I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
The only thing that will change for me on 21 June is that my employer will make me start commuting again. So personally speaking a delay is absolutely fine with me.
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
SAGE modellers can always be relied upon to produce a graph that demonstrates the NHS will be overwhelmed if so and so and such and such and a worst case were to happen etc etc
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
Agreed, and the broader issue is if not now when?
Given its seasonality in the UK, I fail to see how we are going to be in a clearly and significantly better position to unlock until next summer at the earliest.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
They play everything for political gain, so yes, the data they are most interested in for this decision is opinion polls, not hospitalisation and deaths.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
I think that we realise now that Johnson leaves everything to the last minute, until only one option remains.
I think businesses will all be allowed to reopen, but would expect Social Distancing and masks to continue in most settings.
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
Agreed, and the broader issue is if not now when?
Given its seasonality in the UK, I fail to see how we are going to be in a clearly and significantly better position to unlock until next summer at the earliest.
July and August 2021 also count as summer. 5-10 weeks of further vaccination could make a lot of difference if there were to be a delay, making matters clearly and significantly better. Add in some half decent weather then a later Summer opening could help a lot - depending on how things pan out in the next few weeks. IMHO they will stagger it, bring some further easing in on 21 June, the rest later on in late July or late August/early Sept.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
They play everything for political gain, so yes, the data they are most interested in for this decision is opinion polls, not hospitalisation and deaths.
I think that’s untrue and unfair
But the path of least resistance is to open up June 21. It would be a big call to accelerate so I don’t see them taking that risk.
What I am suggesting is they will open on June 21 but are being downbeat now for tactical purposes
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The Novavax didn't come through as we had expected.
It’s even better than that: it’s brilliant news. By my calcs, Hancock’s statistic (10% of people in hospital have had 2 doses of vaccine) implies the vaccine is having at least a 95% protective effect – and probably more like 98%, or maybe even higher. Let me explain… 1/n
Good thread…
Can you provide a link to this thread?
The logic is fairly simple (I assume):
Half of people (roughly) have been vaccinated, but they are by far the most vulnerable half. If unprotected they would have been much more likely to end up in hospital than the young people who have not been vaccinated at all yet.
...a little bit of math...
95+% effective.
Yeah. In summary:
- More than 70% of hospitalisations have previously been from the 2-dosed cohort - Accordingly, for every 9 people in hospital from outside the 2-dosed cohort, you would expect around 21 from the 2-dosed cohort (if no-one was vaxed). - Instead, we have only 1 person from the 2-dosed cohort. (9-1 out of every 10) - So the vaccination reduces the number from c.21 to c.1; 95%+ successful in preventing hospitalisations
Forgive me if i am somewhat sceptical about the AZ vaccine . Has the government gone too far down the road of backing it to now back away from it? If (as it seems very likely) a BBC young presenter can die from it isn't it worth thinking how many BBC presenters are there (not huge numbers) and conclude that the risk of dying from it is not "less than 1 in a 100,000) but greater? I think we trust the government too much , Iraq lies , wartime secrets (perhaps necessary at the time of course) show the government does lie when it thinks it needs to - Is it doing it here? Also think of the scandals like the Post Office convictions ? We trust authority too much
Anyway I will be literally playing Russian roulette next week when i get my second jab of AZ. Odds may be better than 5 in 6 but not sure they are 99999 in 100000
Philip's already pointed out the flaw in your maths (I do hope you don't bet!). On trust, I don't trust the government particularly.
But that's ok, because medicine safety is handled by the independent MHRA. I've dealt with them a bit (being on the receiving end of their scrutiny when doing applications for CPRD data - which was much more testing than the scrutiny from the organisation that gave me a few 100k of their money to do the research, despite MHRA standing to gain a few 10k from me for data access if approved) and I don't think I've come across a more impressive organisation. I do trust them.
I also think that, even if our government was engaged in a mass conspiracy about AZN side effects (odd to admit to them at all and phase out AZN for under 40s if so?) then it's unlikely that the US, not needing AZN particularly - and with AZN a threat to the profits of their own companies - would engage in the same. Likewise many EU countries and the EU commission, who have taken every opportunity to trash AZN. Why would they not delight in highlighting a more serious risk.
I'm under 40. I'm an epidemiologist. I've done some work with pharma adverse effects in the past and have many colleagues in that area. I weighed up the risks and took the AZN vaccine when it was offered.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
They play everything for political gain, so yes, the data they are most interested in for this decision is opinion polls, not hospitalisation and deaths.
I think that’s untrue and unfair
But the path of least resistance is to open up June 21. It would be a big call to accelerate so I don’t see them taking that risk.
What I am suggesting is they will open on June 21 but are being downbeat now for tactical purposes
There is a problem though. Even if you take Bolton and Blackburn out of the equation cases in England are rising exponentially-
We need to be realistic about the possibility of a delay. That does not mean we’ll never open up nor does it mean a significant delay. But there is a realistic possibility. We don’t and can’t know for sure yet.
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
In reality they should not have laid out such a rigid timetable if they were planning a hands-off approach to stuff like border control. As we have been commenting on, countries who had much tougher border controls have resumed almost normal life early. We are an island, we could have done so, but Wazzock in number 10 hates to make decisions.
I would say that if you dislike the likely delay to unlocking and the reason for the delay, you should blame the person responsible. But instead you will sing His praises and keep ramping his government. So perhaps they know there are millions of gullible cultists out there who will cheer on anything they do and that is what drives their actions / non-actions.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
I think that we realise now that Johnson leaves everything to the last minute, until only one option remains.
I think businesses will all be allowed to reopen, but would expect Social Distancing and masks to continue in most settings.
Yes, I suspect this is most likely, like we got with travel. A headline heralding the unlocking, with a catch in the detail.
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
Agreed, and the broader issue is if not now when?
Given its seasonality in the UK, I fail to see how we are going to be in a clearly and significantly better position to unlock until next summer at the earliest.
July and August 2021 also count as summer. 5-10 weeks of further vaccination could make a lot of difference if there were to be a delay, making matters clearly and significantly better. Add in some half decent weather then a later Summer opening could help a lot - depending on how things pan out in the next few weeks. IMHO they will stagger it, bring some further easing in on 21 June, the rest later on in late July or late August/early Sept.
And then what happens when they start getting concerned about the need for “booster” vaccines in the autumn, delays and/or large numbers not bothering - are the models then going to start speculating that the vaccine effect has worn off and people aren’t taking things seriously? And then, “learning the lessons of the need for early action” - everyone back into lockdown again...
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
They play everything for political gain, so yes, the data they are most interested in for this decision is opinion polls, not hospitalisation and deaths.
I think that’s untrue and unfair
But the path of least resistance is to open up June 21. It would be a big call to accelerate so I don’t see them taking that risk.
What I am suggesting is they will open on June 21 but are being downbeat now for tactical purposes
Ok, so when you say they are "playing this for political gain" implying that they are being clever and opportunistic that is fine. When I agree they are playing it for political gain but point out how cynical and unethical that is, it is unfair. I understand.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
Agreed, and the broader issue is if not now when?
Given its seasonality in the UK, I fail to see how we are going to be in a clearly and significantly better position to unlock until next summer at the earliest.
July and August 2021 also count as summer. 5-10 weeks of further vaccination could make a lot of difference if there were to be a delay, making matters clearly and significantly better. Add in some half decent weather then a later Summer opening could help a lot - depending on how things pan out in the next few weeks. IMHO they will stagger it, bring some further easing in on 21 June, the rest later on in late July or late August/early Sept.
And then what happens when they start getting concerned about the need for “booster” vaccines in the autumn, delays and/or large numbers not bothering - are the models then going to start speculating that the vaccine effect has worn off and people aren’t taking things seriously? And then, “learning the lessons of the need for early action” - everyone back into lockdown again...
You’re assuming that will happen. That post should be used in future textbooks as a perfect example of begging the question.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
I think that we realise now that Johnson leaves everything to the last minute, until only one option remains.
I think businesses will all be allowed to reopen, but would expect Social Distancing and masks to continue in most settings.
