Post subject: Re: 6 players and 2 coaches tested POSITIVE for coronavirus
Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2020 3:32 pm
ccs
International Star
Joined: Aug 15 2011 Posts: 5318
MorningGlory23 wrote:Makes you wonder how easily transmitted the virus actually is, no Salford players have caught it so far!! Which seems strange considering the psychical contact of the game
12 players and staff contracting coronavirus suggests to me that it is highly contagious. (The current strain is much worse than the original.)
Salford's testing suggests that our players were not contagious during the game. That in turn could mean they didn't catch it until after the game, but testing positive less than 24 hours later seems a bit unlikely to me.
Is Hodgson the new Griffin, or is it all about pace?
Post subject: Re: 6 players and 2 coaches tested POSITIVE for coronavirus
Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2020 3:43 pm
MorningGlory23
Club Captain
Joined: Jun 12 2019 Posts: 964
ccs wrote:12 players and staff contracting coronavirus suggests to me that it is highly contagious. (The current strain is much worse than the original.)
Salford's testing suggests that our players were not contagious during the game. That in turn could mean they didn't catch it until after the game, but testing positive less than 24 hours later seems a bit unlikely to me.
Well I fully expect the whole off the Salford team and the rest of the hull team to test positive then or like you say we turned the contagious switch off for 80 mins during the game
Post subject: Re: 6 players and 2 coaches tested POSITIVE for coronavirus
Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2020 4:45 pm
bonaire
International Star
Joined: Apr 04 2014 Posts: 7795
MorningGlory23 wrote:Makes you wonder how easily transmitted the virus actually is, no Salford players have caught it so far!! Which seems strange considering the psychical contact of the game
Post subject: Re: 6 players and 2 coaches tested POSITIVE for coronavirus
Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2020 7:37 pm
Keiththered
International Star
Joined: Sep 07 2013 Posts: 1583
Large Paws wrote:Yes it does, but they are verifiable statistics are they not, and now you're being pedantic. Those statistics highlight that the virus is not as dangerous as first thought and as someone else has said, amongst those that did or didn't die in hospital because they had had a positive test in the previous 28 days it goes on the covid stats, regardless of whether they had recovered from it.
Not pedantic at all. Just like Trump you say what supports your argument whether it is the whole truth or not
Post subject: Re: 6 players and 2 coaches tested POSITIVE for coronavirus
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2020 6:50 am
Plum Bob
Club Captain
Joined: Apr 28 2016 Posts: 426
Large Paws wrote:I didn't say any had been quoted did I? I was referring to the statistics and facts that are readily available, to anyone with an internet connection, and which show that the virus isn't as deadly as first thought. I'll give you one STAT for starters. Up to the 31st July this year, there had only been 300 deaths recorded of a person under 60 years of age, from/with Covid, when no other condition/co-morbidity was present. So the FACT is that a healthy person who catches the virus is very unlikely to die from/with it..
“In April 2020 in England, 37.0% of all deaths occurring were a result of COVID-19. When broken down by sex, this was 41.6% of all deaths for males and 32.4% of all deaths for females. When looking at the proportion by age group, the highest proportion of deaths due to COVID-19 was in age group 75 to 84 years, with 40.1% of all deaths in this age group having an underlying cause of COVID-19. For males, the highest proportion of deaths due to COVID-19 was in age group 45 to 64 years (44.3%), whereas for females it was age group 75 to 84 years (36.5%).”
“ There were 33,841 deaths involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) that occurred between 1 March and 30 April 2020 registered up to 5 May 2020 in England and Wales; of these, 32,143 (95.0%) had COVID-19 assigned as the underlying cause of death.”
So up to April there were 33,841 deaths of which the highest proportion of deaths was in the age group 45 to 64 for males. Where does your figure of 300 deaths for those under 60 come from?
Large Paws wrote:I didn't say any had been quoted did I? I was referring to the statistics and facts that are readily available, to anyone with an internet connection, and which show that the virus isn't as deadly as first thought. I'll give you one STAT for starters. Up to the 31st July this year, there had only been 300 deaths recorded of a person under 60 years of age, from/with Covid, when no other condition/co-morbidity was present. So the FACT is that a healthy person who catches the virus is very unlikely to die from/with it..
“In April 2020 in England, 37.0% of all deaths occurring were a result of COVID-19. When broken down by sex, this was 41.6% of all deaths for males and 32.4% of all deaths for females. When looking at the proportion by age group, the highest proportion of deaths due to COVID-19 was in age group 75 to 84 years, with 40.1% of all deaths in this age group having an underlying cause of COVID-19. For males, the highest proportion of deaths due to COVID-19 was in age group 45 to 64 years (44.3%), whereas for females it was age group 75 to 84 years (36.5%).”
“ There were 33,841 deaths involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) that occurred between 1 March and 30 April 2020 registered up to 5 May 2020 in England and Wales; of these, 32,143 (95.0%) had COVID-19 assigned as the underlying cause of death.”
So up to April there were 33,841 deaths of which the highest proportion of deaths was in the age group 45 to 64 for males. Where does your figure of 300 deaths for those under 60 come from?
“In April 2020 in England, 37.0% of all deaths occurring were a result of COVID-19. When broken down by sex, this was 41.6% of all deaths for males and 32.4% of all deaths for females. When looking at the proportion by age group, the highest proportion of deaths due to COVID-19 was in age group 75 to 84 years, with 40.1% of all deaths in this age group having an underlying cause of COVID-19. For males, the highest proportion of deaths due to COVID-19 was in age group 45 to 64 years (44.3%), whereas for females it was age group 75 to 84 years (36.5%).”
“ There were 33,841 deaths involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) that occurred between 1 March and 30 April 2020 registered up to 5 May 2020 in England and Wales; of these, 32,143 (95.0%) had COVID-19 assigned as the underlying cause of death.”
So up to April there were 33,841 deaths of which the highest proportion of deaths was in the age group 45 to 64 for males. Where does your figure of 300 deaths for those under 60 come from?
The NHS data for deaths in hospital, follow the link provided in my post.
“In April 2020 in England, 37.0% of all deaths occurring were a result of COVID-19. When broken down by sex, this was 41.6% of all deaths for males and 32.4% of all deaths for females. When looking at the proportion by age group, the highest proportion of deaths due to COVID-19 was in age group 75 to 84 years, with 40.1% of all deaths in this age group having an underlying cause of COVID-19. For males, the highest proportion of deaths due to COVID-19 was in age group 45 to 64 years (44.3%), whereas for females it was age group 75 to 84 years (36.5%).”
“ There were 33,841 deaths involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) that occurred between 1 March and 30 April 2020 registered up to 5 May 2020 in England and Wales; of these, 32,143 (95.0%) had COVID-19 assigned as the underlying cause of death.”
So up to April there were 33,841 deaths of which the highest proportion of deaths was in the age group 45 to 64 for males. Where does your figure of 300 deaths for those under 60 come from?
The NHS data for deaths in hospital, follow the link provided in my post.
Post subject: Re: 6 players and 2 coaches tested POSITIVE for coronavirus
Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2020 7:54 am
Plum Bob
Club Captain
Joined: Apr 28 2016 Posts: 426
Large Paws wrote:The NHS data for deaths in hospital, follow the link provided in my post.
I posted mine before reading your later posts with the information. However, even then using the NHS statistics the deaths in your age range are still higher than the figure you quote.
Large Paws wrote:The NHS data for deaths in hospital, follow the link provided in my post.
I posted mine before reading your later posts with the information. However, even then using the NHS statistics the deaths in your age range are still higher than the figure you quote.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum