Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Vaccine passports – the first major political divide in the fight against COVID? – politicalbetting.

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited April 1 in General
imageVaccine passports – the first major political divide in the fight against COVID? – politicalbetting.com

After more than a year when there has been broad political support for the anti-COVID strategy it looks as though the idea of vaccine passports could become the first party political issue with both the LAB and LD leaders opposing.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,560
    test
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 657
    The test worked, Mike. I expect you want a little piece of card to prove it....
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,914
    Ye Olde ID cards debate (albeit with another name).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,600
    Reading through the last thread, has anyone actually seen any concrete proposals, or is it all just media kite-flying at this stage?

    I suspect people would answer the question very differently, depending on exactly what was being proposed.

    Good on the opposition parties for this one, it’s the sort of issue where there will be enough of a rebellion on the government side, to make winning votes for some of the more ludicrous schemes difficult.
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    edited April 1
    If you feel like wasting time then try this. Steer your ship through the Suez Canal:

    https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2021/03/cnnix-steership/

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962
    Sandpit said:

    Reading through the last thread, has anyone actually seen any concrete proposals, or is it all just media kite-flying at this stage?

    I suspect people would answer the question very differently, depending on exactly what was being proposed.

    Good on the opposition parties for this one, it’s the sort of issue where there will be enough of a rebellion on the government side, to make winning votes for some of the more ludicrous schemes difficult.

    YouGov is doing a detailed survey on this.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962
    Fewer than a quarter of people in the UK with Covid symptoms are requesting a test, while only half say they are fully self-isolating after symptoms develop, researchers have found.

    People in the UK must self-isolate for 10 days if they have Covid, with the period beginning from the onset of symptoms or, if there are no symptoms, from the day of a positive test result.

    However, data from the Covid-19 rapid survey of adherence to interventions and responses (Corsair) study, conducted by researchers from institutions including King’s College London, Public Health England and University College London and published in the BMJ, suggests compliance is far from universal.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962
    BREAKING: Former US vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has tested positive for Covid-19 and has urged people to take steps to guard against the coronavirus, such as wearing masks in public.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 6,681
    IanB2 said:

    Fewer than a quarter of people in the UK with Covid symptoms are requesting a test, while only half say they are fully self-isolating after symptoms develop, researchers have found.

    People in the UK must self-isolate for 10 days if they have Covid, with the period beginning from the onset of symptoms or, if there are no symptoms, from the day of a positive test result.

    However, data from the Covid-19 rapid survey of adherence to interventions and responses (Corsair) study, conducted by researchers from institutions including King’s College London, Public Health England and University College London and published in the BMJ, suggests compliance is far from universal.

    It's only a cold. Wasn't that the sneering response when people did self-isolate at the start of the pandemic?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,600
    Pfizer vaccine now tested and good on 12-year-olds.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/03/pfizer-covid-vaccine-shows-100-efficacy-in-adolescents-12-15/

    Jabbing secondary schoolkids in July and August?
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    Interesting piece on why loneliness and lockdowns are so bad for us:

    https://www.wired.co.uk/article/lockdown-loneliness-neuroscience

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776

    IanB2 said:

    Fewer than a quarter of people in the UK with Covid symptoms are requesting a test, while only half say they are fully self-isolating after symptoms develop, researchers have found.

    People in the UK must self-isolate for 10 days if they have Covid, with the period beginning from the onset of symptoms or, if there are no symptoms, from the day of a positive test result.

    However, data from the Covid-19 rapid survey of adherence to interventions and responses (Corsair) study, conducted by researchers from institutions including King’s College London, Public Health England and University College London and published in the BMJ, suggests compliance is far from universal.

    It's only a cold. Wasn't that the sneering response when people did self-isolate at the start of the pandemic?
    You don't hear from those people now.

    Without a ouija board, anyway....
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    The thing is, once we are all vaccinated I see no reason for self-isolation or scaremongering or paranoia. Evidence is growing that even if you 'do' contract covid after being vaccinated it may leave you feeling rough but it's extremely unlikely to kill you.

    As for the variants fear, that's what happens with flu and we have annual jabs for that.

    It has been a nasty pandemic but vaccinations are the route out of it. Well done to the UK.

  • Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.
  • felixfelix Posts: 12,607
    Seems like PB is doing a twitter and ignoring the real world again.
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    felix said:

    Seems like PB is doing a twitter and ignoring the real world again.

    In what way? Expand.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,443
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 37,509
    Sandpit said:

    Pfizer vaccine now tested and good on 12-year-olds.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/03/pfizer-covid-vaccine-shows-100-efficacy-in-adolescents-12-15/

    Jabbing secondary schoolkids in July and August?

    More likely late June/July and September. Needlessly difficult to jab them when they’re not in school. Very easy to do it when they are in school.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,247
    Admittedly, not very funny - but is this not The Times’ obligatory ‘April 1’ story?
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pfizer vaccine now tested and good on 12-year-olds.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/03/pfizer-covid-vaccine-shows-100-efficacy-in-adolescents-12-15/

    Jabbing secondary schoolkids in July and August?

