Coronavirus infection rate is still too high

[Javert]

So however uncomfortable it might be Sir Patric Vallance has quoted today that the real rate of infection 8000 per day so smurfy was right,also I standby my assertion that by govt policy whether cynical and by design or accidental then old persons lives were valued as less than the rest of the population.



It has now emerged that hospital discharges were made without covid testing of elderly but mainly non care home elderly people in to care homes thereby callously IMO introducing the virus in to those homes.



There is also evidence of bad practice of nhs hospitals conning care home that managers had agreed to accept people being discharged when in fact they hadn't.

Also I know for a fact that back when they were clearing the hospitals in March, at least some of the hospital doctors knew that the Covid tests had a very high false negative rate, so they also knew that even if they had tested people, it wouldn't have been a reliable indicator of lack of infection.



That said, it's in some ways hard to see what else they could have done if the person was fit for discharge, and I wonder if the real fault is more that the care homes were not receiving equal priority in warnings, training, and PPE.

[papasmurf]

Blimey is it only me that heard Vallance last night saying the true figure is around 8000 per day.

No it isn't only you,  the numbers given out by the government Pinocchio at the daily briefing are the result of test results NOT the national picture.

[cromwell]

Infections/day on the week to 24 June was running at 8k a day (as you say)



We also know the halving time for infections was put at about 14days and that was previous to the loosening of restrictions which would tend to increase the halving time.



From that it is unlikely that for this week ending 7th June, which would be a fortnight later, the infection rate is much below 4k a day.

Blimey is it only me that heard Vallance last night saying the true figure is around 8000 per day.

[BeElBeeBub]

No.

The ONS figures only were up to 24th May. I have no problem with their figures.

However, the figures I have given are within the last week, average 1881/day.



So believe what you want.

Infections/day on the week to 24 June was running at 8k a day (as you say)



We also know the halving time for infections was put at about 14days and that was previous to the loosening of restrictions which would tend to increase the halving time.



From that it is unlikely that for this week ending 7th June, which would be a fortnight later, the infection rate is much below 4k a day.

[cromwell]

So however uncomfortable it might be Sir Patric Vallance has quoted today that the real rate of infection 8000 per day so smurfy was right,also I standby my assertion that by govt policy whether cynical and by design or accidental then old persons lives were valued as less than the rest of the population.



It has now emerged that hospital discharges were made without covid testing of elderly but mainly non care home elderly people in to care homes thereby callously IMO introducing the virus in to those homes.



There is also evidence of bad practice of nhs hospitals conning care home that managers had agreed to accept people being discharged when in fact they hadn't.

[Javert]

Any oddness in the figures seems to be caused by different commentators mixing up the different figures and mixing up what they show.



So far, the positive daily/weekly/monthly number of infections is based on the number of tests made — max of 200,000+ a day — a rate at which it would take 9 months to test everyone in England just once.



While 200,000 people a day are being tested, there are other people among the wider population who are also becoming infected. They do not show up until they are tested. But estimates of infection rates for the whole population are made from the 200,000/day test results.



The main points of a currently cited pilot study quoted by the ONS on its gov.uk** site estimate that there were 54,000 new COVID-19 infections per week  — averaging 7,714 a day — in England between 11 and 24 May. These are the infection figures medics are using to make their judgements. Politicians might use others.

(The results of the next study are scheduled to be released on 4 June.)



** https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest#covid-19-infection-survey-data">https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... urvey-data">https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest#covid-19-infection-survey-data

It's not just that - certain figures that had been available daily were not available for a quite a few days until yesterday and no explanation was given.



Further, as I mentioned above, independent fact checkers who have analysed the data concluded that it's completely untrue to claim that 200k+ people per day are being tested.  The other bit I left out is that in some cases, they are counting the nose and throat swab on the same person as 2 separate tests.  



All of these ways of measuring things might be valid for some specific internal purposes within the process, but they should not be used as the headline metric for outside consumption.

[patman post]

There is something very odd going on with all those numbers at the moment, and I'm waiting again to see what independent fact checkers and statisticians can make of it.

Any oddness in the figures seems to be caused by different commentators mixing up the different figures and mixing up what they show.



So far, the positive daily/weekly/monthly number of infections is based on the number of tests made — max of 200,000+ a day — a rate at which it would take 9 months to test everyone in England just once.



While 200,000 people a day are being tested, there are other people among the wider population who are also becoming infected. They do not show up until they are tested. But estimates of infection rates for the whole population are made from the 200,000/day test results.