If they must continue something I'd prefer it be masks but no social distancing, as the latter is such an almighty embuggerance to the normal operation of so many things.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
In the same way that the UK's punt on getting to the front of the queue for AZ paid off early in the year, Europe's heavy investment in Pfizer is working for them now. Production of the AZ jab has turned out to be harder and slower than anyone expected, even if the EU-AZ wrangling has been worse than undignified.
The Pfizer production network has scaled up brilliantly- though it's still got a way to go to solve this problem globally. 8 billion people = 16 billion jabs needed from somewhere.
But in terms of Europe, France has got about 20 million Pfizer doses booked in for delivery in June (source: https://covidtracker.fr/vaccintracker/). If you consider that France has done about 34 million jabs so far, that's huge. (For comparison, the UK has done about 61 million doses so far).
So it's swings and roundabouts. Though there's no question that the UK really needed the doses it got earlier in the year.
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
In reality they should not have laid out such a rigid timetable if they were planning a hands-off approach to stuff like border control. As we have been commenting on, countries who had much tougher border controls have resumed almost normal life early. We are an island, we could have done so, but Wazzock in number 10 hates to make decisions.
I would say that if you dislike the likely delay to unlocking and the reason for the delay, you should blame the person responsible. But instead you will sing His praises and keep ramping his government. So perhaps they know there are millions of gullible cultists out there who will cheer on anything they do and that is what drives their actions / non-actions.
You of all people are aware of the supply chain issues we would have faced if we had introduced the same level of border control as those you refer to. Aus and NZ don’t rely on truck drivers importing food.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
Forgive me if i am somewhat sceptical about the AZ vaccine . Has the government gone too far down the road of backing it to now back away from it? If (as it seems very likely) a BBC young presenter can die from it isn't it worth thinking how many BBC presenters are there (not huge numbers) and conclude that the risk of dying from it is not "less than 1 in a 100,000) but greater? I think we trust the government too much , Iraq lies , wartime secrets (perhaps necessary at the time of course) show the government does lie when it thinks it needs to - Is it doing it here? Also think of the scandals like the Post Office convictions ? We trust authority too much
Anyway I will be literally playing Russian roulette next week when i get my second jab of AZ. Odds may be better than 5 in 6 but not sure they are 99999 in 100000
So if someone dies who has a rare profession, the odds are higher still? Completely flawed logic.
Had the PM succumbed to covid, since there's only one Prime Minister that would have established a death rate of 100% ???
I think a statistics refresh might be in order here!
It's not a totally unreasonable approach to take, in the absence of good information and when there may be some doubt about the official account. I remember at the start of the pandemic when Iran was playing down the extent of the outbreak, the high proportion of MPs who got sick or died was a signal that there was something awry with the official story there. Having said that, I have had the AZ jab and will have my second in July without too many qualms. It's quite possible that the risks are a bit higher than officially stated, but still quite low and better than catching Covid.
I think the demonstration is made well by @Dura_Ace 's dead pool. Last I knew, nobody had won because none of the named people had succumbed to COVID. So, some found it distasteful, but ultimately (even if it was eventually won), it delivered an important statistical point.
I know a few on here have lost parents and elderly relatives, may they rest in peace, but for the rest of us it is the testimony of people you know, even virtually or second hand, by which we naturally make our assessments.
So, for me personally a couple of small anecdotes by which I assessed stuff: my wife has an Indian born co-worker, who even though he doesn't originate from one of the hotspot States in the northern plains, has had 3 relatives succumb to COVID.
Secondly, in my youth I sometimes used to frequent or pass through Hyde Market. There was, categorically, no shortage of old ladies, despite some hundred of their number being missing. And though 215 murders is a comprehendible number, spreading that over decades and a mid sized town meant the demographics were hardly touched.
I think Leon is right to an extent, the politics of COVID deaths will ultimately be the politics of 'someone else'. The lockdown affects us all, the deaths are, for most people, second hand (like the bit in High Fidelity where the reaction to a death travels through the different degrees of separation). We know the politics of this: it is politics of mass unemployment in the 80s and the various reactions of single-employer northern towns, multi-employer towns (where typically 5-10% were directly affected), and southern shires. And we know how that played out. For COVID the pain n is spread more evenly.
Anyhow, I've rambled a bit beyond what I intended, so I'll leave it there.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
The political fallout from rowing back on 21st June will be far, far greater than "the bodies piling high" (which doesn't seem to have much of a negative voter fallout anyway) and with the benefit of the vaccine, that shouldn't be the problem it was last Autumn. And Boris loves to be loved, so the cast in stone date, is, well, cast in stone. Besides which, Jenny Harries seems to relish her job as Johnson's human shield, so if it does go wrong Dame (sounds perfect) Jenny can carry the can.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
The point is that PHE released the information and no matter her role are you saying the PHE release as quoted by the Guardian is wrong and if so can you provide your source
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
The political fallout from rowing back on 21st June will be far, far greater than "the bodies piling high" (which doesn't seem to have much of a negative voter fallout anyway) and with the benefit of the vaccine, that shouldn't be the problem it was last Autumn. And Boris loves to be loved, so the cast in stone date, is, well, cast in stone. Besides which, Jenny Harries seems to relish her job as Johnson's human shield, so if it does go wrong Dame (sounds perfect) Jenny can carry the can.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
The point is that PHE released the information and no matter her role are you saying the PHE release as quoted by the Guardian is wrong and if so can you provide your source
I don't think the numbers absolve the mistake. One death from negligence is too many.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
I think that we realise now that Johnson leaves everything to the last minute, until only one option remains.
I think businesses will all be allowed to reopen, but would expect Social Distancing and masks to continue in most settings.
I slightly disagree - I think we will transition to guidance only, possibly with the exception of clinical settings, and maybe public transport. You will need to keep your fight going at the hospital to reduce the social distancing requirements!
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
The political fallout from rowing back on 21st June will be far, far greater than "the bodies piling high" (which doesn't seem to have much of a negative voter fallout anyway) and with the benefit of the vaccine, that shouldn't be the problem it was last Autumn. And Boris loves to be loved, so the cast in stone date, is, well, cast in stone. Besides which, Jenny Harries seems to relish her job as Johnson's human shield, so if it does go wrong Dame (sounds perfect) Jenny can carry the can.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
The point is that PHE released the information and no matter her role are you saying the PHE release as quoted by the Guardian is wrong and if so can you provide your source
I don't think the numbers absolve the mistake. One death from negligence is too many.
In a pandemic that has engulfed the world and caused thousands of deaths due to the unknown virus it is not even credible to suggest one death from negligence is one too many
Of course many mistakes were made and not just in the UK but across the world and lessons have to be learnt
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The vaccination program has been supply constrained from the start. If every company had delivered the maximums talked of in the contracts, we would have had 10s of millions of vaccinations in stock when approval went through, for example.
Instead of shouting about law suits and starting wars, the vaccine task force just got on with it.
The upsurge in India ended pretty much any chance of getting further external supplies from there for a while.
The issue is really making good on the "second dose promises" as this makes clear. Overall vaccinations have gone up substantially - if you look before and after the couple of days around 20th March, there is a step change.
From what I can see, the plan was to guarantee the second doses from existing supply lines and anything else would speed up more first doses.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
They play everything for political gain, so yes, the data they are most interested in for this decision is opinion polls, not hospitalisation and deaths.
I think that’s untrue and unfair
But the path of least resistance is to open up June 21. It would be a big call to accelerate so I don’t see them taking that risk.
What I am suggesting is they will open on June 21 but are being downbeat now for tactical purposes
There is a problem though. Even if you take Bolton and Blackburn out of the equation cases in England are rising exponentially-
We need to be realistic about the possibility of a delay. That does not mean we’ll never open up nor does it mean a significant delay. But there is a realistic possibility. We don’t and can’t know for sure yet.
From figures on this thread we know that the vaccines are 95% effective against hospitalization and that the population cohort responsible for 70% of hospitalizations is double-dosed.
For the same level of population infection this reduces hospitalizations by two-thirds.
This is why countries on the continent are opening up even with higher case rates and lower vaccination rates than us. They know that the vaccination of the most vulnerable gives them the leeway to do so.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
The political fallout from rowing back on 21st June will be far, far greater than "the bodies piling high" (which doesn't seem to have much of a negative voter fallout anyway) and with the benefit of the vaccine, that shouldn't be the problem it was last Autumn. And Boris loves to be loved, so the cast in stone date, is, well, cast in stone. Besides which, Jenny Harries seems to relish her job as Johnson's human shield, so if it does go wrong Dame (sounds perfect) Jenny can carry the can.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
The point is that PHE released the information and no matter her role are you saying the PHE release as quoted by the Guardian is wrong and if so can you provide your source
I don't think the numbers absolve the mistake. One death from negligence is too many.
But do you consider the other side in the context of the decision? The numbers of uninfected elderly who would have died if they stayed in hospital (which as we know were extremely dangerous places when the pandemic was at its peak). And the very real fear that the NHS was going to be overwhelmed and every available bed was vital.
From memory a major part of the problem was that, in the absence of large scale testing ability, public health official made guesses about informal signs of infectivity and time periods of incubation. And the level of a symptomatic transmission was simply not understood, or subject to confirmation bias.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
The political fallout from rowing back on 21st June will be far, far greater than "the bodies piling high" (which doesn't seem to have much of a negative voter fallout anyway) and with the benefit of the vaccine, that shouldn't be the problem it was last Autumn. And Boris loves to be loved, so the cast in stone date, is, well, cast in stone. Besides which, Jenny Harries seems to relish her job as Johnson's human shield, so if it does go wrong Dame (sounds perfect) Jenny can carry the can.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
The point is that PHE released the information and no matter her role are you saying the PHE release as quoted by the Guardian is wrong and if so can you provide your source
I don't think the numbers absolve the mistake. One death from negligence is too many.
Context matters though. In a global pandemic that has challenged the entire world, it would be surprising if NO mistakes happened that led to deaths.
two Britons entering Indonesia refused to be quarantined, citing: -their rights to go anywhere per “law of the nature” 🙄 - “law of the nature” has “higher hierarchy” than “man-made law”
I have one, which I fly at music festivals. It is useful to have a distinct flag in order to find your tent, though I also fly Oliver Cromwells Commonwealth Flag
But @Foxy, if you were to hang that up in your hospital in a room where patients were undergoing treatment, could that not be considered ... a false flag operation?
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
The question is the number of movements - how many patients discharged into how many homes vs staff and visitor movements. Then look at the infection rates in both....
Given that in many cases, the infection chain has actually been demonstrated, it should be provable - to the level of a scientific paper.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The Novavax didn't come through as we had expected.
Right, it is pretty obvious that something has gone wrong and a very important premise that 21st June was built on has not occurred. This failure to really accelerate vaccination seems to me to be much more significant than the increase in the Indian variant in multi-generational families and yet it is getting none of the attention.
It compares the travails of the current Labour Party with the situation in the 1930s when George Lansbury was leader and the aftermast. There are also references to George Orwell out-Liddling Rod Liddle.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
They play everything for political gain, so yes, the data they are most interested in for this decision is opinion polls, not hospitalisation and deaths.
I think that’s untrue and unfair
But the path of least resistance is to open up June 21. It would be a big call to accelerate so I don’t see them taking that risk.
What I am suggesting is they will open on June 21 but are being downbeat now for tactical purposes
There is a problem though. Even if you take Bolton and Blackburn out of the equation cases in England are rising exponentially-
We need to be realistic about the possibility of a delay. That does not mean we’ll never open up nor does it mean a significant delay. But there is a realistic possibility. We don’t and can’t know for sure yet.
From figures on this thread we know that the vaccines are 95% effective against hospitalization and that the population cohort responsible for 70% of hospitalizations is double-dosed.
For the same level of population infection this reduces hospitalizations by two-thirds.
This is why countries on the continent are opening up even with higher case rates and lower vaccination rates than us. They know that the vaccination of the most vulnerable gives them the leeway to do so.
Indeed. That thread is actually quite optimistic, I’m not sure whether @DougSeal has read it.
Sure, everyone would prefer it if positive tests were failing not rising, but if they are not translating into serious illness, surely that’s an important step forward we have to take as a society towards living with an endemic virus?
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
It won't be broken.
The MPs are going to need evidence of the re-emergence of the Black Death before they let the Government get away with any further general extensions.
Because we don't need any general extensions beyond 21st June. By then, the risk to the population will be a low risk to those who are awaiting their second jab - and the higher risk to refuseniks. It will be very much less than the toll taken from road traffic accidents - a price we pay for going about our lives.
Forgive me if i am somewhat sceptical about the AZ vaccine . Has the government gone too far down the road of backing it to now back away from it? If (as it seems very likely) a BBC young presenter can die from it isn't it worth thinking how many BBC presenters are there (not huge numbers) and conclude that the risk of dying from it is not "less than 1 in a 100,000) but greater? I think we trust the government too much , Iraq lies , wartime secrets (perhaps necessary at the time of course) show the government does lie when it thinks it needs to - Is it doing it here? Also think of the scandals like the Post Office convictions ? We trust authority too much
Anyway I will be literally playing Russian roulette next week when i get my second jab of AZ. Odds may be better than 5 in 6 but not sure they are 99999 in 100000
So if someone dies who has a rare profession, the odds are higher still? Completely flawed logic.
Had the PM succumbed to covid, since there's only one Prime Minister that would have established a death rate of 100% ???
I think a statistics refresh might be in order here!
It's not a totally unreasonable approach to take, in the absence of good information and when there may be some doubt about the official account. I remember at the start of the pandemic when Iran was playing down the extent of the outbreak, the high proportion of MPs who got sick or died was a signal that there was something awry with the official story there. Having said that, I have had the AZ jab and will have my second in July without too many qualms. It's quite possible that the risks are a bit higher than officially stated, but still quite low and better than catching Covid.
It's not the small sample that is the problem, per se, but the small sample combined with small cases.
How many BBC presenters are there? Maybe 10k? Say 5k had AZN. So 1/5000 death rate from that sample. A standard approach* to working out the 95% confidence interval for the death rate in the general populaion includes 0 in the lower bound on those data. So the incidence and sampe size combined are not enough for useful information.
If there were 20 deaths in that 5000 sample, then you'd have useful data (and a lower 95%CI that was not compatible** with a 1 in 100k or lower risk). That's why, as someone else posted, high numbers of cases among Iranian politicians was a pointer to official under-reporting there.
*this approach doesn't really work for such a low number of cases (edit: just run the numbers through the proper approach for such low incidence and the 95% CI still comforatble includes 1 in 100k) **outside the 95% confidence interval - could still be a statistical fluke, probability of seeing such numbers if true incidence was 1/100k would be <5% (if ouside the 99% CI then less than 1% and so on...)
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
In the same way that the UK's punt on getting to the front of the queue for AZ paid off early in the year, Europe's heavy investment in Pfizer is working for them now. Production of the AZ jab has turned out to be harder and slower than anyone expected, even if the EU-AZ wrangling has been worse than undignified.
The Pfizer production network has scaled up brilliantly- though it's still got a way to go to solve this problem globally. 8 billion people = 16 billion jabs needed from somewhere.
But in terms of Europe, France has got about 20 million Pfizer doses booked in for delivery in June (source: https://covidtracker.fr/vaccintracker/). If you consider that France has done about 34 million jabs so far, that's huge. (For comparison, the UK has done about 61 million doses so far).
So it's swings and roundabouts. Though there's no question that the UK really needed the doses it got earlier in the year.
