Should be far fewer people out and about this coming week, weather's gonna change.
Good news - the government is also apparently working with farmers to encourage furloughed workers to help with harvests.
At least it'll be good practice for next year I suppose...
How much has the UK's weather and its effects on activity levels been taken into consideration with CV19 statistics / projections?
No weather on my analysis. There might be some in the seasonal modelling as contact patterns change with seasons. That work was done by a former colleague, Mark Lipsitch at Harvard.
I’m struggling with the gruaniad outrage. If they concentrated their ire at PHE and testing, I would have more sympathy.
I'm inclined to agree - lots of smoke and mirrors to distract us from the practical failings.
If they concentrated their ire at PHE and testing, I would have more sympathy.
The decision to restrict testing to hospital cases was made because of the ‘science’ from Sage.
No the decision to restrict capacity of testing was down to PHE not recognising other lab competence and wanting to keep it centralised, hugely rationing availability (so who would you test?). Then importing antibody tests that they decided have no use (except they would have been fine to do a population survey, just not individual use). This failure has set back decision making about a month. Then having to rely on the public sector (AZ/GSK) to come to the rescue for PCR testing. Most people don’t know that Alderley Park is AZ’s old R&D site.
SAGE have based their recommendations on what is possible. But with the testing limitations, that’s having one arm behind your back.
This is where we are failing. Forget Cummings and SAGE it’s a distraction. On the plus side, I think that the ventilator challenge and Nightingale hospitals are a success. One delivers CPAP and more supply, the other insurance if everything went pear shaped. Who WANTS to claim on their insurance? So credit where it’s due. But testing is a shambles. And they know it.
The decision to move from ‘delay’ to ‘contain’ and the ending of testing people in their homes was announced by the government, and the advice from Sage was cited as the reason for the change at that time. Later failures to ramp up testing look to be partly the result of the mishandling you point out, but I was referring to way back when…
(12 March according to a Guardian timeline)
The decision to move from ‘delay’ to ‘contain’ and the ending of testing people in their homes was announced by the government, and the advice from Sage was cited as the reason
Did you not see TiReds comment
SAGE have based their recommendations on what is possible. But with the testing limitations, that’s having one arm behind your back.
I meant ‘contain’ to ‘delay’… of course.
Yes, I read what Tired said, and agree, that a limit on the number of available tests had/has to have a bearing on what Sage could and can advise… but the decision not to take a test/track/contain route back in March was taken by the government based on Sage advice, which was valued as ‘impartial’, when many at the time where saying that it was the wrong decision (WHO for example). It looked at the time that the science was being cherry picked to suit the views of Cummings and Warner… and that’s why the revelation that they were part of Sage… smells dodgy.
What qualified these two to be part of SAGE?
Personally, I think the decisions on lockdown were largely taken based on the acceptance in other countries. Sure there were recommendations, but it got to the point where the decision would be based on “why aren’t you when every else is”.
But testing is something we had within PHE circle of control. And they absolutely failed. And that has set us back in our knowledge and capability. We will pay for that failure as we decide to unlock.
It’s like flying a plane on instruments and coming into land. We don’t have a functioning altimeter and don’t know the cloud cover. We’re doing Ok in the cloud with some info, but it’s landing time. Dan will appreciate that analogy.
I’m not talking about ‘lockdown’ timing, I’m talking about the decision to stop testing outside hospitals. Testing and contact tracing is needed no matter what social distancing measures are introduced or removed, and when. Hancock has been doing the rounds stressing this himself this past week. Now go back to the second week in March… when the government announced that it would be stopping this, based on the advice from Sage… that private advice ran contrary to public advice from others (see back in this thread) and ‘coincidently’ in line with the views of Cummings and Warner about herd immunity.
Probably true, but largely academic because sheer case numbers would rapidly have swamped PHE capability if we carried on tracing cases as they were doubling in the U.K. every 2 days. If we had been in South Korea, or perhaps, Germany, Then I think this would have been material. But I still believe capacity basically tied our hands. Not calling for help until some arbitrary impossible test/day target was blurted has have helped. But Germany went full devolved testing from the outset. South Korea already had their system in place. Nobody else has really done any better. But I think PHE are the likely villains here. I also think they know it too.
The notion of herd immunity was founded on a belief that this looked a lot like influenza. In fact it was spreading much faster than the models (of influenza) will have predicted (from limited Wuhan data). So I’m not surprised that proposal changed. It’s a good job it did, or we’d be at perhaps 40k deaths already and looking foolish. I don’t have any qualms about the pattern of policy per se, just testing.
This is popping up on social media now as evidence of the Government’s master plan.
It’s pretty simplistic though & doesn’t really explain how countries that had earlier lockdowns have faired better though.
