now better).
There are other possibilities though. It could be just a lag effect. The lag effect does increase with reduced age. The cases are also on an upward trajectory, which magnifies this lag effect. For example, the newly case rates in the 3 weeks of the period I looked at were: 556, 747 and 776. However, the two weeks just prior had case rates of just 202 and 345. It's unlikely that a case in my second and third weeks would have shown up as a death within that period.

I think we'll get a better idea over the next month or so. My figures are a bit out of date also (there has been mention of the age profile getting a bit older). Like last time, one possible big contributor to the death numbers is again the nursing homes. Yesterday, I saw mentioned on the news that there has been a recent outbreak in one nursing home and one residential home. If general population rates increase above a certain level, it's likely we'll get a restart in outbreaks in nursing homes (the 55% of them that were untouched by covid last time).
 

Patslatt1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
5,531
I guess it's possible. However, a lot of it would be explained by the significantly lower age profile of those now getting it. I actually did a quick statistical exercise, out of curiosity, about 2 weeks back to look at this. The data is a little old now but I'll give a summary anyway.

I looked at a 3-week period (5th August to 26th August). One can find out a lot by looking at the daily tables on the HPSC website and doing some subtraction. I looked at stats from the start and end of this period.

The following table gives the age profile of cases (the second column gives the proportions for my 3-week period and the third column prior to 5th August ).

Age CategoryCases from 5/8/20 to 26/8/20Cases Prior to 5/8/20
0-4yrs3.4%0.8%
5-14yrs7.5%1.4%
15-24yrs21.7%7.8%
25-34yrs21.7%17.1%
35-44yrs16.9%17.6%
45-54yrs14.4%17.8%
55-64yrs8.4%12.6%
65-74yrs3.9%7.0%
75-84yrs1.5%8.8%
85+yrs0.5%9.1%

The proportion of over 75s is drastically reduced (9 times less). 65-74yrs is 55% of what it was. Under 25s are way up (more than 3 fold).

I tried to estimate what the case fatality rate (CFR) should be give the new age profile of cases. Age-based CFRs were available in the HPSC stats, e.g. for example what was the case fatality rate for 35-44 year olds so far.

The overall CFR prior to my time period I estimated to 5.74% (doing a weighted average of age cohorts by their age-related CFRs). This is exactly the same as the HPSC's overall estimate for this (so I'm calculating this correctly).

Then I did a weighted average to predict what the overall CFR should now be in this 3-week period given the changed age profile. I calculated it to be 1.28%, which is about 4.5 times lower. The number of deaths reported in that 3-week period was 12 and the number of cases was 2196, which gives apparently a 0.55% actual CFR (slightly less than half what I predicted).

There are another of possible reasons for that. It's possible the virus really is a bit less fatal (perhaps due to treatments that are now better).
There are other possibilities though. It could be just a lag effect. The lag effect does increase with reduced age. The cases are also on an upward trajectory, which magnifies this lag effect. For example, the newly case rates in the 3 weeks of the period I looked at were: 556, 747 and 776. However, the two weeks just prior had case rates of just 202 and 345. It's unlikely that a case in my second and third weeks would have shown up as a death within that period.

I think we'll get a better idea over the next month or so. My figures are a bit out of date also (there has been mention of the age profile getting a bit older). Like last time, one possible big contributor to the death numbers is again the nursing homes. Yesterday, I saw mentioned on the news that there has been a recent outbreak in one nursing home and one residential home. If general population rates increase above a certain level, it's likely we'll get a restart in outbreaks in nursing homes (the 55% of them that were untouched by covid last time).
The 0 to 34 age groups increased from 27.1% to 54.3% of cases, an increased share of 27.2%, whereas the 55 to 85 plus age groups fell from 37.5% to 14.3%, a decreased share of 23.2% and a decrease of 62% in these two percentages . Given the very low death rates among the 0 to 54 age groups, the decrease in deaths should mostly be attributed to this 62%. Actual death fell 79% from June to August and the percentages of deaths to new monthly cases almost completely collapsed in July and August.
 

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
14,595
I think a lot of it is due to a younger cohort of people getting it and recovering. Older and more vulnerable are people are taking more precautions and nursing homes have substantially strengthened their policies and procedures.
 

greencharade

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2019
Messages
899
Large increase in false positives in testing, against much lower community infection now (numbers and viral load of cases).

No information from Donnelly, Dept of Health or NPHET about criteria for positive PCR test. To the contrary, silence being maintained on this. Suggest research twitter.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
35,992
I think a lot of it is due to a younger cohort of people getting it and recovering. Older and more vulnerable are people are taking more precautions and nursing homes have substantially strengthened their policies and procedures.
The danger is that as the infection spreads, the vulnerable will get infected and hospital and death numbers will increase.
 

reg11

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
3,794
The danger is that as the infection spreads, the vulnerable will get infected and hospital and death numbers will increase.
What can anybody who isn't in the vulnerable category do about that, other than taking sensible precautions and hoping for the best? Unless, you want them to put their lives in a continuous lockdown situation? Even if that were done, one would have to emerge at some stage and the virus would still be lurking about. Whereas the vulnerable now know much more about how to protect themselves.
 

wombat

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
35,992
What can anybody who isn't in the vulnerable category do about that, other than taking sensible precautions and hoping for the best?
Its not a question of hoping for the best. We need to make sacrifices in our daily lives to reduce the spread of the virus. I was in Dunnes Stores in Cornelscourt last night to buy a shirt and noticed the clothing section was quite busy - people were wearing facemasks but most of them were just browsing - could not that pastime be curtailed? I haven't been in a shopping mall but I suspect there are people wandering around as usual. I was speaking to a friend who's son lives in Edmonton where the pubs opened early in the summer and he said people have not returned in previous numbers so maybe opening the pubs won't be the boom the alcohol lobby expect.
 

tsarbomb

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
5,495
There was a lot less testing in March - May, so the true amount of cases for that period was likely a lot higher than recorded. These days they're doing more contact tracing and testing. A lot of people who are being contacted for testing don't even know there's something wrong with them.
 

fat finger

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2016
Messages
2,717
Old folk susceptible to the virus are already 6 months older than when the virus first arrived, and statistically, the older you are, the higher the likelihood that you will die tomorrow. The lower death rate now compared to six months ago indicates the official response to the virus in this country (and some others) was wrong and reckless from the very beginning, as several on this forum have been saying since all along, and we also need more information on did previous flu vaccination make some old folk more susceptible to coronavirus, or was coronavirus actually caused by previous vaccination programmes, no questions should be ruled out or allowed to be ruled out when it comes to our public health, heavy handed management of the crisis by the pharma-medico community just feeds the conspiracy theorists and goads them into suspecting cover up, for all our sakes we need better information to find out what really has been going on, and what we need to do to ensure it cannot happen again
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
52,897
They say it has to do with the age profile of those infected. It may be too soon to start speculating, today's figures showed a bigger % of over 65 than has been happening. It may mean that the virus has started to build up among the older group which are more vulnerable to serious infections.
Perhaps the virus is weakening to ensure its survival? Little point killing the host
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
52,897
I guess it's possible. However, a lot of it would be explained by the significantly lower age profile of those now getting it. I actually did a quick statistical exercise, out of curiosity, about 2 weeks back to look at this. The data is a little old now but I'll give a summary anyway.

I looked at a 3-week period (5th August to 26th August). One can find out a lot by looking at the daily tables on the HPSC website and doing some subtraction. I looked at stats from the start and end of this period.

The following table gives the age profile of cases (the second column gives the proportions for my 3-week period and the third column prior to 5th August ).

Age CategoryCases from 5/8/20 to 26/8/20Cases Prior to 5/8/20
0-4yrs3.4%0.8%
5-14yrs7.5%1.4%
15-24yrs21.7%7.8%
25-34yrs21.7%17.1%
35-44yrs16.9%17.6%
45-54yrs14.4%17.8%
55-64yrs8.4%12.6%
65-74yrs3.9%7.0%
75-84yrs1.5%8.8%
85+yrs0.5%9.1%

The proportion of over 75s is drastically reduced (9 times less). 65-74yrs is 55% of what it was. Under 25s are way up (more than 3 fold).

I tried to estimate what the case fatality rate (CFR) should be give the new age profile of cases. Age-based CFRs were available in the HPSC stats, e.g. for example what was the case fatality rate for 35-44 year olds so far.

The overall CFR prior to my time period I estimated to 5.74% (doing a weighted average of age cohorts by their age-related CFRs). This is exactly the same as the HPSC's overall estimate for this (so I'm calculating this correctly).

Then I did a weighted average to predict what the overall CFR should now be in this 3-week period given the changed age profile. I calculated it to be 1.28%, which is about 4.5 times lower. The number of deaths reported in that 3-week period was 12 and the number of cases was 2196, which gives apparently a 0.55% actual CFR (slightly less than half what I predicted).