Yes, that has undoubtedly saved lives. Most of the large EU countries are still (just) in 3 figures a day and we are (usually) in the single digits. Early vaccination has saved many thousands, possibly tens of thousands, as well as allowing us to open up as far as we have.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
The political fallout from rowing back on 21st June will be far, far greater than "the bodies piling high" (which doesn't seem to have much of a negative voter fallout anyway) and with the benefit of the vaccine, that shouldn't be the problem it was last Autumn. And Boris loves to be loved, so the cast in stone date, is, well, cast in stone. Besides which, Jenny Harries seems to relish her job as Johnson's human shield, so if it does go wrong Dame (sounds perfect) Jenny can carry the can.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
The point is that PHE released the information and no matter her role are you saying the PHE release as quoted by the Guardian is wrong and if so can you provide your source
I don't think the numbers absolve the mistake. One death from negligence is too many.
Well that fucks up Andy Burnham's chances of ever leading Labour then....
two Britons entering Indonesia refused to be quarantined, citing: -their rights to go anywhere per “law of the nature” 🙄 - “law of the nature” has “higher hierarchy” than “man-made law”
I have one, which I fly at music festivals. It is useful to have a distinct flag in order to find your tent, though I also fly Oliver Cromwells Commonwealth Flag
But @Foxy, if you were to hang that up in your hospital in a room where patients were undergoing treatment, could that not be considered ... a false flag operation?
I thank you!
Unfortunately infection control would take a dim view of me displaying flags in my consulting room!
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
In reality they should not have laid out such a rigid timetable if they were planning a hands-off approach to stuff like border control. As we have been commenting on, countries who had much tougher border controls have resumed almost normal life early. We are an island, we could have done so, but Wazzock in number 10 hates to make decisions.
I would say that if you dislike the likely delay to unlocking and the reason for the delay, you should blame the person responsible. But instead you will sing His praises and keep ramping his government. So perhaps they know there are millions of gullible cultists out there who will cheer on anything they do and that is what drives their actions / non-actions.
I've been consistently criticising the lack of a closed border and the pandering the the "but what about holidays" media.
I've been consistently saying that we should keep the border closed until after normal life is resumed and that the border should be the last thing to reopen.
I've been consistently attacking the government for its cowardly and timid reopening of domestic life.
I've been consistently saying there's zero excuses for delay.
I'm saying I will not under any circumstances support the government for any delay.
But other than that . . . yeah well done, I've not cheered on any of that!
If there are delays to 21 June I hope letters get sent to the 1922 Committee. Clear enough for you?
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
In the same way that the UK's punt on getting to the front of the queue for AZ paid off early in the year, Europe's heavy investment in Pfizer is working for them now. Production of the AZ jab has turned out to be harder and slower than anyone expected, even if the EU-AZ wrangling has been worse than undignified.
The Pfizer production network has scaled up brilliantly- though it's still got a way to go to solve this problem globally. 8 billion people = 16 billion jabs needed from somewhere.
But in terms of Europe, France has got about 20 million Pfizer doses booked in for delivery in June (source: https://covidtracker.fr/vaccintracker/). If you consider that France has done about 34 million jabs so far, that's huge. (For comparison, the UK has done about 61 million doses so far).
So it's swings and roundabouts. Though there's no question that the UK really needed the doses it got earlier in the year.
Yes, that has undoubtedly saved lives. Most of the large EU countries are still (just) in 3 figures a day and we are (usually) in the single digits. Early vaccination has saved many thousands, possibly tens of thousands, as well as allowing us to open up as far as we have.
In terms of deaths by day of death, it's been 2 weeks since we had a double digit death rate.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
So are you saying she is lying?
I am saying she is a loyal interpreter.
To be fair do you think the figures release by PHE to the Guardian are correct or not, and if not do you have your source
This is important as there is a public perception that tens of thousands died from patents being released to care homes when the number quoted is 286
This is not about politics but genuine fact checking
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
The political fallout from rowing back on 21st June will be far, far greater than "the bodies piling high" (which doesn't seem to have much of a negative voter fallout anyway) and with the benefit of the vaccine, that shouldn't be the problem it was last Autumn. And Boris loves to be loved, so the cast in stone date, is, well, cast in stone. Besides which, Jenny Harries seems to relish her job as Johnson's human shield, so if it does go wrong Dame (sounds perfect) Jenny can carry the can.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
The point is that PHE released the information and no matter her role are you saying the PHE release as quoted by the Guardian is wrong and if so can you provide your source
I don't think the numbers absolve the mistake. One death from negligence is too many.
Context matters though. In a global pandemic that has challenged the entire world, it would be surprising if NO mistakes happened that led to deaths.
Historically the cover up will override the initial error.
I understand why the Government have to deny mistakes as having a consequence.
To this day, despite the evidence to the contrary Blair claims he was right over Iraq. He does this because an admission of error makes all the lives lost, lost for nothing.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
So are you saying she is lying?
I am saying she is a loyal interpreter.
I don't think PHE will be lying, but there may be a spin put on the numbers.
For example, PHE determine X deaths were due to infected hospital discharges, Y due to staff and Z due to visitors, but there's also a large number of unknown cause (e.g. if someone may have been discharged with infection - not all were tested - and someone visited who later turned out to be infected). The government runs with the X known deaths figure, neglecting to say that it could be much larger if the many unknowns were also due to hospital discharge.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Yes, but I couldn't make out whether the figure was direct deaths (those sent out who later died of covid) or included indirect (those that were sent out, then passed the virus onto staff or other residents, who then succumbed). Potentially one transmission to staff could cause quite a lot of spread, particularly as during the first wave care homes did not have either the PPE or the training to minimise spread.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
His piece doesn't refer to the PHE data. With regards to hindsight that is inevitable - all reviews of past actions do this. It is literal hindsight - of the rewriting history kind - to pretend that the release of covid patients unscreened into care homes was not responsible for the case and death clusters that followed immediately.
Did Covid spontaneously explode into these care homes when patients were released from hospital? No. The cult will defend literally anything to try and use the hindsight defence that "we did nothing wrong". Tell that to the families of the dead.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The Novavax didn't come through as we had expected.
Right, it is pretty obvious that something has gone wrong and a very important premise that 21st June was built on has not occurred. This failure to really accelerate vaccination seems to me to be much more significant than the increase in the Indian variant in multi-generational families and yet it is getting none of the attention.
Well, back in February and March, when we were confidently expecting 1 million vaccinations a day this month, we considered the unlockdown plan very conservative, and expected the dates to be brought forward*. I think someone said it was a rare example where the government was underpromising and would be able to overdeliver.
As it's turned out you could argue their caution was warranted, which would mean they could keep to the June 21st date because they anticipated shortfalls in vaccine supply.
* For example, I thought I would be double-dosed in time for the Scotland v England football match, but instead I will likely be double-dosed by the 4th Test against India.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
So are you saying she is lying?
I am saying she is a loyal interpreter.
To be fair do you think the figures release by PHE to the Guardian are correct or not, and if not do you have your source
This is important as there is a public perception that tens of thousands died from patents being released to care homes when the number quoted is 286
This is not about politics but genuine fact checking
I have no reason to doubt them, although interpretation of which numbers are appropriate will be doubtless analysed in an enquiry.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
They play everything for political gain, so yes, the data they are most interested in for this decision is opinion polls, not hospitalisation and deaths.
I think that’s untrue and unfair
But the path of least resistance is to open up June 21. It would be a big call to accelerate so I don’t see them taking that risk.
What I am suggesting is they will open on June 21 but are being downbeat now for tactical purposes
There is a problem though. Even if you take Bolton and Blackburn out of the equation cases in England are rising exponentially-
We need to be realistic about the possibility of a delay. That does not mean we’ll never open up nor does it mean a significant delay. But there is a realistic possibility. We don’t and can’t know for sure yet.
From figures on this thread we know that the vaccines are 95% effective against hospitalization and that the population cohort responsible for 70% of hospitalizations is double-dosed.
For the same level of population infection this reduces hospitalizations by two-thirds.
This is why countries on the continent are opening up even with higher case rates and lower vaccination rates than us. They know that the vaccination of the most vulnerable gives them the leeway to do so.
Indeed. That thread is actually quite optimistic, I’m not sure whether @DougSeal has read it.
Sure, everyone would prefer it if positive tests were failing not rising, but if they are not translating into serious illness, surely that’s an important step forward we have to take as a society towards living with an endemic virus?
This is what I have been saying for a while. We are seeing cases and admissions in the unvaccinated groups. The vaccinated groups are static or falling.
Forgive me if i am somewhat sceptical about the AZ vaccine . Has the government gone too far down the road of backing it to now back away from it? If (as it seems very likely) a BBC young presenter can die from it isn't it worth thinking how many BBC presenters are there (not huge numbers) and conclude that the risk of dying from it is not "less than 1 in a 100,000) but greater? I think we trust the government too much , Iraq lies , wartime secrets (perhaps necessary at the time of course) show the government does lie when it thinks it needs to - Is it doing it here? Also think of the scandals like the Post Office convictions ? We trust authority too much
Anyway I will be literally playing Russian roulette next week when i get my second jab of AZ. Odds may be better than 5 in 6 but not sure they are 99999 in 100000
Philip's already pointed out the flaw in your maths (I do hope you don't bet!). On trust, I don't trust the government particularly.
But that's ok, because medicine safety is handled by the independent MHRA. I've dealt with them a bit (being on the receiving end of their scrutiny when doing applications for CPRD data - which was much more testing than the scrutiny from the organisation that gave me a few 100k of their money to do the research, despite MHRA standing to gain a few 10k from me for data access if approved) and I don't think I've come across a more impressive organisation. I do trust them.
I also think that, even if our government was engaged in a mass conspiracy about AZN side effects (odd to admit to them at all and phase out AZN for under 40s if so?) then it's unlikely that the US, not needing AZN particularly - and with AZN a threat to the profits of their own companies - would engage in the same. Likewise many EU countries and the EU commission, who have taken every opportunity to trash AZN. Why would they not delight in highlighting a more serious risk.
I'm under 40. I'm an epidemiologist. I've done some work with pharma adverse effects in the past and have many colleagues in that area. I weighed up the risks and took the AZN vaccine when it was offered.
I do bet actually and do well especially on politics - (Count Binface over 20K votes? 8/1 I gave the tip) - anyway you sound an arrogant person and I know how stats work - As I said using prominent people (BBC presenters ) might not be exact science but it surely causes a further look at official stats. I dont understand your faith in official lines - I mean Iraq - did you blindly think Saddam had chemical weapons ? Here is a tip - use independent data/observations /anything to verify official stats always and if it does not tie up then at least question it
Forgive me if i am somewhat sceptical about the AZ vaccine . Has the government gone too far down the road of backing it to now back away from it? If (as it seems very likely) a BBC young presenter can die from it isn't it worth thinking how many BBC presenters are there (not huge numbers) and conclude that the risk of dying from it is not "less than 1 in a 100,000) but greater? I think we trust the government too much , Iraq lies , wartime secrets (perhaps necessary at the time of course) show the government does lie when it thinks it needs to - Is it doing it here? Also think of the scandals like the Post Office convictions ? We trust authority too much
Anyway I will be literally playing Russian roulette next week when i get my second jab of AZ. Odds may be better than 5 in 6 but not sure they are 99999 in 100000
So if someone dies who has a rare profession, the odds are higher still? Completely flawed logic.
Had the PM succumbed to covid, since there's only one Prime Minister that would have established a death rate of 100% ???
I think a statistics refresh might be in order here!
It's not a totally unreasonable approach to take, in the absence of good information and when there may be some doubt about the official account. I remember at the start of the pandemic when Iran was playing down the extent of the outbreak, the high proportion of MPs who got sick or died was a signal that there was something awry with the official story there. Having said that, I have had the AZ jab and will have my second in July without too many qualms. It's quite possible that the risks are a bit higher than officially stated, but still quite low and better than catching Covid.
I think the demonstration is made well by @Dura_Ace 's dead pool. Last I knew, nobody had won because none of the named people had succumbed to COVID. So, some found it distasteful, but ultimately (even if it was eventually won), it delivered an important statistical point.
I know a few on here have lost parents and elderly relatives, may they rest in peace, but for the rest of us it is the testimony of people you know, even virtually or second hand, by which we naturally make our assessments.
So, for me personally a couple of small anecdotes by which I assessed stuff: my wife has an Indian born co-worker, who even though he doesn't originate from one of the hotspot States in the northern plains, has had 3 relatives succumb to COVID.
Secondly, in my youth I sometimes used to frequent or pass through Hyde Market. There was, categorically, no shortage of old ladies, despite some hundred of their number being missing. And though 215 murders is a comprehendible number, spreading that over decades and a mid sized town meant the demographics were hardly touched.
I think Leon is right to an extent, the politics of COVID deaths will ultimately be the politics of 'someone else'. The lockdown affects us all, the deaths are, for most people, second hand (like the bit in High Fidelity where the reaction to a death travels through the different degrees of separation). We know the politics of this: it is politics of mass unemployment in the 80s and the various reactions of single-employer northern towns, multi-employer towns (where typically 5-10% were directly affected), and southern shires. And we know how that played out. For COVID the pain n is spread more evenly.
Anyhow, I've rambled a bit beyond what I intended, so I'll leave it there.
Something else to consider is how Covid has affected non Covid deaths: not being able to see the terminally ill, people dying alone, limited attendance at funerals, families not able to comfort each other. That’ll be quite a large number of people. Whether it has political consequences is another matter, but ‘let the bodies pile high’ and allegations of aiming at herd immunity have reverberations outside the bare numbers.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Yes, but I couldn't make out whether the figure was direct deaths (those sent out who later died of covid) or included indirect (those that were sent out, then passed the virus onto staff or other residents, who then succumbed). Potentially one transmission to staff could cause quite a lot of spread, particularly as during the first wave care homes did not have either the PPE or the training to minimise spread.
In the press conference yesterday she did say the deaths from hospital transfer in care homes was a very small percentage and the real problem was from care staff and visitors bringing the virus into the home
These PHE figures seem to confirm that (in England)
It compares the travails of the current Labour Party with the situation in the 1930s when George Lansbury was leader and the aftermast. There are also references to George Orwell out-Liddling Rod Liddle.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The Novavax didn't come through as we had expected.
Right, it is pretty obvious that something has gone wrong and a very important premise that 21st June was built on has not occurred. This failure to really accelerate vaccination seems to me to be much more significant than the increase in the Indian variant in multi-generational families and yet it is getting none of the attention.
Well, back in February and March, when we were confidently expecting 1 million vaccinations a day this month, we considered the unlockdown plan very conservative, and expected the dates to be brought forward*. I think someone said it was a rare example where the government was underpromising and would be able to overdeliver.
As it's turned out you could argue their caution was warranted, which would mean they could keep to the June 21st date because they anticipated shortfalls in vaccine supply.
* For example, I thought I would be double-dosed in time for the Scotland v England football match, but instead I will likely be double-dosed by the 4th Test against India.
My theory is that the 21st June plan was based on the-all-but-guaranteed supply lines/production. With any extra being from improvements in production and purchases from other overseas suppliers.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
and there is no cause for concern - flat line of under 100 hospital admissions per day and no rise in total beds occupied still at nugatory levels.
The Scottish numbers are pretty small and are being driven by greater Glasgow where nearly half the new cases in all of Scotland are. But the latest "newly reported" figure (why are we using this crap instead of actual dates?) for Scotland for hospital admissions is 16. I don't see how that is driving the UK figure.
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
The political fallout from rowing back on 21st June will be far, far greater than "the bodies piling high" (which doesn't seem to have much of a negative voter fallout anyway) and with the benefit of the vaccine, that shouldn't be the problem it was last Autumn. And Boris loves to be loved, so the cast in stone date, is, well, cast in stone. Besides which, Jenny Harries seems to relish her job as Johnson's human shield, so if it does go wrong Dame (sounds perfect) Jenny can carry the can.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
The point is that PHE released the information and no matter her role are you saying the PHE release as quoted by the Guardian is wrong and if so can you provide your source
I don't think the numbers absolve the mistake. One death from negligence is too many.
Well that fucks up Andy Burnham's chances of ever leading Labour then....