I don’t have any qualms about the pattern of policy per se, just testing.
Recent policy? I agree entirely. Would we have moved to those policies sooner without Cummings and Warner being in SAGE…? And what were their qualifications to be part of it? Those are my questions. I agree with you entirely about mistakes made trying to have centralised rather than distributed testing, and that being on PHE’s hands. But that is a different issue to how government policy at a critical juncture was based on ‘science’ coming from Sage that was (apparently, we never got to read it) at odds with scientists outside it, but inline with the views of Cummings and Warner who for some reason were (secretly) inside it.
Tbh just comes across a little pro government, anti media.
What do I know though.
Those simplified graphs also assume that the same number of people will be infected no matter what measures are taken. Useful for explaining the “flatten the curve” theory… but still has a bit of the “herd immunity” rather than “buying us time to understand this virus better” going on. It is not preordained that a huge proportion of the population can and must get this virus… slow it, contain it, starve it… and wait… work is going on everywhere, at speed, to find us ways of treating sufferers more successfully and/or vaccinating* away possible new hosts without exposing them naturally to the virus.
[ I don’t just mean using vaccinations here of course, I’m using “vaccinating” as short hand for any way of building up a level of immunity without uncontrolled exposure to the virus ]
Hmm that lockdown timing...
If you remember a lot of companies actually instigated work from home prior to the government recommendations.
You can see how the 'scientific advice' to abandon testing and tracing could come about. If PHE insists on being the testing provider and then says it hasn't the capacity to continue the approach, SAGE advice might well end up being to give up on test and trace because it is just not deliverable.
SAGE should be grown up enough to recognise there is capacity beyond PHE but in other contexts there's been a tendency not to want to use resources that sit outside the Government domain, rather than say 'OK, we need a national effort. All hands to the pumps'.
I also feel that the politicians, who are in a really hard place, are trying to hide behind 'science'. They want the science to be black or white, right or wrong, whereas it is actually incomplete, inexact and evolving. Ultimately the politicians are the decision makers- they are quick enough to remind people of that when it suits- and they shouldn't forget what the A in SAGE stands for.
BBC news feed tells us to rejoice as Boris is back to lift the lockdown just like Italy are doing and New Zealand. FFS I've always supported the bbc but in the last month they have tipped over the edge for me. Completely ****ing stupid reporting that misses out key facts and ignores a load of other shit.
aa - where on BBC news feed does it say rejoice or otherwise tell us to be happy about johnson's return?
In the past month they have been consistent; maybe it's you who's tipped over the edge.
It's reporting is pure factual - johnson is returning to work to lead covid-19 response.
Spain and Italy are reducing their lockdown to about what we have now, bars and restaurants will be allowed to do takeaway, for example, 1hr outside exercise. Italian children will return to school in September. What do you think we’ll do?
They want the science to be black or white, right or wrong, whereas it is actually incomplete
Science advice is almost always equivocal.
That YouTube video posted earlier is bollocks. It only applies if you are looking to achieve herd immunity. If they’d applied the measures mid Feb and kept R0<1, then it would have never taken off and we might have got away with a few hundred deaths. We’ll likely end up with around 40K dead after the first peak and we’ll effectively just be putting ourself back in the position we were in, in Feb. I.e the virus at large in the community, no discernible ‘herd’ immunity and ready to pounce if we don’t keep the measures in place.
We’ll likely end up with around 40K dead after the first peak and we’ll effectively just be putting ourself back in the position we were in, in Feb. I.e the virus at large in the community, no discernible ‘herd’ immunity and ready to pounce if we don’t keep the measures in place.
problem is that we can't be certain herd immunity is inevitable, and that 40k dead doesn't tell us what proportion of the population might have had it & is potentially immune.
We can infer it, but still a gamble.
You've also got to look at the number of people who have had it & may need longer term rehab .
With a massive test track & trace programme set up could we shut down the 2nd wave too?
problem is that we can’t be certain herd immunity is inevitable,
It may be inevitable but the opportunity costs may also be unpalatable.
I believe the German experience bears out the effects of very early intervention. A 25% difference and six doubling times gives a 3.8x difference. That’s huge, but that’s how exponential processes work.
Our friends down under look to have avoided any significant deaths...
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/new-zealand/
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/australia/
Does anyone know at what stage they introduced lockdown?
Re new Zealand
They had their first confirmed case same time as us
But (like Germany) they started checking incoming flights for ill people in feb (we're still not doing this?)
They also stopped big outdoor gatherings going ahead in early march & said anyone arriving into country had to isolate for 14 days or face deportation (this must have helped)
Lockdown came about same time as UK but
Interestingly announced bailout package before lockdown, which helped them look in control, compared to sunak having to constantly revise govs plan
Was explained quite nicely in their infographic government put out
They introduced limited restrictions much earlier & heavy restrictions about same time, as well as let test , track & trace going throughout
https://shorthand.radionz.co.nz/coronavirus-timeline/
Spain and Italy are reducing their lockdown to about what we have now
Exactly bbc, missed that fact on their live feed this am.