    More likely late June/July and September. Needlessly difficult to jab them when they’re not in school. Very easy to do it when they are in school.
    Was part n' parcel of my childhood: annual flu jab at school. They belted through 750 in 2 days.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962

    Admittedly, not very funny - but is this not The Times’ obligatory ‘April 1’ story?
    Aren’t we in it ourselves? The lead does say that Starmer is going to oppose something; I took that as the joke?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 6,923
    Morning all.

    The amount of flapping about the prospect of 'vaccine passports' seems overdone to me.

    Politicians need something to politic about, so they are going to find something....

    A sign of a return to normal.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 65,173

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pfizer vaccine now tested and good on 12-year-olds.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/03/pfizer-covid-vaccine-shows-100-efficacy-in-adolescents-12-15/

    Jabbing secondary schoolkids in July and August?

    More likely late June/July and September. Needlessly difficult to jab them when they’re not in school. Very easy to do it when they are in school.
    Was part n' parcel of my childhood: annual flu jab at school. They belted through 750 in 2 days.
    Are you quite young?
    One jab I've never been offered is flu
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pfizer vaccine now tested and good on 12-year-olds.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/03/pfizer-covid-vaccine-shows-100-efficacy-in-adolescents-12-15/

    Jabbing secondary schoolkids in July and August?

    More likely late June/July and September. Needlessly difficult to jab them when they’re not in school. Very easy to do it when they are in school.
    Was part n' parcel of my childhood: annual flu jab at school. They belted through 750 in 2 days.
    Are you quite young?
    One jab I've never been offered is flu
    I think it was a public school boarding thing. In order to avoid a raging pandemic in a confined environment they vaccinated us all. Funny that.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 17,056

    Admittedly, not very funny - but is this not The Times’ obligatory ‘April 1’ story?
    Argh! I’ve just been down by the Guardian one. They’ve got a piece saying house prices fell in March.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966
    Pulpstar said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    Pfizer vaccine now tested and good on 12-year-olds.

    https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/03/pfizer-covid-vaccine-shows-100-efficacy-in-adolescents-12-15/

    Jabbing secondary schoolkids in July and August?

    More likely late June/July and September. Needlessly difficult to jab them when they’re not in school. Very easy to do it when they are in school.
    Was part n' parcel of my childhood: annual flu jab at school. They belted through 750 in 2 days.
    Are you quite young?
    One jab I've never been offered is flu
    Was involved in a couple of vaccine campaigns in schools in the 90's. Meningitis, for example. Never flu, though.

    And, as far as N Essex is concerned, what's happened to the sun this April morning.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 1,997
    Excellent if the opposition is finally going to oppose something.

    Makes me wonder why they've been drawing their salaries for the last year, though. A rubber stamp could have done the job just as well as the Parliamentary Labour Party in the last year and we'd have saved 200 salaries.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.

    I am absolutely certain we shall need some evidence of vaccination to allow us to visit our family in Thailand.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 17,056
    On topic:

    [if] we get the virus properly under control, the death rates are near zero, hospital admissions very, very low, that the British instinct in those circumstances will be against vaccine passports.

    Define “low”. Tricky by saying “near zero” isn’t helpful. That may come to pass, but we shouldn’t be worried so long as the NHS isn’t suffering and there isn’t the prospect of numbers exploding as they have before.
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    edited April 1
    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 17,056
    edited April 1
    Foxy said:
    Non-COVID deaths are running well below the five-year average, a fact that is conspicuously absent from that Guardian article.

    Perhaps the 28 day cut-off is missing some deaths, but isn’t many.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 22,754

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Sure, excess deaths are probably the most accurate measure, but the tail of new disease is quite telling.

    This is quite a significant piece of work by University of Leicester and ONS. I think the same group is looking at less severe disease not requiring admission. 5% of inpatient survivors developing new diabetes within months has quite a lot of implications if similar in outpatients.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 12,240
    The problem with vaccine passports is that they are unlikely to work, rather than objectionable in principle. If the trade-off is that you save lives and can go about normal life at the expense of a loss of some liberty, most people will accept that loss of liberty. But if it ends up being an ineffectual piece of bureaucracy, people will ask, why are we doing this?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 1,712
    Foxy said:
    I’ve not read the piece but one factor is that Covid hospitalisation is often for the oldest and frailest. No real surprise if some come back later. Also how many of them picked it up in hospital?
    I think the headline is trying to imply it’s younger people who are damaged by Covid who then expire later. I’m not sure this is right.
    In addition the 28 days cut off is perforce a compromise. If Derek draper passed today it would surely be from Covid, but not officially. Coroner might say different.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 6,923
    Foxy said:

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Sure, excess deaths are probably the most accurate measure, but the tail of new disease is quite telling.

    This is quite a significant piece of work by University of Leicester and ONS. I think the same group is looking at less severe disease not requiring admission. 5% of inpatient survivors developing new diabetes within months has quite a lot of implications if similar in outpatients.
    What sort of new Diabetes is that Foxy?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776

    Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.

    I am absolutely certain we shall need some evidence of vaccination to allow us to visit our family in Thailand.
    I don't remember needing a Yellow Fever "passport" to travel extensively around Africa. Just a certificate.