...and so it should. I am content for Drakeford to spend the rest of his days in jail for all the Covid deaths from negligence that occurred on his watch in Wales.
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
In reality they should not have laid out such a rigid timetable if they were planning a hands-off approach to stuff like border control. As we have been commenting on, countries who had much tougher border controls have resumed almost normal life early. We are an island, we could have done so, but Wazzock in number 10 hates to make decisions.
I would say that if you dislike the likely delay to unlocking and the reason for the delay, you should blame the person responsible. But instead you will sing His praises and keep ramping his government. So perhaps they know there are millions of gullible cultists out there who will cheer on anything they do and that is what drives their actions / non-actions.
I've been consistently criticising the lack of a closed border and the pandering the the "but what about holidays" media.
I've been consistently saying that we should keep the border closed until after normal life is resumed and that the border should be the last thing to reopen.
I've been consistently attacking the government for its cowardly and timid reopening of domestic life.
I've been consistently saying there's zero excuses for delay.
I'm saying I will not under any circumstances support the government for any delay.
But other than that . . . yeah well done, I've not cheered on any of that!
If there are delays to 21 June I hope letters get sent to the 1922 Committee. Clear enough for you?
You absolutely have done all of those things - vocally and consistently. And you are punishing their long list of failures by supporting the government! Unless you've defected to Labour or the LibDems or the Wazza Independents instead of supporting the Tories?
The is exactly my point about the Cult of Boris. People will sit and complain about all the stuff they think the government have done wrong. Of the businesses closes, opportunities gone and loved ones list. And then show their disgust by voting Tory.
That prannock Trump said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose votes. The Tory equivalent is the government incompetence closing someone's business and killing their granny and them showing their disgust by voting Tory.
It isn't just because Labour have imploded and the LibDems self-destructed in 2015. Its because people have decided they will forgive the liar of literally any transgression. Politically it truly is a phenomenon we haven't seen the likes of before.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
So are you saying she is lying?
I am saying she is a loyal interpreter.
To be fair do you think the figures release by PHE to the Guardian are correct or not, and if not do you have your source
This is important as there is a public perception that tens of thousands died from patents being released to care homes when the number quoted is 286
This is not about politics but genuine fact checking
I have no reason to doubt them, although interpretation of which numbers are appropriate will be doubtless analysed in an enquiry.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
There's a few glaring logic flaws in your issue there. Such as that the 19k deaths were throughout the entire pandemic and yet the not testing residents was in March 2020 and by early April 2020 the testing was in place. Do you think deaths in January 2021, or November 2020, or even June 2020 were because of an absence of testing before discharge in March 2020?
The simple fact of the matter is that if the virus is prevalent in the community then staff members who live in the community are going to be infected and they are going to bring it into work with them - and that is essentially unavoidable even with the strictest of restrictions.
The only realistic way to stop the virus from infecting homes is to stop the virus infecting anyone in the community. Which is why notions like "risk stratification" last year were patent codswallop.
I think the demonstration is made well by @Dura_Ace 's dead pool. Last I knew, nobody had won because none of the named people had succumbed to COVID. So, some found it distasteful, but ultimately (even if it was eventually won), it delivered an important statistical point.
A few people on it did die, the Notorious RBG and Phil the Greek for two, but not from Covid.
@Paristonda got the closest with Johnson I reckon but alas Comrade Corona of the Wuhan Battalion narrowly failed in his glorious mission.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
and there is no cause for concern - flat line of under 100 hospital admissions per day and no rise in total beds occupied still at nugatory levels.
The Scottish numbers are pretty small and are being driven by greater Glasgow where nearly half the new cases in all of Scotland are. But the latest "newly reported" figure (why are we using this crap instead of actual dates?) for Scotland for hospital admissions is 16. I don't see how that is driving the UK figure.
The data quoted is to the 23rd and the 7 day admissions rise for England then is 13%, with Wales extremely low and Scotland running considerably above 20%. All of the numbers are low hence the percentages swing around a bit. England hasn't had a day in triple figures for weeks, whilst 16 in Scotland scaled up to England would be over 160.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The Novavax didn't come through as we had expected.
Right, it is pretty obvious that something has gone wrong and a very important premise that 21st June was built on has not occurred. This failure to really accelerate vaccination seems to me to be much more significant than the increase in the Indian variant in multi-generational families and yet it is getting none of the attention.
Well, back in February and March, when we were confidently expecting 1 million vaccinations a day this month, we considered the unlockdown plan very conservative, and expected the dates to be brought forward*. I think someone said it was a rare example where the government was underpromising and would be able to overdeliver.
As it's turned out you could argue their caution was warranted, which would mean they could keep to the June 21st date because they anticipated shortfalls in vaccine supply.
* For example, I thought I would be double-dosed in time for the Scotland v England football match, but instead I will likely be double-dosed by the 4th Test against India.
What it comes down to is that the government does not want to have anything qualifying their "good news" story on vaccinations so they have kept the focus on the Indian variant but it is the failure to deliver enough vaccines is the real problem and which is causing the uncertainty.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
His piece doesn't refer to the PHE data. With regards to hindsight that is inevitable - all reviews of past actions do this. It is literal hindsight - of the rewriting history kind - to pretend that the release of covid patients unscreened into care homes was not responsible for the case and death clusters that followed immediately.
Did Covid spontaneously explode into these care homes when patients were released from hospital? No. The cult will defend literally anything to try and use the hindsight defence that "we did nothing wrong". Tell that to the families of the dead.
My quoting Ed Conway's piece was separate to the PHE figures
And to be fair you seem to have conflated the two, when my question to you was do you agree with Ed Conway and that his commentary is likely to be prescient to the conclusion of any enquiry
I am not playing politics, I am endeavouring to provide the platform for a sensible debate
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
and there is no cause for concern - flat line of under 100 hospital admissions per day and no rise in total beds occupied still at nugatory levels.
The Scottish numbers are pretty small and are being driven by greater Glasgow where nearly half the new cases in all of Scotland are. But the latest "newly reported" figure (why are we using this crap instead of actual dates?) for Scotland for hospital admissions is 16. I don't see how that is driving the UK figure.
Because he is a cretin and has no clue what he is talking about
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I wonder if they are playing this for political gain?
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
They play everything for political gain, so yes, the data they are most interested in for this decision is opinion polls, not hospitalisation and deaths.
I think that’s untrue and unfair
But the path of least resistance is to open up June 21. It would be a big call to accelerate so I don’t see them taking that risk.
What I am suggesting is they will open on June 21 but are being downbeat now for tactical purposes
There is a problem though. Even if you take Bolton and Blackburn out of the equation cases in England are rising exponentially-
We need to be realistic about the possibility of a delay. That does not mean we’ll never open up nor does it mean a significant delay. But there is a realistic possibility. We don’t and can’t know for sure yet.
We need to watch the hospitalisations. There will be a rise, but how rapid and how far?
The unvaxxed are not immune, nor do they have zero or negligible risk of being seriously ill, but their rate of serious illness is considerably less than that of the vaxxed cohorts prior to vaccination. They are also far more likely to pull through - at least to the point of leaving hospital.
There is a real concern about lingering effects - the eightfold rise in organ damage for the hospital survivors and the rate of prolonged symptoms for some of even the "mild" cases - but that will be weighed up in the decision.
It boils down to how many younger and healthier people we will be willing to allow to be seriously ill or chronically affected. This number is, as said, considerably lower than the equivalent number in the older and more vulnerable cohorts, even if it is not zero or negligible. It's all a question of trade-offs.
Then, against that, they'll have to weigh up the expected changes over time of the numbers vaccinated. If each week removes 500k from those left unprotected, that points to a higher economic and freedom cost in delaying until however-many-more are vaxxed; if it's 1.5 million a week, it's a different trade-off; if it's 2.5 million a week, it's another one yet again.
For me, my closest loved-ones should all have been offered at least one dose by 21st June, so I'm not a disinterested judge of this.