There are another of possible reasons for that. It's possible the virus really is a bit less fatal (perhaps due to treatments that are now better).
There are other possibilities though. It could be just a lag effect. The lag effect does increase with reduced age. The cases are also on an upward trajectory, which magnifies this lag effect. For example, the newly case rates in the 3 weeks of the period I looked at were: 556, 747 and 776. However, the two weeks just prior had case rates of just 202 and 345. It's unlikely that a case in my second and third weeks would have shown up as a death within that period.

I think we'll get a better idea over the next month or so. My figures are a bit out of date also (there has been mention of the age profile getting a bit older). Like last time, one possible big contributor to the death numbers is again the nursing homes. Yesterday, I saw mentioned on the news that there has been a recent outbreak in one nursing home and one residential home. If general population rates increase above a certain level, it's likely we'll get a restart in outbreaks in nursing homes (the 55% of them that were untouched by covid last time).
In the early stages it was typically only symptomatic people being tested. And even then, it was only those with multiple symptoms.

Now, with the contact tracing app up and running, is it possible that more young people have downloaded that and are being called for testing, despite being asymptomatic?

Is it possible that although the proportion of people getting it who are old has decreased, the numbers have not decreased (save for nursing home victims)?

A really useful figure would be to compare the number of asymptomatic cases now and earlier.

It is very possible that there are now fewer cases but they are instead being caught more frequently due to better testing facilities, better awareness and a lower threshold for testing.

In short, rather than these being the definitive number of cases, they are the definitive number of cases found. Is it therefore more appropriate to compare outcomes, which are much improved since earlier this year.

Put another way, if 6 months ago we learned of a new disease which presented as asymptomatic in the majority of cases, saw the majority with symptoms fully recover, and saw the vulnerable protected by limited isolation, and the overall population washing their hands and wearing masks, what would we have proposed as the solution?

Would we have proposed shutting down our airlines, virtually banning travel, teaching college students remotely, closing pubs, etc., etc.?
 

Finbar10

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
3,054
In the early stages it was typically only symptomatic people being tested. And even then, it was only those with multiple symptoms.

Now, with the contact tracing app up and running, is it possible that more young people have downloaded that and are being called for testing, despite being asymptomatic?

Is it possible that although the proportion of people getting it who are old has decreased, the numbers have not decreased (save for nursing home victims)?

A really useful figure would be to compare the number of asymptomatic cases now and earlier.

It is very possible that there are now fewer cases but they are instead being caught more frequently due to better testing facilities, better awareness and a lower threshold for testing.

In short, rather than these being the definitive number of cases, they are the definitive number of cases found. Is it therefore more appropriate to compare outcomes, which are much improved since earlier this year.

Put another way, if 6 months ago we learned of a new disease which presented as asymptomatic in the majority of cases, saw the majority with symptoms fully recover, and saw the vulnerable protected by limited isolation, and the overall population washing their hands and wearing masks, what would we have proposed as the solution?

Would we have proposed shutting down our airlines, virtually banning travel, teaching college students remotely, closing pubs, etc., etc.?
Yes, it's possible we are just catching more in testing (more milder asymptomatic cases). Another possibility is that, since we don't seem to have active nursing home outbreaks at the moment (apart from one home seemingly), that old people who are showing up as cases are somewhat healthier on average (many still capable of independent living).

Another more intriguing possibility is that more widespread usage of masks has significantly reduced the typical viral load of those catching it. There's some evidence that people catching it are then much more likely to be asymptomatic or have milder symptoms.
One More Reason to Wear a Mask: You’ll Get Less Sick From COVID-19
 

ShoutingIsLeadership

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
52,897
Yes, it's possible we are just catching more in testing (more milder asymptomatic cases). Another possibility is that, since we don't seem to have active nursing home outbreaks at the moment (apart from one home seemingly), that old people who are showing up as cases are somewhat healthier on average (many still capable of independent living).

Another more intriguing possibility is that more widespread usage of masks has significantly reduced the typical viral load of those catching it. There's some evidence that people catching it are then much more likely to be asymptomatic or have milder symptoms.
One More Reason to Wear a Mask: You’ll Get Less Sick From COVID-19
Do we need to dramatically reassess how we are dealing with it? The wider health service is as good as closed, people are not getting care in the community, mental health services are even worse now, old people are virtual prisoners in nursing homes, women are giving birth to and losing babies on their own...
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom