Chopping and changing of CV stats counting, confusing.

[Lencoboy]

I know I may sound a bit on the negative side here, but I (an no doubt many others) am finding the frequent 'chopping and changing' of CV stats here in the UK every few days extremely confusing to say the least. Yesterday they said that the number of both newly confirmed CV cases and fatalities had slowed a bit, or at least levelled off for three consecutive days, and now there is mention of the ONS coming on board and adding further to the stats, with deaths occurring (and having occurred) in non-hospital environments. Not to mention the fact that changes were already made last Thursday (26th March) to include the full 24-hour period instead of the previous 12-hour period, which could very well have been one of the factors responsible for the sudden 'jump' in both CV-related deaths and newly-confirmed 'active' cases, and now this added on top.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not in anyway complaining, just extremely miffed.

[Scass]

I seem to remember this happening with China too. It’s really sad isn’t it.

[Lencoboy]

I suppose it's in order to try and make the stats more representative.

Mind you, this latest 'record jump' in new cases and deaths reported by the press will obviously make for more exciting reading as usual, as far as editorial teams are concerned.

[Lencoboy]

There seems to be a lot of inconsistency on the reporting of all of this at the moment as some sources have suggested that the record rises of both CV cases and deaths since yesterday were could have been partly attributed to the changes in the way the stats are counted, whilst others just seem to be stating them on a 'face value' basis with no real explanation, as if it is a genuine 'record jump' in actual cases/deaths and inadvertently having digs at the authorities, etc. Even the BBC seem to be at it ATM. So confusing.

[Pamplemousse]

There seems to be a lot of inconsistency on the reporting of all of this at the moment as some sources have suggested that the record rises of both CV cases and deaths since yesterday were could have been partly attributed to the changes in the way the stats are counted, whilst others just seem to be stating them on a 'face value' basis with no real explanation, as if it is a genuine 'record jump' in actual cases/deaths and inadvertently having digs at the authorities, etc. Even the BBC seem to be at it ATM. So confusing.

Even bigger rises today: 4,324/563. The inconsistency of how they are counting these is a problem.

[Lencoboy]

Even bigger rises today: 4,324/563. The inconsistency of how they are counting these is a problem.

That's exactly the problem all along, as nothing really seem to be telling us as to whether it's genuine or accountable for the latest changes, it's all seemingly very vague.

Sadly it's even more fodder for both the media and certain factions of our society who seem to revel in the 'worst-case scenario' narratives, CV or not.

Anyway, I'll shut up now!

[glassgirlw]

Quite honestly over here in the states I’ve just stopped looking at the numbers. We know it’s going to continually rise over the next few weeks so I’m hoping that as it does, if I don’t focus so much on the numbers maybe it will keep my anxiety a little more in line over it all. Maybe not, but we’ll see.

[Lencoboy]

Quite honestly over here in the states I’ve just stopped looking at the numbers. We know it’s going to continually rise over the next few weeks so I’m hoping that as it does, if I don’t focus so much on the numbers maybe it will keep my anxiety a little more in line over it all. Maybe not, but we’ll see.

And here they still seem to be downplaying the total recovery rates, as if there is some kind of hidden agenda involved (which I could be completely wrong, of course), and at the expense of many people's mental health.

[Call me Edwin]

The "recovery stats" in the UK of 135, or 179 if you prefer, are completely unrealistic.
For example, we know that Prince Charles has recovered. So has TV newsreader George Alagiah (in spite of 6 years of chemo!) These are people who have definitely tested positive. So 2 out of the 179 who have "recovered" are celebrities while none of the 2,000 dead are celebrities? It doesn't bear scrutiny. Theferore, a LOT more people have recovered, including tens of thousands who have self-isolated and so were never diagnosed.

[Gary A]

Recent studies have suggested that as much as 50% of people infected with Covid-19 show no symptoms. The data was studied from cruise ships, which of course meant everyone on board was tested. Consistently this has shown that 50% of infected individuals show no obvious symptoms.

You can absolutely apply that to general population. Factor in “mild” cases which don’t require hospitalisation, then apply asymptomatic cases and that number is actually going to be quite staggering.

It’s actually very intuitive when you think about it. The rate of spread of infection is absolutely mind boggling, it really is utterly plausible to think that there were huge volumes of people walking around with this virus that didn’t even know it. How else could it spread so rapidly and go so undetected?

I really am interested to see the results of antibody testing here in the UK and elsewhere.