South African Covid-19 News and Discussions 3

[daveza]

Flu shot costs R50. This vaccine isn't going to be 50 bucks

And you need it twice.

Some people haven't worked since March, they don't have a cent to pay for vaccines.

 

[MiW]

And you need it twice.

Some people haven't worked since March, they don't have a cent to pay for vaccines.

Governments supposedly will cover it.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Governments supposedly will cover it.

Not ours.... We don't have money remember

 

[Paulsie]

Not ours.... We don't have money remember

Considering the solidarity fund pays
the supplier, it should be free. Going forward, with the NHI - private medical aids will pay for all.

 

[Grant]

When our vaccines eventually arrive, what's the cost and who pays ?

I suspect govt will pay, but that will come with the joys of going to govt run clinics.
Otherwise private medical aid, for those with cover.

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

Not ours.... We don't have money remember

Well, we do have money for this vaccination programme, except that it's all going to SOEs (SAA R10.5 billion alone), corruption and civil servants' salaries.

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

DA also fighting to open beaches in the EC: https://www.news24.com/citypress/ne...ourt-to-challenge-closure-of-beaches-20201217

 

[Kusana]

I have just done an analysis on the SA data (such as it is) that never occured to me do before. I looked at the percentage of daily mortalities in relation to the number of new daily cases that were reported two weeks before. A reasonable assumption I think? Anecdotal reports suggest it is about right and our cases peaked on the 24th of July but deaths peaked on the 8th of August so that fits as well.

But here's the interesting thing, the ratio seems to be getting steadily worse. Back at the peak the fatalities were about 2 or 2.5% of the identified cases. Currently we are sitting at over 6%.

What gives? I thought treatments had got steadlly better. Not worse. Can anyone offer an explanation?

If that ratio is sustained, based on the new cases that have been reported in the last few days, by early in January we are going to see daily deaths in the 700 per day plus mark. The government is going to freak out.

 

[Grant]

Perhaps the fatalities are related to specific regions - some have more resources than others?

 

[Paulsie]

I have just done an analysis on the SA data (such as it is) that never occured to me do before. I looked at the percentage of daily mortalities in relation to the number of new daily cases that were reported two weeks before. A reasonable assumption I think? Anecdotal reports suggest it is about right and our cases peaked on the 24th of July but deaths peaked on the 8th of August so that fits as well.

But here's the interesting thing, the ratio seems to be getting steadily worse. Back at the peak the fatalities were about 2 or 2.5% of the identified cases. Currently we are sitting at over 6%.

What gives? I thought treatments had got steadlly better. Not worse. Can anyone offer an explanation?

If that ratio is sustained, based on the new cases that have been reported in the last few days, by early in January we are going to see daily deaths in the 700 per day plus mark. The government is going to freak out.

A lot more pressure on hospitals (specially public health) as this time round, people are far more complacent (less hygiene) and alcohol is allowed. You will find that high care has far more patients in from alcohol related incidents than back then.

 

[Leno]

I have just done an analysis on the SA data (such as it is) that never occured to me do before. I looked at the percentage of daily mortalities in relation to the number of new daily cases that were reported two weeks before. A reasonable assumption I think? Anecdotal reports suggest it is about right and our cases peaked on the 24th of July but deaths peaked on the 8th of August so that fits as well.

But here's the interesting thing, the ratio seems to be getting steadily worse. Back at the peak the fatalities were about 2 or 2.5% of the identified cases. Currently we are sitting at over 6%.

What gives? I thought treatments had got steadlly better. Not worse. Can anyone offer an explanation?

If that ratio is sustained, based on the new cases that have been reported in the last few days, by early in January we are going to see daily deaths in the 700 per day plus mark. The government is going to freak out.

Short answer:

We are not testing enough, with +- 20% positive test rate and public testing limited to people with symptoms the death rate will go up. We are missing thousands of cases which are not fatal

You have to treat SA stats as being very rough, only stats that could be worthwhile is excess deaths

 

[Cage Rattler]

Interesting we never see racial group breakdown of figures since we do for almost everything else in this country. Was speaking to one of the researchers on the medical council and she said people would be quite surprised with those stats...