    This "Covid Passport" seems to have got itself a PR firm....
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 6,681

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Excess deaths might be objective but is not sound unless all the other causes of death continue at the same rate, and we know that is not the case: flu is down; we had a mild winter; presumably road accidents are down owing to lockdown, and so on.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 6,865
    Snow forecast for London next Monday.
    I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..


  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 22,754
    MattW said:

    Foxy said:

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Sure, excess deaths are probably the most accurate measure, but the tail of new disease is quite telling.

    This is quite a significant piece of work by University of Leicester and ONS. I think the same group is looking at less severe disease not requiring admission. 5% of inpatient survivors developing new diabetes within months has quite a lot of implications if similar in outpatients.
    What sort of new Diabetes is that Foxy?
    The paper it is taken from doesn't differentiate, due to how the data was derived from coding. There are other pieces of work showing similar findings, on in USVA hospitals for example. There is a plausible hypothesis of direct covid effect on pancreas Beta cells.

    https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n693

    This graphic shows the important findings:



    The controls were from the general population, matched for age and co morbidity.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962

    Foxy said:
    I’ve not read the piece but one factor is that Covid hospitalisation is often for the oldest and frailest. No real surprise if some come back later. Also how many of them picked it up in hospital?
    I think the headline is trying to imply it’s younger people who are damaged by Covid who then expire later. I’m not sure this is right.
    In addition the 28 days cut off is perforce a compromise. If Derek draper passed today it would surely be from Covid, but not officially. Coroner might say different.
    Potentially if representative that would add another 7,500 deaths to our coronavirus total.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,962

    Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.

    I am absolutely certain we shall need some evidence of vaccination to allow us to visit our family in Thailand.
    I don't remember needing a Yellow Fever "passport" to travel extensively around Africa. Just a certificate.

    This "Covid Passport" seems to have got itself a PR firm....
    I presume it's also going to be called blue and look black?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 6,923
    Foxy said:

    MattW said:

    Foxy said:

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Sure, excess deaths are probably the most accurate measure, but the tail of new disease is quite telling.

    This is quite a significant piece of work by University of Leicester and ONS. I think the same group is looking at less severe disease not requiring admission. 5% of inpatient survivors developing new diabetes within months has quite a lot of implications if similar in outpatients.
    What sort of new Diabetes is that Foxy?
    The paper it is taken from doesn't differentiate, due to how the data was derived from coding. There are other pieces of work showing similar findings, on in USVA hospitals for example. There is a plausible hypothesis of direct covid effect on pancreas Beta cells.

    https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n693

    This graphic shows the important findings:



    The controls were from the general population, matched for age and co morbidity.

    Aha. I thought you meant from your place.

    It was interesting the leverage that could be obtained from NHS big data in the study.

    That looks like a scientific competitive advantage for the UK, and a lesson to learn where electronic records are not yet started.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 15,914
    MattW said:

    A big good news story in a small pond:

    https://twitter.com/JackTwigg4/status/1377267293961486336

    He gets the boot.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,024
    Foxy said:
    Whilst serious if true, it would be important to understand the significance of age and likelihood to die in any case. I noted we are below average deaths for the time of year again and that should be the kind of information used to put this in context
  • kamskikamski Posts: 1,944

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Excess deaths might be objective but is not sound unless all the other causes of death continue at the same rate, and we know that is not the case: flu is down; we had a mild winter; presumably road accidents are down owing to lockdown, and so on.
    There's also a fair bit variance from year to year without covid.

    Also some have argued that a significant percentage of deaths in care homes were people who often wouldn't have lived many months longer which would also have a bit of an effect if looking at excess deaths over a longer period.

    Excess deaths is useful, but not necessarily more accurate than other ways of counting in places like the UK. But the main criterion for whether to focus exclusively on excess deaths or not for half of PB will be whether it improves the comparison of the UK with Germany or not.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966
    MattW said:

    A big good news story in a small pond:

    https://twitter.com/JackTwigg4/status/1377267293961486336

    Timpson's have an excellent record on this. Encourages one to use them, although one of our local one's made a bit of a bog of something they did for me. Put it right cheerfully and apologetically though, and at no cost, although it could have been argued that I was partly 'to blame'.
    Which is the way to keep customers.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 5,471

    Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.

    I am absolutely certain we shall need some evidence of vaccination to allow us to visit our family in Thailand.
    I don't remember needing a Yellow Fever "passport" to travel extensively around Africa. Just a certificate.

    This "Covid Passport" seems to have got itself a PR firm....
    Yes, quite. I argued in a header weeks back that simple yellow fever type documentation would be needed, out of necessity rather than desire; a necessary piece of documentation to extend freedoms to UK citizens to visit those countries which demanded it. However it seems like vaccine passports are being consider in order to limit freedoms not extend them.

    Why is the discussion around limited UK citizen's freedoms rather than the measures we should demand from non-UK citizens visiting the UK? I find that very curious. We seem content to beat up our own (not new in this pandemic).

    My neighbour emigrated to the Philippines a year or so ago. We are still in contact and he and his wife are currently pontificating about whether to visit the UK in May or June this year to visit family and for their Covid jabs (which they are still eligible for). In May and June it will remain illegal for us to leave the country.

    We are in danger of allowing foreign nationals more freedoms that our own citizens enjoy and this is not the position for a UK government to be in.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,024

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Excess deaths might be objective but is not sound unless all the other causes of death continue at the same rate, and we know that is not the case: flu is down; we had a mild winter; presumably road accidents are down owing to lockdown, and so on.
    But often 3 figures are put forward - deaths within 28 days of a test, excess deaths and Covid reported on death certificate. All these figures appear to be fairly aligned. I have confidence that we are recording and reporting this as accurately as possible when it is impossible to know about every case without diverting undue and unavailable resources.
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Excess deaths might be objective but is not sound unless all the other causes of death continue at the same rate, and we know that is not the case: flu is down; we had a mild winter; presumably road accidents are down owing to lockdown, and so on.
    That's misleading. We know that flu tends to drop during a SARS type outbreak. There may be several reasons for that but the obvious ones are 1. Face masking wearing 2. Social Distancing and 3. Lockdowns.

    We're currently announcing under 100 deaths a day due to some sort of mention of covid in a 28 day period. It's frankly pointless.

    They should stop all daily death announcements given the dribbling number of them (thankfully) and publish monthly excess deaths instead.

    It's time to cease this scaremongering.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 31,031

    Foxy said:
    I’ve not read the piece but one factor is that Covid hospitalisation is often for the oldest and frailest. No real surprise if some come back later. Also how many of them picked it up in hospital?
    I think the headline is trying to imply it’s younger people who are damaged by Covid who then expire later. I’m not sure this is right.
    In addition the 28 days cut off is perforce a compromise. If Derek draper passed today it would surely be from Covid, but not officially. Coroner might say different.
    Isn’t it within 28 days of A test not the FIRST test?
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,024
    kamski said:

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Excess deaths might be objective but is not sound unless all the other causes of death continue at the same rate, and we know that is not the case: flu is down; we had a mild winter; presumably road accidents are down owing to lockdown, and so on.
    There's also a fair bit variance from year to year without covid.

    Also some have argued that a significant percentage of deaths in care homes were people who often wouldn't have lived many months longer which would also have a bit of an effect if looking at excess deaths over a longer period.

    Excess deaths is useful, but not necessarily more accurate than other ways of counting in places like the UK. But the main criterion for whether to focus exclusively on excess deaths or not for half of PB will be whether it improves the comparison of the UK with Germany or not.
    Unable to see the sarcasm alert at the end there. Most people don't give a monkeys about rates in Germany - they care about their own life chances. The measurements of Covid are therefore important in one respect to understand the seriousness of the issue, but in another way totally irrelevant - you can't rely on numbers to look after yourself by hygiene and social distancing measures.
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    I don't deny that during the UK's two waves things were bad.

    Now they aren't.

    Friend of mine's father died in a care home and counts as a covid death. My friend's comment? 'He was about to die soon anyway.'

    The whole thing has become bloody silly.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 36,455
    Foxy said:
    This is the real challenge for the NHS and our health systems generally over the next year. The pressure that long Covid is going to put on the system is going to be immense and make the catch up of those categories neglected even more difficult. Health spending is going to have to increase materially to cope with this and that is going to put severe pressure on other parts of the budget.

    My view is that we really do not have the capacity to dick about with this. If vaccine passports are required for mass attendance events or access to nightclubs the pressure on those who are currently resisting vaccination will increase. We want everyone vaccinated so this pernicious disease is eliminated from our society and so we can concentrate on dealing with the aftermath which is going to be very hard.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 27,641

    MattW said:

    A big good news story in a small pond:

    https://twitter.com/JackTwigg4/status/1377267293961486336

    Timpson's have an excellent record on this. Encourages one to use them, although one of our local one's made a bit of a bog of something they did for me. Put it right cheerfully and apologetically though, and at no cost, although it could have been argued that I was partly 'to blame'.
    Which is the way to keep customers.
    Wrong type of feet?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 31,031
    edited April 1
    Scott_xP said:
    There are dozens of “advisors” scurrying around Downing Street - it’s not a senior post at all. I’m not surprised the minister hasn’t heard of him.

    Edit: I’ve never heard of either the minister or him, mind!
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 27,641
    edited April 1
    re vaccine passports.

    First off I think it's a good thing if the opposition parties oppose. It will be a welcome change for them.

    Secondly the govt has presumably done the math to optimise people returning to be economic contributers. If they have determined that more people will get out and spend if there is a VP then that's what is motivating them I presume and hope.

    But where does that leave the compulsion? This is where it's going to fall down. The market will or should dictate whether we have them but then they could presumably do that without govt input. Or would that be discriminatory?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 27,641
    MattW said:

    TOPPING said:

    MattW said:

    A big good news story in a small pond:

    https://twitter.com/JackTwigg4/status/1377267293961486336

    Timpson's have an excellent record on this. Encourages one to use them, although one of our local one's made a bit of a bog of something they did for me. Put it right cheerfully and apologetically though, and at no cost, although it could have been argued that I was partly 'to blame'.
    Which is the way to keep customers.
    Wrong type of feet?
    One thing I didn't know is that they offer free dry cleaning for interview clothes for unemployed.

    Small, strategic acts.
    That is great.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 52,720

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Excess deaths might be objective but is not sound unless all the other causes of death continue at the same rate, and we know that is not the case: flu is down; we had a mild winter; presumably road accidents are down owing to lockdown, and so on.
    That's misleading. We know that flu tends to drop during a SARS type outbreak. There may be several reasons for that but the obvious ones are 1. Face masking wearing 2. Social Distancing and 3. Lockdowns.

    We're currently announcing under 100 deaths a day due to some sort of mention of covid in a 28 day period. It's frankly pointless.

    They should stop all daily death announcements given the dribbling number of them (thankfully) and publish monthly excess deaths instead.

    It's time to cease this scaremongering.
    Disagreed completely. As deaths are driven down and out it's important people know and understand that. If you abruptly drop reporting while people are scared then people won't stop being afraid, they'll think "what are they not telling us, what are they trying to hide" instead.

    Deaths are inexorably going down to zero now. Which do you think will do more to end scaremongering: deaths abruptly not being reported, or the national media reporting next to no deaths and the local media reporting there have been zero deaths locally?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 52,720

    Pickled Puffin's breathless re-tweet of the Guardian piece, itself a write up of the research published in BMJ needs a little qualification.

    It has long been argued that a better measure of covid mortality is excess death against a mean, NOT those reported as dying within 28 days of a positive covid test. Why? Because with the latter measurement we simply don't know the extent of other pre-existing contributory causes.

    That's all the more the case with this research.

    Excess death against a mean is really the only objectively sound measurement.

    Excess deaths might be objective but is not sound unless all the other causes of death continue at the same rate, and we know that is not the case: flu is down; we had a mild winter; presumably road accidents are down owing to lockdown, and so on.
    That's misleading. We know that flu tends to drop during a SARS type outbreak. There may be several reasons for that but the obvious ones are 1. Face masking wearing 2. Social Distancing and 3. Lockdowns.

    We're currently announcing under 100 deaths a day due to some sort of mention of covid in a 28 day period. It's frankly pointless.

    They should stop all daily death announcements given the dribbling number of them (thankfully) and publish monthly excess deaths instead.

    It's time to cease this scaremongering.
    Disagreed completely. As deaths are driven down and out it's important people know and understand that. If you abruptly drop reporting while people are scared then people won't stop being afraid, they'll think "what are they not telling us, what are they trying to hide" instead.

    Deaths are inexorably going down to zero now. Which do you think will do more to end scaremongering: deaths abruptly not being reported, or the national media reporting next to no deaths and the local media reporting there have been zero deaths locally?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,600
    Stocky said:

    Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.

    I am absolutely certain we shall need some evidence of vaccination to allow us to visit our family in Thailand.
    I don't remember needing a Yellow Fever "passport" to travel extensively around Africa. Just a certificate.

    This "Covid Passport" seems to have got itself a PR firm....
    Yes, quite. I argued in a header weeks back that simple yellow fever type documentation would be needed, out of necessity rather than desire; a necessary piece of documentation to extend freedoms to UK citizens to visit those countries which demanded it. However it seems like vaccine passports are being consider in order to limit freedoms not extend them.

    Why is the discussion around limited UK citizen's freedoms rather than the measures we should demand from non-UK citizens visiting the UK? I find that very curious. We seem content to beat up our own (not new in this pandemic).

    My neighbour emigrated to the Philippines a year or so ago. We are still in contact and he and his wife are currently pontificating about whether to visit the UK in May or June this year to visit family and for their Covid jabs (which they are still eligible for). In May and June it will remain illegal for us to leave the country.

    We are in danger of allowing foreign nationals more freedoms that our own citizens enjoy and this is not the position for a UK government to be in.
    The current status is that only UK citizens and permanent residents are allowed to enter the UK, and they must quarantine for 10 days on arrival - either at a designated address or in an hotel, depending on where they have come from. They must also get permission to leave at the end of their trip, which may not be a simple formality.

    Like it or not, international travel is going to be a total and utter pain in the arse for the next 12-18 months.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 36,455

    I don't deny that during the UK's two waves things were bad.

    Now they aren't.

    Friend of mine's father died in a care home and counts as a covid death. My friend's comment? 'He was about to die soon anyway.'

    The whole thing has become bloody silly.

    Things are going to be very bad for a long time, certainly many years. Many more people are going to be permanently debilitated by long Covid and a lot of them are going to die prematurely. It is not entirely clear that vaccination will prevent this completely. Your odds of not getting Covid are significantly improved and your risk of dying becomes very remote but that does not mean that this virus cannot do damage to a range of organs.

    I want our society back to normal. I want a hair cut. To go to the pub with my pals. To go to restaurants and cafes. Even to visit the odd shop. I completely agree that we should be pushing forward with all of this. If vaccine passports facilitate that change back to normal, give more confidence, make opening up easier to insure, for example, then I am on. Let's get this done.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 1,486
    I don't see how people (i.e. the Government) can simultaneously argue that the vaccines are excellent in terms of effectiveness (particularly at reducing hospitalisation and death) and that take-up is also extremely high, much higher than had been hoped for, and yet vaccine passports are also still needed. There seems to be a failure of logic in that somewhere to me,

    Especially if you add to the mix of that the promise of removing all legal restrictions on social distancing on June 21 and also the promise that no such passports would be offered domestically until all the adult population had been offered a jab.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 8,171
    edited April 1
    Barnesian said:

    Snow forecast for London next Monday.
    I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..


    It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,100

    Barnesian said:

    Snow forecast for London next Monday.
    I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..


    It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
    "A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 8,171

    I don't see how people (i.e. the Government) can simultaneously argue that the vaccines are excellent in terms of effectiveness (particularly at reducing hospitalisation and death) and that take-up is also extremely high, much higher than had been hoped for, and yet vaccine passports are also still needed. There seems to be a failure of logic in that somewhere to me,

    Especially if you add to the mix of that the promise of removing all legal restrictions on social distancing on June 21 and also the promise that no such passports would be offered domestically until all the adult population had been offered a jab.

    Yes, the whole thing is a nonsense. Regardless of the ethical, philosophical and moral questions, it simply falls foul of a massive logical Catch-22.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 6,775
    This is the hill on which Starmer makes his stand!?
    More interesting perhaps is he is giving an exclusive interview to the Telegraph.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,100

    I don't see how people (i.e. the Government) can simultaneously argue that the vaccines are excellent in terms of effectiveness (particularly at reducing hospitalisation and death) and that take-up is also extremely high, much higher than had been hoped for, and yet vaccine passports are also still needed. There seems to be a failure of logic in that somewhere to me,

    Especially if you add to the mix of that the promise of removing all legal restrictions on social distancing on June 21 and also the promise that no such passports would be offered domestically until all the adult population had been offered a jab.

    So why are they pursuing this idea? As you say it seems likely to be not really needed. The focus on an app rather than a piece of paper should make people question the deeper motives.
  • GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,066
    DavidL said:

    If vaccine passports are required for mass attendance events or access to nightclubs the pressure on those who are currently resisting vaccination will increase

    The cynic in me thinks that passports are being floated with this objective in mind.

  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 8,171

    Barnesian said:

    Snow forecast for London next Monday.
    I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..


    It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
    "A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."

    Barnesian said:

    Snow forecast for London next Monday.
    I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..


    It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
    "A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
    We’ll see who’s right! According to Big G and others it was going to snow last Friday. I said it wouldn’t, except on the highest ground, and it didn’t of course.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 1,712
    IanB2 said:

    Foxy said:
    I’ve not read the piece but one factor is that Covid hospitalisation is often for the oldest and frailest. No real surprise if some come back later. Also how many of them picked it up in hospital?
    I think the headline is trying to imply it’s younger people who are damaged by Covid who then expire later. I’m not sure this is right.
    In addition the 28 days cut off is perforce a compromise. If Derek draper passed today it would surely be from Covid, but not officially. Coroner might say different.
    Potentially if representative that would add another 7,500 deaths to our coronavirus total.
    And out excess death is over 150000 isn't it? Counting of who has died of covid is tricky, and not just in the UK.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,100

    I don't see how people (i.e. the Government) can simultaneously argue that the vaccines are excellent in terms of effectiveness (particularly at reducing hospitalisation and death) and that take-up is also extremely high, much higher than had been hoped for, and yet vaccine passports are also still needed. There seems to be a failure of logic in that somewhere to me,

    Especially if you add to the mix of that the promise of removing all legal restrictions on social distancing on June 21 and also the promise that no such passports would be offered domestically until all the adult population had been offered a jab.

    https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1377521178840084480
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776

    MattW said:

    A big good news story in a small pond:

    https://twitter.com/JackTwigg4/status/1377267293961486336

    Timpson's have an excellent record on this. Encourages one to use them, although one of our local one's made a bit of a bog of something they did for me. Put it right cheerfully and apologetically though, and at no cost, although it could have been argued that I was partly 'to blame'.
    Which is the way to keep customers.
    We need a Task Force, looking into how to "Timpsonise" far more of the UK workforce. Likely to have far better practical outcomes than a raft of reports on institutionalised racism.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 6,865
    rkrkrk said:

    This is the hill on which Starmer makes his stand!?
    More interesting perhaps is he is giving an exclusive interview to the Telegraph.

    Ed Davey has given an interview to the Spectator
    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-new-opposition-an-interview-with-ed-davey?utm_medium=email&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Editorial&utm_campaign=WEEK 20210403 AL+CID_5633028eefb29e917c09f85d5843a209
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 36,455

    I don't see how people (i.e. the Government) can simultaneously argue that the vaccines are excellent in terms of effectiveness (particularly at reducing hospitalisation and death) and that take-up is also extremely high, much higher than had been hoped for, and yet vaccine passports are also still needed. There seems to be a failure of logic in that somewhere to me,

    Especially if you add to the mix of that the promise of removing all legal restrictions on social distancing on June 21 and also the promise that no such passports would be offered domestically until all the adult population had been offered a jab.

    I just don't see the inconsistency. Vaccination is such a good thing we want more of it. We want to encourage groups in our society who have been more resistant to comply. We want to incentivise them to comply.

    So far as opening up is concerned there are 2 different aspects. Firstly there is the criminal law. It will no longer apply. Secondly there is public confidence and the willingness of insurers to take on risk. For the latter vaccine passports clearly have a role.

    I am not saying that they should be compulsory but I am saying that if people or businesses want to restrict their services to those who have them that is absolutely fair enough.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 15,855
    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So the people who don’t like the report disagree with the people who do like the report. It’s “confrontational” to be told that someone disagrees with you I guess?

    But not confrontational to sound off to the press?
    The background of some of the people selected for the Commission pretty much predestined its daft conclusions. One member has views on foreign aid so extreme that Bill Gates reviewed her book as "promoting evil". Another is openly partisan in anti-Labour politics. A third talked about gay people as "tortured queens".

    This editorial summarises the views of many of us, not only those who routinely expound on these issues.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/31/the-guardian-view-on-boris-johnsons-race-review-you-cannot-be-serious

    It's simply a missed opportunity. It is clearly true that there are many causes of inequality, not only racism But it is laughable to dismiss it, since it alienates ordinary people who experience everyday hassle for being black - being routinely stopped to prove you own your car is a well-known example. It's one thing to put up with systematic unfairness without letting it dominate your life. It's something else for a Government-appointed body to tell you the problem doesn't exist.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,195

    Barnesian said:

    Snow forecast for London next Monday.
    I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..


    It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
    Google also says snow. :/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 36,455
    Gadfly said:

    DavidL said:

    If vaccine passports are required for mass attendance events or access to nightclubs the pressure on those who are currently resisting vaccination will increase

    The cynic in me thinks that passports are being floated with this objective in mind.

    Absolutely. And it is not cynical, its smart.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 8,171
    As the vast majority of all COVID deaths are in the very old and very infirm, it’s not surprising that many people are readmitted. Given that fewer people are dying of all causes now than the average, I’m not sure that Guardian article means what some people seem to be assuming.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 1,712
    Charles said:

    Foxy said:
    I’ve not read the piece but one factor is that Covid hospitalisation is often for the oldest and frailest. No real surprise if some come back later. Also how many of them picked it up in hospital?
    I think the headline is trying to imply it’s younger people who are damaged by Covid who then expire later. I’m not sure this is right.
    In addition the 28 days cut off is perforce a compromise. If Derek draper passed today it would surely be from Covid, but not officially. Coroner might say different.
    Isn’t it within 28 days of A test not the FIRST test?
    I think in his case he no longer has covid, but has been grievously affected. i doubt he has tested positive in the last month.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,600

    I don't see how people (i.e. the Government) can simultaneously argue that the vaccines are excellent in terms of effectiveness (particularly at reducing hospitalisation and death) and that take-up is also extremely high, much higher than had been hoped for, and yet vaccine passports are also still needed. There seems to be a failure of logic in that somewhere to me,

    Especially if you add to the mix of that the promise of removing all legal restrictions on social distancing on June 21 and also the promise that no such passports would be offered domestically until all the adult population had been offered a jab.

    So why are they pursuing this idea? As you say it seems likely to be not really needed. The focus on an app rather than a piece of paper should make people question the deeper motives.
    Got it in one! The problem is apps and databases.

    If Starmer wants a good angle without upsetting his authoritarian ID card-loving supporters, then phone apps are massively exclusionary - especially to the bottom 10%, the elderly and the vulnerable.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 5,471
    Sandpit said:

    Stocky said:

    Vaccine passports are illiberal and likely to fallfoul of other legislation. It's been poor judgement from the Governemnt to let this one run. Proof of vaccination for entry to certain countries isn't new though and will be accepted.

    I am absolutely certain we shall need some evidence of vaccination to allow us to visit our family in Thailand.
    I don't remember needing a Yellow Fever "passport" to travel extensively around Africa. Just a certificate.

    This "Covid Passport" seems to have got itself a PR firm....
    Yes, quite. I argued in a header weeks back that simple yellow fever type documentation would be needed, out of necessity rather than desire; a necessary piece of documentation to extend freedoms to UK citizens to visit those countries which demanded it. However it seems like vaccine passports are being consider in order to limit freedoms not extend them.

    Why is the discussion around limited UK citizen's freedoms rather than the measures we should demand from non-UK citizens visiting the UK? I find that very curious. We seem content to beat up our own (not new in this pandemic).

    My neighbour emigrated to the Philippines a year or so ago. We are still in contact and he and his wife are currently pontificating about whether to visit the UK in May or June this year to visit family and for their Covid jabs (which they are still eligible for). In May and June it will remain illegal for us to leave the country.

    We are in danger of allowing foreign nationals more freedoms that our own citizens enjoy and this is not the position for a UK government to be in.
    The current status is that only UK citizens and permanent residents are allowed to enter the UK, and they must quarantine for 10 days on arrival - either at a designated address or in an hotel, depending on where they have come from. They must also get permission to leave at the end of their trip, which may not be a simple formality.

    Like it or not, international travel is going to be a total and utter pain in the arse for the next 12-18 months.
    What makes you think this will change in 12-18 months? We don't seem to want to accept that Covid isn't going anywhere and that viruses mutate.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,996
    Scott_xP said:
    Channel 4 is a neutral public service broadcaster.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 14,294
    DavidL said:

    I don't deny that during the UK's two waves things were bad.

    Now they aren't.

    Friend of mine's father died in a care home and counts as a covid death. My friend's comment? 'He was about to die soon anyway.'

    The whole thing has become bloody silly.

    Things are going to be very bad for a long time, certainly many years. Many more people are going to be permanently debilitated by long Covid and a lot of them are going to die prematurely. It is not entirely clear that vaccination will prevent this completely. Your odds of not getting Covid are significantly improved and your risk of dying becomes very remote but that does not mean that this virus cannot do damage to a range of organs.

    I want our society back to normal. I want a hair cut. To go to the pub with my pals. To go to restaurants and cafes. Even to visit the odd shop. I completely agree that we should be pushing forward with all of this. If vaccine passports facilitate that change back to normal, give more confidence, make opening up easier to insure, for example, then I am on. Let's get this done.
    I agree but as I have said before, I don't understand how vaccine passports give more confidence.

    If you have been vaccinated, you have say 70% protection against any COVID symptoms whatsoever and near enough 100% protection against severe disease. For all intents and purposes you are protected. In that circumstance, what benefit does a vaccine passport give you? Nothing. Any fears or anxieties are irrational.

    Let's say you haven't been vaccinated by choice. A vaccine passport isn't going to protect you because (1) you don't want protecting and (2) you are probably happy to take risks in any case. That's personal choice.

    Finally — people who can't get vaccinated for whatever reason. The hardest category. The problem is that there will always be people with compromised immune systems. I'm one of them. We cannot eliminate all risk and pubs and restaurants are always going to be dangerous for people with compromised immune systems. There's no rational reason why the whole population should be constrained for the benefit of a tiny amount of people. There will always be a risk, vaccine passport or no vaccine passport.

    The fact is I fail to see any logical justification for vaccine passports.

    With all due respect to those who support them, I truly believe it is a case of "that sounds good, let's have that" rather than having thought it through properly.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 1,712

    Barnesian said:

    Snow forecast for London next Monday.
    I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..


    It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
    I wouldn't rule out a snow shower. Very unlikely to be any settling snow though.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 1,944

    As the vast majority of all COVID deaths are in the very old and very infirm, it’s not surprising that many people are readmitted. Given that fewer people are dying of all causes now than the average, I’m not sure that Guardian article means what some people seem to be assuming.

    People can't be readmitted after they have died?

    They did have a control group:

    Results
    Over a mean follow-up of 140 days, nearly a third of individuals who were discharged from hospital after acute covid-19 were readmitted (14 060 of 47 780) and more than 1 in 10 (5875) died after discharge, with these events occurring at rates four and eight times greater, respectively, than in the matched control group.

    https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n693
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,996

    Charles said:

    Scott_xP said:
    So the people who don’t like the report disagree with the people who do like the report. It’s “confrontational” to be told that someone disagrees with you I guess?

    But not confrontational to sound off to the press?
    The background of some of the people selected for the Commission pretty much predestined its daft conclusions. One member has views on foreign aid so extreme that Bill Gates reviewed her book as "promoting evil". Another is openly partisan in anti-Labour politics. A third talked about gay people as "tortured queens".

    This editorial summarises the views of many of us, not only those who routinely expound on these issues.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/31/the-guardian-view-on-boris-johnsons-race-review-you-cannot-be-serious

    It's simply a missed opportunity. It is clearly true that there are many causes of inequality, not only racism But it is laughable to dismiss it, since it alienates ordinary people who experience everyday hassle for being black - being routinely stopped to prove you own your car is a well-known example. It's one thing to put up with systematic unfairness without letting it dominate your life. It's something else for a Government-appointed body to tell you the problem doesn't exist.
    Yes, it's fascinating how many people have such strong views on a report they haven't read.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 13,383

    IanB2 said:

    Foxy said:
    I’ve not read the piece but one factor is that Covid hospitalisation is often for the oldest and frailest. No real surprise if some come back later. Also how many of them picked it up in hospital?
    I think the headline is trying to imply it’s younger people who are damaged by Covid who then expire later. I’m not sure this is right.
    In addition the 28 days cut off is perforce a compromise. If Derek draper passed today it would surely be from Covid, but not officially. Coroner might say different.
    Potentially if representative that would add another 7,500 deaths to our coronavirus total.
    And out excess death is over 150000 isn't it? Counting of who has died of covid is tricky, and not just in the UK.
    IIRC 28 days was used (in a number of countries) because, while it misses a number of deaths due to Long COVID effects, it catches deaths "with COVID" and at 28 days it kind of evens out.

    Hence the pretty good match between the 28 days numbers and the excess deaths numbers.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    Barnesian said:

    Snow forecast for London next Monday.
    I don't think this is an April fool joke but ..


    It’s not an April Fool, just a crap app. It’s not going to snow in London on Monday.
    "A viewer phoned in earlier and asked if there was a hurricane coming..."
    We're around 40 miles NE of London. BBC forecasters give a 20% chance of sleet showers at 6am on Monday. Nothing after that; sunny intervals, but cold.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,100
    "negotiating with Russia from its current, desperate position, while sitting on millions of AstraZeneca jabs, discredited in a deeply irresponsible post-Brexit propaganda exercise, is a tragic situation for the EU to have put itself in and bad for the West as a whole."

    Halligan, Telegraph.
Sign In or Register to comment.