My best guess is that they will look at the figures and unless the hospitalisations are skyrocketing - which I very much doubt they will be, given all we know - they'll open up to a considerable degree at least.
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
and there is no cause for concern - flat line of under 100 hospital admissions per day and no rise in total beds occupied still at nugatory levels.
The Scottish numbers are pretty small and are being driven by greater Glasgow where nearly half the new cases in all of Scotland are. But the latest "newly reported" figure (why are we using this crap instead of actual dates?) for Scotland for hospital admissions is 16. I don't see how that is driving the UK figure.
The data quoted is to the 23rd and the 7 day admissions rise for England then is 13%, with Wales extremely low and Scotland running considerably above 20%. All of the numbers are low hence the percentages swing around a bit. England hasn't had a day in triple figures for weeks, whilst 16 in Scotland scaled up to England would be over 160.
LOL, if your granny had testicles she could be your grandpa sounds more sensible than that mince.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
His piece doesn't refer to the PHE data. With regards to hindsight that is inevitable - all reviews of past actions do this. It is literal hindsight - of the rewriting history kind - to pretend that the release of covid patients unscreened into care homes was not responsible for the case and death clusters that followed immediately.
Did Covid spontaneously explode into these care homes when patients were released from hospital? No. The cult will defend literally anything to try and use the hindsight defence that "we did nothing wrong". Tell that to the families of the dead.
Except it is you that is twisting in the wind and ignoring reality.
Do you think that with the prevalence of Covid in the community there is some sort of magical shield around care home staff that would magically protect them from being infectious and bringing the infection into work with them?
Considering you're using data from the entire pandemic despite the fact that the policy with care homes was changed all the way back in April 2020, you are either being entirely dishonest with your data or you haven't thought this through. It seems like PHE have actually thought it through unlike you.
In Brussels there was shock and anger. In Switzerland, quiet celebration and relief — but, for some, doubts about what exactly comes next.
On Wednesday, Bern announced it was formally withdrawing from negotiations to codify future relations with the EU into a single overarching “framework agreement” — a back-and-forth exchange that has dominated an increasingly fraught relationship with Brussels since 2014.
“You’d never sign a contract like that in business,” said Philip Erzinger, the head of a Kompass Europe, an anti-framework agreement campaign group. “It was one sided. It required us to take on EU law without any mechanism for saying No. It would have been a direct interference in our system of direct democracy and cantons in Switzerland.”
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
So are you saying she is lying?
I am saying she is a loyal interpreter.
To be fair do you think the figures release by PHE to the Guardian are correct or not, and if not do you have your source
This is important as there is a public perception that tens of thousands died from patents being released to care homes when the number quoted is 286
This is not about politics but genuine fact checking
Well I remember when you got excited over these numbers and went quiet when this happened.
10 March 2020: Harries resists calls to cancel large events, saying she was "following the science" and downplay the severity of the virus by saying most will just feel "a bit rough".
10 March 2020: Harries admits that the Government's strategy will allow "significant numbers" to die.
She focuses on handwashing, not ventilation, misinforming the public about how the virus spreads.
12 March 2020: Harries says wearing masks "not a good idea" and says that "people can adversely put themselves at more risk" by wearing masks.
20 March 2020: Harries says that the country has a "perfectly adequate supply of PPE"
25 March 2020: Harries is dismissive of the approaches taken by the likes of Singapore (370 times fewer deaths per capita then UK) and South Korea (57 times fewer) when giving evidence before Parliament.
6 March 2020: Harries says that testing is "not an appropriate mechanism as we go forward"
5 May 2020: Harries tells the Commons Health Select Committee that shortages were the reason for stopping testing. This completely contradicts her earlier claims that it was no longer the strategy and foreshadowing that testing would be stopped (5 March)
Forgive me if i am somewhat sceptical about the AZ vaccine . Has the government gone too far down the road of backing it to now back away from it? If (as it seems very likely) a BBC young presenter can die from it isn't it worth thinking how many BBC presenters are there (not huge numbers) and conclude that the risk of dying from it is not "less than 1 in a 100,000) but greater? I think we trust the government too much , Iraq lies , wartime secrets (perhaps necessary at the time of course) show the government does lie when it thinks it needs to - Is it doing it here? Also think of the scandals like the Post Office convictions ? We trust authority too much
Anyway I will be literally playing Russian roulette next week when i get my second jab of AZ. Odds may be better than 5 in 6 but not sure they are 99999 in 100000
Philip's already pointed out the flaw in your maths (I do hope you don't bet!). On trust, I don't trust the government particularly.
But that's ok, because medicine safety is handled by the independent MHRA. I've dealt with them a bit (being on the receiving end of their scrutiny when doing applications for CPRD data - which was much more testing than the scrutiny from the organisation that gave me a few 100k of their money to do the research, despite MHRA standing to gain a few 10k from me for data access if approved) and I don't think I've come across a more impressive organisation. I do trust them.
I also think that, even if our government was engaged in a mass conspiracy about AZN side effects (odd to admit to them at all and phase out AZN for under 40s if so?) then it's unlikely that the US, not needing AZN particularly - and with AZN a threat to the profits of their own companies - would engage in the same. Likewise many EU countries and the EU commission, who have taken every opportunity to trash AZN. Why would they not delight in highlighting a more serious risk.
I'm under 40. I'm an epidemiologist. I've done some work with pharma adverse effects in the past and have many colleagues in that area. I weighed up the risks and took the AZN vaccine when it was offered.
I do bet actually and do well especially on politics - (Count Binface over 20K votes? 8/1 I gave the tip) - anyway you sound an arrogant person and I know how stats work - As I said using prominent people (BBC presenters ) might not be exact science but it surely causes a further look at official stats. I dont understand your faith in official lines - I mean Iraq - did you blindly think Saddam had chemical weapons ? Here is a tip - use independent data/observations /anything to verify official stats always and if it does not tie up then at least question it
I'm sorry you took offence at the (I think) "hope you don't bet" comment. I did not mean to offend you, so my apologies (stats knowledge is not particularly relevant to betting, other than being able to handle odds). I suspect I know stats better than you (it being my day job - apologies if you're equally qualified) but that doesn't make me a better bettor than you, so it was a bit of a crass comment, even though intended only as a joke.
Yes, you can use a small sample, but only if you have sufficient cases, 20 deaths among BBC presenters (far fewer, probably, I haven't run the numbers as I don't know the sample size, which is also needed) and you start to have some evidence. Your logic is similar to - despite knowing that winning the lottery is very unlikely - buying a ticket anyway because your neighbour just won. It's common and it's how the human mind works (and why Camelot big up the winners and have the whole 'it could be you' slogan). Or, on a darker note, to the woman who was jailed for being unfortunate enough to have a 'statistically improbable' number of her chidren die from cot death. Very rare events happen all the time, because there ae an awful lot of people for them to happen to.
On evidence. Yep, all evidence is important. One death in a post-hoc constructed sample is not evidence. I didn't believe the Iraq claims because there was plenty of evidence to the contrary. I was, naively, luke-warm on the war because I thought it might be worthwhile in the end for the country and the region. Boy was I wrong!
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
and there is no cause for concern - flat line of under 100 hospital admissions per day and no rise in total beds occupied still at nugatory levels.
There has been a small uptick in admissions...
There is an uptick in test positivity locally. Quite a strong surge vaccination programme using Pfizer amongst the affected districts of Leicester in the over 30's.
There is no possible justification for postponing the 21 June date other than "the NHS might collapse".
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
In reality they should not have laid out such a rigid timetable if they were planning a hands-off approach to stuff like border control. As we have been commenting on, countries who had much tougher border controls have resumed almost normal life early. We are an island, we could have done so, but Wazzock in number 10 hates to make decisions.
I would say that if you dislike the likely delay to unlocking and the reason for the delay, you should blame the person responsible. But instead you will sing His praises and keep ramping his government. So perhaps they know there are millions of gullible cultists out there who will cheer on anything they do and that is what drives their actions / non-actions.
I've been consistently criticising the lack of a closed border and the pandering the the "but what about holidays" media.