 

[Lupus]

Short answer:

We are not testing enough, with +- 20% positive test rate and public testing limited to people with symptoms the death rate will go up. We are missing thousands of cases which are not fatal

You have to treat SA stats as being very rough, only stats that could be worthwhile is excess deaths

You know PCR testing isn't designed for mass testing right? You're saying there is a 20% positive rate, there is more likely only 10% as the PCR test can and does pick up the virus when it's been dead up to 80 days. So thats someone who had the virus 3 months ago still testing positive.

 

[Geoff.D]

Interesting we never see racial group breakdown of figures since we do for almost everything else in this country. Was speaking to one of the researchers on the medical council and she said people would be quite surprised with those stats...

The figures are available but it is considered inappropriate to publish stats. The question is what are you trying to prove?
What is your motive?
If you do want to do the analysis, make sure you take into account the demographics otherwise the outcome will just be the obvious.

 

[Geoff.D]

I have just done an analysis on the SA data (such as it is) that never occured to me do before. I looked at the percentage of daily mortalities in relation to the number of new daily cases that were reported two weeks before. A reasonable assumption I think? Anecdotal reports suggest it is about right and our cases peaked on the 24th of July but deaths peaked on the 8th of August so that fits as well.

But here's the interesting thing, the ratio seems to be getting steadily worse. Back at the peak the fatalities were about 2 or 2.5% of the identified cases. Currently we are sitting at over 6%.

What gives? I thought treatments had got steadlly better. Not worse. Can anyone offer an explanation?

If that ratio is sustained, based on the new cases that have been reported in the last few days, by early in January we are going to see daily deaths in the 700 per day plus mark. The government is going to freak out.

It proves that the health system is not able to cope. It shows the failure of LDs even in the much vaunted reason of allowing the health system to prepare and be ready. It shows that notwithstanding better treatment regimes being available, these are not being implemented especially in public hospitals.

I have been doing a similar analysis since the start and I see the same pattern emerging.

 

[noxibox]

Those numbers accurate? Wow KZN more than doubling in a day

Unfortunately the numbers don't mean much. The days when more tests get done they produce higher numbers. They then stoke the fear fire. Completely quiet on days when the numbers drop. See any headlines when the Western Cape's active cases dropped? Or when the overall positivity rate for South Africa was on a downward trend for a whole week?

South Africa's positivity rate is too high. Even 10% is too high. But test results are also going to be messed up by testing the general population, i.e. people you have no reason to suspect might be infected. The more you do that the more the false positives creep in. Even testing asymptomatic people is more likely to give false positives. The numbers aren't as simple as they appear.

The whole beach thing is just window dressing.

 

[noxibox]

The figures are available but it is considered inappropriate to publish stats. The question is what are you trying to prove?
What is your motive?
If you do want to do the analysis, make sure you take into account the demographics otherwise the outcome will just be the obvious.

For some it would be to try to assign blame. From my perspective it would be that blanket interventions are pointless, especially when they fail to address the real reasons why specific areas have most of the infections. And not even because the people there are wilfully ignoring safety rules. But the truth is the government has no means to correct the biggest risk factors, so they'll keep doing what looks like doing something no matter how much harm it causes.

 

[Gerry]

 

[Dan C]

View attachment 978084

Is that in Brazil ?

 

[CataclysmZA]

What gives? I thought treatments had got steadlly better. Not worse. Can anyone offer an explanation?

If that ratio is sustained, based on the new cases that have been reported in the last few days, by early in January we are going to see daily deaths in the 700 per day plus mark. The government is going to freak out.

A pharmacist friend of mine who is making home visits decked out in full PPE says that the people he's seeing now are getting sicker faster and for longer. His oxygen supplies are depleted, and his oxygen concentrators are all in for repairs. The second wave is reaching people who were protected with the first lockdowns, and this may be mostly due to family visits during the holidays. Cases in retirement communities are also on the rise as kids visit their grandparents.

As for the death rate, that's expected as our case numbers have almost doubled from November, and daily new cases are in the 22% range now.

there is more likely only 10% as the PCR test can and does pick up the virus when it's been dead up to 80 days. So thats someone who had the virus 3 months ago still testing positive.

This would only apply for people who are testing because they are symptomatic, so the point still stands that we're seeing a doubling in the infection/positivity rate.

That high of a number, even with PCR tests that have ~70% confidence levels, tells you that there are many more cases that you're not catching.