corona virus alerts - Latest cruising Information for vessels/locations/rules

[fivecapes]

Originally Posted by El Pinguino

I don't think there is anything sus about the chinese numbers.
...

^This

See countries below that have comparable/better ratios than China if normalized by no. of tests administered per capita

Taiwan
S. Korea
Germany
Canada
Japan
Hong Kong
Macau
New Zealand
Oz

They had the same information as everybody else back in January

[rbk]

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

Unfortunately, when states willfully provide inaccurate or data that is suspect it makes things much harder for an accurate accounting and leads us back into extrapolating guesses rather than interpolating estimates.

To say that China is willfully providing misinformation is pure conjecture. However likely it may be we will never see any hard proof.

[CatNewBee]

All figures we see are agenda driven. Nobody really does an post mortem autopsy to prove the death was caused by corona and not anything else, and nobody really makes statistical tests to get the real infection rate. Corona is a mutation of already existing and spreading viruses for ages, antibodies can be there from similar infections or other reason, and not because of the one now, so this is also possible to have a lot of false positives. There is a chance, you had corona and no known antibodies too. There is no quick test to show the presence of the virus itself.

Some autoritarian countries want to shine as the winner and don't count elderly found dead at home, like China, other see an opportunity to lock down and enforce big government, keep riots and disagreement of people boiling over years on the streets and people under control (France, Italy, Germany, Spain, Greece to name a few, the list is not complete) or get external funding and debt relief for failed politics like in some EU countries with high figures asking for Euro-bonds and refusing other more specific help, like Italy and Spain and the other southern countries. Greece and Italy see also a chance to use the lockdown and get the illegal migration pushed by Turkey nowadays under control without sacrificing the legend of an open society in Europe, so the population accepts the current measures more easily and the political elites can take a breath.

Others are so liberal, that they even refuse measures and don't count or test, hoping, it will work out, like Sweden, assuming elderly death as collateral damage and relief for the social system, by priorising health care help for the yonger if ressources become a problem. Of course the numbers here are probably much higher than published.

UK is difficult too, there are some measures, but also a lot of ignorance, I guess it is the Brexit battle that tears the country apart and prevents a consistent response.

There are too many politics involved to get a clear picture, every country treats its science personal differently and the WHO is rigged too.

So what numbers do you want to believe?

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

... It would be nice if the media, who love bigger numbers, would report the suspected cumulative number of infections worldwide is thought to be 10-25 million. That is likely more accurate than 2+ million confirmed cases suggest.
I wonder why no major media outlet has jumped on that bandwagon?

Every major news source is carrying stories about the difference between the number of recorded cases, and the likely actual infected numbers.
➥ https://www.google.com/search?client...onfirmed+cases


Until/unless we get vastly improved testing (near universal & accutate), any estimates of actual infection numbers is/are going to be very speculative. Some guesstimates will be much more informed, than others.


Worldometer is cited as a source in over 10,000 published books and in more than 6,000 professional journal articles and was voted as one of the best free reference websites by the American Library Association (ALA), the oldest and largest library association in the world.
➥ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Definitions and more from ➥ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/about/

Total Cases = reported total cumulative count of detected and laboratory (and sometimes, depending on the country reporting them and the criteria adopted at the time, also clinically) confirmed positive and sometimes - depending on the country reporting standards - also presumptive, suspect, or probable cases of detected infection. Because it represents a cumulative count (rather than a snapshot of the number of current cases at any given time), this number can't decrease. The size of the gap between detected (whether confirmed, suspect or probable) and reported cases versus actual cases will depend on the number of tests performed and on the country's transparency in reporting. Most estimates have put the number of undetected cases at several multiples of detected cases. See also: Change in US CDC "Case" and "Death" definition

Active Cases = (total cases) - (total deaths) - (recovered). This figure represents the current number of people detected and confirmed to be infected with the virus. This figure can increase or decrease, and represents an important metric for Public Health and Emergency response authorities when assessing hospitalization needs versus capacity.

Recoveries = this statistic is highly imperfect, because reporting can be missing, incomplete, incorrect, based on different definitions, or dated (or a combination of all of these) for many governments, both at the local and national level, sometimes with differences between states within the same country or counties within the same state. WHO recommends following the criteria of [symptoms resolve + 2 negative tests within 24 hours] or [symptoms resolve + additional 14 days], but this is only a recommendation. In some countries, when a patient is discharged from the hospital it is counted as "recovered" even if no test is performed. Some health officials now consider anyone who was diagnosed with COVID-19 three or more weeks ago and has not died to be recovered from the disease. In view of this, "Active Cases" and "Closed Cases Outcome" which both depend on the number of recoveries (in addition to an accurate death count and a satisfactory rate of case detection, both of which are lacking in the vast majority of countries) can be affected by this inherent flaw for many countries and for the total worldwide count.

Serious and Critical = similarly to recoveries, it is very imperfect, for many of the same reasons. When 99% of the cases were in China, the figure pretty much corresponded to the Chinese NHC's reported number of "severe" cases. Today, it represents for the most part the number of patients currently being treated in Intensive Care Unit (ICU), if and when this figure is reported.

Total Deaths = cumulative number of deaths among detected cases.

Reporting Issues

On a daily basis, we encounter an increasing number of reporting issues. Some of these include official governmental channels changing or retracting figures, or publishing contradictory data on different official outlets. National or State figures with old or incomplete data compared to regional, local (counties, in the US) government's reports is the norm, so we try to compensate by collecting the missing data and maintaining an accurate and timely count.

