Viruses are a natural occurrence, nature wont allow them to spread like its being portrayed in the media

It would have been stopped naturally a long time ago, nature wont allow us to get ill all at the same time, and it certainly wont allow us all to die at the same

Nature of course can't stop us being stupid and killing one another, but its not daft is nature its intelligent enough to know it can't let things get out of hand

That's why your neighbour can be sick but you don't get whatever he got

All this b0llocks about "spreading" ffs

1tp if it was in a lab its nothing, it would be long gone

Usual crap from 1st time. Seems a very sad man to me.

Taking death figures relating to population it looks like 0-60s have a 99.8% chance of survival.

99.8% chance?

You've got more chance of dying in a cup of soup ffs

I think a better way of looking at things is to look at the actual numbers in the population who are at risk rather than just the deaths. To me the number of deaths have suggested that the shielding groups were probably underestimated (bot a dig at anyone in an evolving situation).

It's no good just saying well if you aren't old or have chronic conditions from the deaths you have very little to worry about, though this is true it doesn't give an indication of the actual numbers involved in millions of the more susceptible.

It's hard to gauge exactly because of the multi risk factors when trying to estimate this number. ie we know a decent estimate of obese/morbidly obese but this will often have other linked conditions.A 70 year old with no conditions despite the age may well have a lower risk than someone in their 50's with diabetes who is also obese etc etc.

I think I have seen around 50% of over 60's have at least 1 chronic condition.When you add all the risks together throughout the whole population I wouldn't be surprised if around 20% of the population had some sort of significant increased risk from this disease.

That's still a pretty big shield.

This disease for me though it wasn't needed has highlighted the problems are storing up with a more elderly population with chronic conditions rattling around needing more and more medications being/ seeded by an ever increasing rate of unhealthy people in the younger groups. It needs urgent attention.

Anyway off to the shops be interesting if more are donning masks.

It's interesting that asthma sufferers seem to be at less risk than you'd think. Maybe it's because asthma is an over-active inflammatory response, so whatever it is within these people which triggers asthmatic inflammation it's also going after the coronavirus, and dealing with the virus before it spreads to all parts of the body.

I wonder whether hay fever sufferers will see a similar protective effect (and whether anyone will think of asking patients for the relevant data).

Smoking also triggers increased inflammation (as seen by higher numbers of white blood cells), so the same mechanism might be at work here. Chronic inflammation seems to persist even once you've given up the ciggies, which might explain why past smokers are nearly as well protected against this virus as current smokers.

If you're a current smoker, this would be the ideal time to stop. You really would be getting the best of both worlds.

Ibuprofen reduces inflammation and we were told do not use ibuprofen if you have symptoms of coronavirus

deaths arnt the only story,you don't either die or walk out for a jog around the park,theres 100,s/1000, of people suffering all sorts of complication lives ruined for forseable future,muscel wastage,stroke like recoveries, and as yet unknown internal injuries

I wondered if coughing might be dislodging the virus before
It takes a hold.

Not saying it is, but another connection between some smokers and some asthmatics

Inflammation is an even better fit though given the ibuprofen advice

Neil Ferguson should be strung up.

Ibrahima

I think its damage limitation now, they've been absolutely rumbled with this and its a case of just trying to herd everyone back to work and get the kids back to school without causing utter mayhem

I can't believe they attempted this you can't fake a pandemic ffs

Where has that little s*** weazel Billy Gates gone? AKA buffalo bill

These people need finding and stringing up, but no doubt once they give everyone their jobs and sporting distractions back this will be forgotten about in 6 months time

People have had enough, we are making are own way back to normal, slowly but it is coming whatever the government or the opposition party (the bbc) tell us.

The latest numbers came out yesterday for up to 5pm on 19th May.

Received treatment for a Mental Health condition    4%
Learning Disability and or Autism    2%
Asthma    7%
Chronic Kidney Disease    15%
Chronic Neurological Disorder    3%
Chronic Pulmonary Disease    15%
Dementia    18%
Diabetes    26%
Rheumatological Disorder    3%
Ischaemic Heart Disease    11%
Other    71%

Heart disease is creeping up as more data comes out.

All these figures but I cannot see why more people are not questioning the way the daily figure associated with the 'new infections' is being questioned.

Surely, the more tests carried out the more the number of cases?

Hence, should not the daily figure - and the rolling 7 day average - be a percentage of the number of tests carried out?

After all, 5000 new infections from 100,000 tests is 5% but 6,000 from 150,000 tests is 4%.

If the number of tests keep going up, then we will never leave lockdown until there are now new infections because within 62 million people nationwide someone will always have CV19.

Hence, the way the figures are shown now would indicate an increase in infections but measured as a percentage it isn't.

I keep sending this question in to the Government daily briefing website to be read out. But if ever an exercise was designed to give a government the chance to peddle their latest idea / achievement etc etc this is it, so my legit question will never be asked.

I hope they are not using total new cases as a means for planning.

They are, as you suggest, subject to new testing conditions.

The R number and the number of new cases are irrelevant figures.

R is impossible to measure with any degree of accuracy given that we have no idea on the number of new cases unless we test large random samples on a regular basis.

The R number includes care home infections and is around 3 weeks old when given out.

Hence, it has been distorted very badly in last 3 weeks because if you go back 3 to 4 weeks the virus was at its worse in care homes.

The trend is nursing home infections is now on the wane, thankfully, so the R figure from next week onwards should show this reduction. If it doesn't then we will have an issue.

I do hope the scientists are not being blinded by boris
And his pals as suggested.