Our friends down under look to have avoided any significant deaths…
19 wasnt it? Beeb missed that fact too on their live feed, just reported that all 3 were lifting or talking of lifting lockdown restrictions. Context is everything here and they added none.
Does anyone know at what stage they introduced lockdown?
Before the virus took hold clearly and they also tested tested tested as WHO advised.
Seems to have been well handled by New Zealand, although very different nation to us in terms of geography, population density and volume of international travel in and out.
Lessons to learn from I hope, but not necessarily a stick to beat ourselves with.
A-A
All those facts are or have been in the full BBC reports, not the snapshots/headlines you are talking about.
Step away from the media for a couple of hours and just try and chill. You're sounding very panicky this morning.
Step away from the media for a couple of hours and just try and chill. You’re sounding very panicky this morning
Not panicked at all but just annoyed by shit journalism.
All those facts are or have been in the full BBC reports, not the snapshots/headlines you are talking about.
Which most people wont read.
Scroll down for Europe wide country-by-country comparison.
It looks like the UK has managed to be the worst of all of them:
https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps
I think you mean England. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland get their own graphs.
Surely you can’t tell anything until it’s all over in a few years time?
There are plenty of glaring errors for sure, but absolute numbers at this stage in the pandemic really don’t mean anything.
The message all along has been flatten the curve to avoid breaching NHS capacity. We’ve done that.
What happens next is key.
Squash it to a low level of new cases, which we can then contact trace & quarantine. That must surely be easier if 15% of the population have antibodies than if only 1% do?
Hands up who believes China is managing to run all its factories without any new transmission? Data is only as good as the input.
The message all along has been flatten the curve to avoid breaching NHS capacity. We’ve done that.
What happens next is key.
Squash it to a low level of new cases, which we can then contact trace & quarantine. That must surely be easier if 15% of the population have antibodies than if only 1% do?
Yay herd immunity is back
Squash it to a low level of new cases, which we can then contact trace & quarantine. That must surely be easier if 15% of the population have antibodies than if only 1% do?
Only if we have tested and recorded a significant number of thosecwith disease or anti bodies.
Not panicked at all but just annoyed by shit journalism.
This x10^n, where n is not small.
Be under no illusions, we will do what others have done. It's not herd immunity, it's herd decision-making 😉 . I don't have much of an issue with that though. Italy and Spain were both badly affected, we acted to prevent us being the same (or worse). We'll come out of it the same way. Then there can be little debate other than "why aren't we like Germany?".
I can confidently predict that we will not have herd immunity by passive epidemic control. The opportunity cost is too high.
Lockdown came about same time as UK but
Re NZ. Time is not the key point, timing is the key point, they did it earlier and harder.
The message all along has been flatten the curve to avoid breaching NHS capacity. We’ve done that.
The curve will, by definition flatten but some countries started earlier and there peak was much much lower. Yes we have just about allowed the NHS to cope by pretty much stopping all other health care but 20 000+ deaths in UK hospitals so far does not look like a good outcome compared to Germany does it. Either our government are fully in control and this is the outcome they waanted or they were asleep at the wheel in Feb and March, as ever with Tories its hard to be sure of which!
It’s reporting is pure factual – johnson is returning to work to lead covid-19 response.
Not quite - it said "Boris Johnson's return to work 'a boost for the country' "
Re NZ. Time is not the key point, timing is the key point, they did it earlier and harder.
NZ doesn't have anything like the population density of England or the same number of air passengers travelling into or through it. It's very easy to cherry-pick NZ as an exemplar when the fact is there are other reasons they have fared so well this (first) wave.
NZ doesn’t have anything like the population density of England or the same number of air passengers travelling into or through it
What is it, 3million with 1 million in and around Dorkland? It also has a massive tourist industry. I think what it did, has had a bigger effect on its outcome than anything else, they have had roughly 1000x less deaths than us lets not forget.
It’s very easy to cherry-pick NZ as an exemplar when the fact is there are other reasons they have fared so well this (first) wave
I wasnt I was trying to explain why NZ is a very poor exemplar for the bbc to use on when to reduce lockdown here. Germany is far better example.
DrJ - that's a long way short of saying'....rejoice, rejoice'.
New Zealand gets something around 3.9 million visitors per year compared to 37 million for the UK.
Boris this morning: "I know there will be many people looking at our apparent success".
It's clearly about perception management not science that's why he's surrounded himself with Cummings, Halpern and Levido. David King was shocked by the MO of this government.
