Coronavirus Numbers Check My Sums

[Barquentine]

Population of China = 1.386 billion (2017 - Wikipedia).
Total reported infections in China = 80,282 (worldometers.info @ 4.3.2020 21:50)
80,282/1,386,000,000x100=0.006%

Population of UK = 67,767,425 (1st March 2020 (worldometers.info)
Projected infection rates based on China infection rate: 0.006% x 67,767,425 = 4,066 infections.

Why has the UK Govt used a 'worst case' projection of 80% of the UK population being infected? That figure is 13,333 times higher than China's actual infection rate?
Has the Govt got some 'alternative facts' that cut through Sinomendacity?

[Buenchico]

China is a massive country. It would probably make more sense to make comparisons between the UK (pop. 67.8m, area 242 sq km) and Hubei province (pop. 58.5m, area 186 sq km).

The incidence of Covid-19 within Hubei is much higher than within China as a whole. Further, it's not the current incidence that matters but the projected incidence. It's possible that it could well turn out to be extremely high.

Even so, it's probably still unlikely that 80% of the population (either in Hubei or in the UK) will contract Covid-19 but the whole point of 'worst case' scenarios is that they must look beyond what is statistically most likely to happen and focus on what could possibly just happen.

[jim360]

There can be no "facts" about the future. The worst case is just a projection. I'm not sure that the government is officially assuming that 80% could be affected, though -- I thought there were quoting 20% infection rate at a worst case. But we simply don't know.

I'd rather see the government overreact to the illness than to react too little.

[Buenchico]

The Chief Medical Officers still seem to be reasonably confident that the situation can be kept under control, while at the same time encouraging the Government to plan for all possibilities:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-from-the-four-uk-chief-medical-officers-on-novel-coronavirus

[THECORBYLOON]

Is the 80% figure not based upon no action being undertaken?

[douglas9401]

One of these days it will be proven that the sky is not falling.

Until then stand up straight and do what you're told.

[fiction-factory]

The 80% figure is just one of several scenarios that are to be planned for. It is the 'worst case scenario. The chances of it reaching 80% are very low indeed but it is better to have some sort of plan for each eventuality.
But the 0.006% figure you refer to is not a good planning assumption. If you take the UK for example and make a very rough estimate that the number of reported cases is doubling every 5 days, it wouldn't take many months for it to be at pretty scary levels.

[Old_Geezer]

Natural pessimism due to wanting to be ready for the worst.

[roopower]

We have to be prepared, its true, but 1.5 million people world wide died from TB in 2018 and 10 million fell ill. Fortunately cases in the UK aren't that scary

[Peter Pedant]

// There can be no "facts" about the future. //
Jim I keep on telling you to retrain in Law - you have the brains etc...

future facts come up in Law as in asbestos exposure for example. Fella OK now but whether or no he gets asbestosis and DIIIIIES ! is a future fact.

comes up in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McGhee_v_National_Coal_Board
brick dust causes dermatitis and if you are the lucky winner as a future fact you are allowed to walk across the guilty bridge and claim your pot of gold
there is also a bridge to no=moolah which is that you sould have got it anyway .... judges - fun people huh?

pandemic you are looking at 60% infection which for UK is around 36m, the vast majority will be mild 1% mortality is 360 k and 0,1% mortality is 36 000

around 500 000 people die anyway - so that is an uplift of 10%
at the end of this everyone says phew!
and the high ups give each other medals and enhanced pensions

[Peter Pedant]

// make a very rough estimate that the number of reported cases is doubling every 5 days,//

yeah I think people are turning up for their crap paid jobs because they need the moolah - called presenteeism

[jourdain2]

It's all guesses. The virus has mutated. Who knows? We lived through lots already. I suppose you have to operate on a 'worst case' premise, it's only sensible.

[Khandro]

Influenza stats;
'Since October, more than 4,000 people with confirmed flu have been admitted to hospitals in England with at least 70 deaths.'

[Barquentine]

I heard Prof Whitty yesterday say that planning here is based on 20% infection rate in Hubei province. Yet, at the same time, the BBC has some maps showing the Coronavirus spread in different countries (link below). This states as at 5 March 2020, Hubei Province has 'more than 67,000 cases'.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-51235105
So, say 70,000/58,500,000=0.12%.
Where does Whitty get this 20% Hubei figure? That would imply almost 12 million infected in Hubei. And 20% is 167 times higher than the current 0.12% figure in Hubei.
If 20% is a worst case projection for Hubei, why are they using 80% as a worst case projection for the UK? Is the Government privy to real as opposed to official Chinese figures? Something doesn't add up and it's not just my poor maths ability.

[jim360]

It may simply be deliberate over-caution. Also, even leaving aside the possibility that the figures in China are being misreported (as has been suspected but never established), the infection was only brought under control there using extreme measures that are unlikely to be replicated in the UK.

[Barquentine]

Listen to this from 20min 50secs to 21 min 10sec. Whitty says 'overall infection rate in Hubei'....20%. 20% of 58 million is NOT 67,000.

[Barquentine]

Sorry - forgot to include link:

[jim360]

Clearly not. You'd have to ask him what he was talking about, although possibly he's partly got in mind the (potentially quite large) number of people who carry the disease without showing any symptoms.

[Peter Pedant]

er what is your question?
why cant the experts sing from the same book ? - no one knows I suppose

whitty says the infection ration is 60% and in a year we find it is 40.5 or 33.2 - with a death ratio of 0,01 %
why couldnt he have got it more right? well hehad to guess.....

never bet on a horse the CMO tips I suppose