The main points of a currently cited pilot study quoted by the ONS on its gov.uk** site estimate that there were 54,000 new COVID-19 infections per week  — averaging 7,714 a day — in England between 11 and 24 May. These are the infection figures medics are using to make their judgements. Politicians might use others.

(The results of the next study are scheduled to be released on 4 June.)



** https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest#covid-19-infection-survey-data">https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... urvey-data">https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest#covid-19-infection-survey-data

[Javert]

No.

The ONS figures only were up to 24th May. I have no problem with their figures.

However, the figures I have given are within the last week, average 1881/day.



So believe what you want.

There is something very odd going on with all those numbers at the moment, and I'm waiting again to see what independent fact checkers and statisticians can make of it.



From what I can tell, for quite a few days they were completely unable to say how many people had been tested, whilst simultaneously claiming they were hitting all targets.



Then miraculously they announce they've hit the 200k tests target, but on closer inspection, yet again, they are trying the old "capacity" trick where they say "well theoretically we can do 200k tests".



As I've stated before several times, BBC's More or Less and several other independent bodies have concluded that there has not been a single day, ever, when the government even met he 100k tests target, let alone 200k, if you consider testing as being "testing 100 thousand people per day" (not my definition but the PM's definition).  This is because

- Most people would understand that to mean a completed test, not a test kit sent out in the post without any idea whether, or when, it will even be used.

- The test number includes nearly 30% of retests on the same person.

- It also includes thousands of tests that are being done for various research programs that arguably should not be part of the metric if the metric is to determine the effectiveness of actively controlling the virus.

[papasmurf]

No.

The ONS figures only were up to 24th May. I have no problem with their figures.

However, the figures I have given are within the last week, average 1881/day.



So believe what you want.

Are you being deliberately obtuse. The ONS figures for then will not be published. You are either being deliberately thick or you don't understand.

[patman post]

Bojo The Clown removed the travel distance restriction.

Some — including government advisors — didn't wait. Without condemning the blatant ignoring of the rules, Johnson was left just like Cnut the Great (unable to stem the tide of ignorance) and thus had his troops say all is safe until it's proved not to be. At which time he can then claim science dictated blah blah...

[Barry]

Sorry Barry but you are too scared to believe to ONS. The ONS figures are close enough to 8000 a day for me.

You hiding from the truth is like putting a blanket over your head to make you feel safe when there is a Tiger outside the tent.

If you disagree with the ONS take in up with them, and leave me alone it is you who are scared not me.

No.

The ONS figures only were up to 24th May. I have no problem with their figures.

However, the figures I have given are within the last week, average 1881/day.



So believe what you want.

[papasmurf]

Judging by the reports of overcrowding, excessive litter, and even moorland fires caused by barbecues, it's your fellow citizen who appear to be currently the most dangerous for you, not the authorities or government...

Bojo The Clown removed the travel distance restriction.

[papasmurf]

"Public health leaders join chorus of voices warning lockdown restrictions are being eased too quickly"  Hardly surprising after the chaos over the weekend.



More at link:-



https://www.itv.com/news/2020-06-01/public-health-leaders-join-chorus-of-voices-warning-lockdown-restrictions-are-being-eased-too-quickly/">https://www.itv.com/news/2020-06-01/pub ... o-quickly/">https://www.itv.com/news/2020-06-01/public-health-leaders-join-chorus-of-voices-warning-lockdown-restrictions-are-being-eased-too-quickly/



1 June 2020 at 9:29am



Directors of public health are the latest group to raise concern over the government's easing of lockdown restrictions in England.



A number of top scientists, who sit on Sage, the committee advising the government about the coronavirus pandemic, have already warned lockdown is being eased too fast.



Now the Association of Directors of Public Health (ADPH) have said they too are "increasingly concerned" about the relaxation of the rules.

[patman post]

Precisely. Until tests are freely available and the track and trace system is up and running, for people like me in the shielded group it is still far too dangerous to go off of my property. (I don't trust the government at all.)

Judging by the reports of overcrowding, excessive litter, and even moorland fires caused by barbecues, it's your fellow citizen who appear to be currently the most dangerous for you, not the authorities or government...

[papasmurf]

The figures you're stating are the results of a max of around 200,000 tests a day.

Extrapolate those results across the whole population with whatever caveats, tweets and models the virologist-statisticians use, and you'll get many times the test results...

Precisely. Until tests are freely available and the track and trace system is up and running, for people like me in the shielded group it is still far too dangerous to go off of my property. (I don't trust the government at all.)