Below we are keeping a log with a partial list of errors, retractions, or major discrepancies (and their explanation) between our numbers and what users could see on other outlets, in the hope to clarify the many inquiries we receive:

[El Pinguino]

How many dead from Covid-19?

I think the most accurate figure is 'rather a lot'..

Small countries with good health care infrastructure such as Oz, Chile and NZ? The numbers are most likely quite accurate.

Many countries... Ecuador , much of Africa, Brasil? They aren't fudging the numbers... they just don't know...

[delmarrey]

Well, we have a lot of catching up to do so this can be a real pandemic.


.

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by delmarrey

Well, we have a lot of catching up to do so this can be a real pandemic.


.

Using this ridiculous metric, which ignores the definition of 'pandemic', life itself is the real pandemic, with, globally, over 55 million deaths annually.

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by fivecapes

^This

See countries below that have comparable/better ratios than China if normalized by no. of tests administered per capita

Taiwan
S. Korea
Germany
Canada
Japan
Hong Kong
Macau
New Zealand
Oz

They had the same information as everybody else back in January

And in the US, population about 330 million, there have been, according to the CDC*, as of yesterday, 353,000 tests. I'll leave it to those fixated on numbers to figure out that percentage, and its affect on effective modeling...

*https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...ing-in-us.html

Certainly seems that science trumps (pun definitely intended) feelings, beliefs or desires in actual outcomes.

Hey, let's get the country open again! The economy is suffering!


In case no-one's paying attention, the population is the economy...

[lestersails]

Hi All
You might be interested to see that cruising was the topic of a New York Times article today!
Les

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/18/s...gtype=Homepage

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

And in the US, population about 330 million, there have been, according to the CDC*, as of yesterday, 353,000 tests. I'll leave it to those fixated on numbers to figure out that percentage, and its affect on effective modeling...

*https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...ing-in-us.html

Certainly seems that science trumps (pun definitely intended) feelings, beliefs or desires in actual outcomes.

Hey, let's get the country open again! The economy is suffering!


In case no-one's paying attention, the population is the economy...

What I am really corious about is a comparison per country of deaths last year per month compared with death this year per month per country, then there may or may not be evidence of a deadly pandemic.

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by lestersails

Hi All
You might be interested to see that cruising was the topic of a New York Times article today!
Les

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/18/s...gtype=Homepage

Nice, news from Ocean Fox, Simon and Carla on their Lagoon 400. They have a YT channel and sail now the 2nd year and try to come back to Europe. Unfortunately the article is behind a pay wall.

[B23iL23]

I posted this in another thread..

When was the last time New York had 10,000 deaths from a virus in an 8 week period? Or the UK for that matter, or Italy with 22,000 deaths in 8 weeks.

The answer is never in the last 100 years. Forget about the rate per 1000, or the % tested and just look at the end result. You can have a bad winter fly bug but that has a death rate spread over may 5/6 months, not 8 weeks.

This is not the flu, it's not another winter bug. This thing will kill even healthy people and do so in vast numbers.

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

What I am really corious about is a comparison per country of deaths last year per month compared with death this year per month per country, then there may or may not be evidence of a deadly pandemic.

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by CatNewBee

Nice, news from Ocean Fox, Simon and Carla on their Lagoon 400. They have a YT channel and sail now the 2nd year and try to come back to Europe. Unfortunately the article is behind a pay wall.

I am a subscriber - but I thought that if you registered, you could look at up to ten articles a day free of charge?

[lestersails]

Hi Again,
Another source you might want to consider is FiveThirtyEight.com. This is primarily a sports statistics site run by Nate Silver, one of the original MoneyBall gurus, but they also do other good statistical analyses, including health and science. They are running periodic pieces on meta-analyses of epidemiology experts estimates of the outbreak. Yesterday's analysis is here:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-end-of-april/

Stay healthy out there!

[Exile]

Originally Posted by B23iL23

I posted this in another thread..

When was the last time New York had 10,000 deaths from a virus in an 8 week period? Or the UK for that matter, or Italy with 22,000 deaths in 8 weeks.

The answer is never in the last 100 years. Forget about the rate per 1000, or the % tested and just look at the end result. You can have a bad winter fly bug but that has a death rate spread over may 5/6 months, not 8 weeks.

This is not the flu, it's not another winter bug. This thing will kill even healthy people and do so in vast numbers.

You posted this in response to this interview with a leading Swedish epidemiologist: https://unherd.com/thepost/coming-up...of2YDemk9qL7d8. I don't think the legitimate questions you pose about the concentrated deaths CV-19 has produced in NY and other locales were answered in the interview. Instead, the interview was summarized as follows:

• UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based
• The correct policy is to protect the old and the frail only
• This will eventually lead to herd immunity as a “by-product”
• The initial UK response, before the “180 degree U-turn”, was better
• The Imperial College paper was “not very good” and he has never seen an unpublished paper have so much policy impact
• The paper was very much too pessimistic
• Any such models are a dubious basis for public policy anyway
• The flattening of the curve is due to the most vulnerable dying first as much as the lockdown
• The results will eventually be similar for all countries
• Covid-19 is a “mild disease” and similar to the flu, and it was the novelty of the disease that scared people.
• The actual fatality rate of Covid-19 is the region of 0.1%
• At least 50% of the population of both the UK and Sweden will be shown to have already had the disease when mass antibody testing becomes available