Do you know what the summer peak will be? Seems none of us do unless we are directly involved in treating patients, that is a key aspect of the phenomenon of this pandemic, clinicians perceptions of the reality have been very different to how it has been represented by officialising media.
I agree with this and your last post. Treatment would be eminently sensible if it were not for the criminal pretence, maintained by WHO and SAGE's around the world, that there are no effective treatments. All to support the emergency authorisation of a novel gene tretament.
And with ZOE's COVID symptom definitions now including hay fever unless hospitalisations are peaking there is not a genuine real peak.
Oh, and our new poster Lord Snooty seems to be determined to justify his username with his dismissive idiocy.
Do you know what the summer peak will be?
Well, that was our discussion. With respect to peak in growth , now I've put the newest data in, and the best idea I have of what the peak growth was 4 July, approx 400,000 existing cases, growing at 14,000 per day. Growth continues but more slowly, newest zoe figures suggest 11,000 cases per day. Here's the plot
none of us do unless we are directly involved in treating patients
So growth is slowing, it's unknowable how quickly it will turn negative, previous such events have turned very quickly, see the very first plot. Previously, several times, the turn has taken one week.
clinicians perceptions of the reality have been very different to how it has been represented by officialising media.
Diverse clinicians each have their own anecdotal notions that are hard to assemble into data. Anyway, that's the picture from the ZOE app data. It will be very interesting too see how it looks this time next week.
Treatment would be eminently sensible if it were not for the criminal pretence, maintained by WHO and SAGE's around the world, that there are no effective treatments. All to support the emergency authorisation of a novel gene treatment.
I'm only discussing rates of change in ZOE, not absolute case counts, variation. I doubt there is a sudden change underway in hay fever. So that point is invalid.
Remember Zoe changed its methodology lately where even runny nose/headache can get classed as covid. That wont help.
The same phenomenon is seen in other data, more later….
I won't comment otherwise except to say that in the past, zoe has been quite precise at pin pointing the peaks, i.e. sensitive to changes in the trend. In such a plot, the absolute numbers are less important.
A better analogue here would be look at India.
When 617.2 appeared it ripped through then dropped back. It took roughly 7 weeks to rise and a further 7 to fall naturally.
well our rip of the 617.2 started on May 25, which is 44 days ago, let's call it 5 days shy of 7 weeks. Isn't that a cosmic coincidence? I will be impressed by zoe if, by next week, it shows -ve growth. time will tell….
quote]
Its quite possible that's what we've been seeing here in which case you'd expect the peak in 2-3 weeks or so time.
we've already had 7 weeks, with the damn indian/delta variant , near enough...
A much higher R0 meaning it rips through available hosts rapidly, runs out and drops off just as rapidly vs wild type.
I hope you are correct about the last part.
I suspect the UK peak/predictions were messed up by 617.2 slowly replacing good old .117 in frequency so muddled up the data somewhat in terms of rates.
We effectively had 2 separate disease curves being merged into one at that point.
Nothing is carved in stone then. Coronavirus really likes sudden changes in direction, it has demonstrated that many times, it often does not do slow artistic, graceful turns, it turns on you suddenly in 180 degree about-faces. That is why it is so fearsome. It infects its victims, then suddenly disappears into a void. No wonder people turn to conspiracy theories, it works like an algorithm using random numbers.
It's very mysterious.
Maybe public health should focus on treatments, prevention appears to be just a medium for powerful interests to pursue political ends by other means.
It depends on the type of powerful interest. For example, the tobacco industry decried cancer prevention for decades, and the asbestos industry did similarly. There are many more similar example such as Associated Octel, who still make the world's supply of lead additive for petrol, in Ellsemere port/ Liverpool. Sometimes prevention means reducing demand or supply for a dangerous thing.Sometimes, as with childhood vaccination, prevention means priming the immune system, or providing dietary vitamins . Sometimes, in similar way, it is effected using fluoridation, or chlorination etc. Other times, the target is some virus, when the reach for solution usually means vaccination. You are right that the world needs to develop ways to regulate public health bodies.
Public health bodies believe they are great and good. They automatically assume it is their role to regulate everybody else, they are not told that they are to be the subject of regulation. If we do Build back better, we'll need to establish regulators for Public health bodies, to keep them straight. That should be priority 1, since there is so much to win or lose. For example, it is not wrong for a commercial organisation to sit on helpful information, their job is to make profits. But the free market profit motive does not lead automatically to good moral behaviour. there does not appear to be a simple way to enforce good moral behaviour on firms, or anything else. Endless reams of red tape is often unhelpful in other ways. It's real toughie.