I've been consistently saying that we should keep the border closed until after normal life is resumed and that the border should be the last thing to reopen.
I've been consistently attacking the government for its cowardly and timid reopening of domestic life.
I've been consistently saying there's zero excuses for delay.
I'm saying I will not under any circumstances support the government for any delay.
But other than that . . . yeah well done, I've not cheered on any of that!
If there are delays to 21 June I hope letters get sent to the 1922 Committee. Clear enough for you?
You absolutely have done all of those things - vocally and consistently. And you are punishing their long list of failures by supporting the government! Unless you've defected to Labour or the LibDems or the Wazza Independents instead of supporting the Tories?
The is exactly my point about the Cult of Boris. People will sit and complain about all the stuff they think the government have done wrong. Of the businesses closes, opportunities gone and loved ones list. And then show their disgust by voting Tory.
That prannock Trump said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose votes. The Tory equivalent is the government incompetence closing someone's business and killing their granny and them showing their disgust by voting Tory.
It isn't just because Labour have imploded and the LibDems self-destructed in 2015. Its because people have decided they will forgive the liar of literally any transgression. Politically it truly is a phenomenon we haven't seen the likes of before.
Its not a Cult, its just that the Tories are the best option available right now.
Have Labour, or the LibDems, or the Wazza Independents or anyone else come out against reopening for holidays? Have any of them said that we should reopen faster? Simply saying in hindsight "oh you should have put India on the red list sooner" doesn't count.
The only people in Parliament who seem to reflect what I am thinking on this now are people like Steve Baker etc who sit in the Tory Party. The Lib Dems get close and seem sometimes like they're on the cusp of actually growing some balls and developing some liberal policies, but then back away or don't push it hard.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
So are you saying she is lying?
I am saying she is a loyal interpreter.
To be fair do you think the figures release by PHE to the Guardian are correct or not, and if not do you have your source
This is important as there is a public perception that tens of thousands died from patents being released to care homes when the number quoted is 286
This is not about politics but genuine fact checking
Well I remember when you got excited over these numbers and went quiet when this happened.
10 March 2020: Harries resists calls to cancel large events, saying she was "following the science" and downplay the severity of the virus by saying most will just feel "a bit rough".
10 March 2020: Harries admits that the Government's strategy will allow "significant numbers" to die.
She focuses on handwashing, not ventilation, misinforming the public about how the virus spreads.
12 March 2020: Harries says wearing masks "not a good idea" and says that "people can adversely put themselves at more risk" by wearing masks.
20 March 2020: Harries says that the country has a "perfectly adequate supply of PPE"
25 March 2020: Harries is dismissive of the approaches taken by the likes of Singapore (370 times fewer deaths per capita then UK) and South Korea (57 times fewer) when giving evidence before Parliament.
6 March 2020: Harries says that testing is "not an appropriate mechanism as we go forward"
5 May 2020: Harries tells the Commons Health Select Committee that shortages were the reason for stopping testing. This completely contradicts her earlier claims that it was no longer the strategy and foreshadowing that testing would be stopped (5 March)
The piece published in the Guardian is the central point in all this, not Jenny Harries though she did make the point in yesterday's press conference
The question is are you disputing PHE figures of 286 transfer deaths in care homes or not
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
and there is no cause for concern - flat line of under 100 hospital admissions per day and no rise in total beds occupied still at nugatory levels.
The Scottish numbers are pretty small and are being driven by greater Glasgow where nearly half the new cases in all of Scotland are. But the latest "newly reported" figure (why are we using this crap instead of actual dates?) for Scotland for hospital admissions is 16. I don't see how that is driving the UK figure.
The data quoted is to the 23rd and the 7 day admissions rise for England then is 13%, with Wales extremely low and Scotland running considerably above 20%. All of the numbers are low hence the percentages swing around a bit. England hasn't had a day in triple figures for weeks, whilst 16 in Scotland scaled up to England would be over 160.
Perhaps the English should tell Scottish residents not to come to England with Eng nats on the road border telling our Caledonian cousins to fuck off? Just as Scots nats did to the English last summer.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
So are you saying she is lying?
I am saying she is a loyal interpreter.
To be fair do you think the figures release by PHE to the Guardian are correct or not, and if not do you have your source
This is important as there is a public perception that tens of thousands died from patents being released to care homes when the number quoted is 286
This is not about politics but genuine fact checking
Well I remember when you got excited over these numbers and went quiet when this happened.
10 March 2020: Harries resists calls to cancel large events, saying she was "following the science" and downplay the severity of the virus by saying most will just feel "a bit rough".
10 March 2020: Harries admits that the Government's strategy will allow "significant numbers" to die.
She focuses on handwashing, not ventilation, misinforming the public about how the virus spreads.
12 March 2020: Harries says wearing masks "not a good idea" and says that "people can adversely put themselves at more risk" by wearing masks.
20 March 2020: Harries says that the country has a "perfectly adequate supply of PPE"
25 March 2020: Harries is dismissive of the approaches taken by the likes of Singapore (370 times fewer deaths per capita then UK) and South Korea (57 times fewer) when giving evidence before Parliament.
6 March 2020: Harries says that testing is "not an appropriate mechanism as we go forward"
5 May 2020: Harries tells the Commons Health Select Committee that shortages were the reason for stopping testing. This completely contradicts her earlier claims that it was no longer the strategy and foreshadowing that testing would be stopped (5 March)
The piece published in the Guardian is the central point in all this, not Jenny Harries though she did make the point in yesterday's press conference
The question is are you disputing PHE figures of 286 transfer deaths in care homes or not
Have PHE published the data? Have you seen the data? Can you provide a link?
Needs greater exposure & investigation - another bit of "received wisdom" that may well be wrong:
The narrative is so set after this long, and its so surprising (to me anyway), that I suspect for most it will simply not be believed, or just wont sink in, even if it is right.
Needs greater exposure & investigation - another bit of "received wisdom" that may well be wrong:
Quite a disclaimer though as spotted by this tweeter:
"I am not competent to review the report (pdf linked in next tweet) but I note it does include this disclaimer:
Index hospital-associated cases would not be identified if the admitted patient was not tested for COVID-19 either due to asymptomatic status or testing practices."
Considering how hard it was to get a test in the early days of the pandemic, that is quite a select population. It appears those 286 deaths were from people known to have covid, but discharged anyway.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
To be fair the figures surprised me, but Jenny Harries said in the press conference yesterday that the discharge of patients into care homes accounted for a very small percentage of deaths
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
Jenny Harries seems to relish her role as Johnson's human shield, and has done so throughout the pandemic. She has been a loyal lieutenant when the likes of Vallence, Whitty and JVT have drifted wildly from the script.
So are you saying she is lying?
I am saying she is a loyal interpreter.
To be fair do you think the figures release by PHE to the Guardian are correct or not, and if not do you have your source
This is important as there is a public perception that tens of thousands died from patents being released to care homes when the number quoted is 286
This is not about politics but genuine fact checking
Well I remember when you got excited over these numbers and went quiet when this happened.
10 March 2020: Harries resists calls to cancel large events, saying she was "following the science" and downplay the severity of the virus by saying most will just feel "a bit rough".
10 March 2020: Harries admits that the Government's strategy will allow "significant numbers" to die.
She focuses on handwashing, not ventilation, misinforming the public about how the virus spreads.
12 March 2020: Harries says wearing masks "not a good idea" and says that "people can adversely put themselves at more risk" by wearing masks.
20 March 2020: Harries says that the country has a "perfectly adequate supply of PPE"
25 March 2020: Harries is dismissive of the approaches taken by the likes of Singapore (370 times fewer deaths per capita then UK) and South Korea (57 times fewer) when giving evidence before Parliament.
6 March 2020: Harries says that testing is "not an appropriate mechanism as we go forward"
5 May 2020: Harries tells the Commons Health Select Committee that shortages were the reason for stopping testing. This completely contradicts her earlier claims that it was no longer the strategy and foreshadowing that testing would be stopped (5 March)
The piece published in the Guardian is the central point in all this, not Jenny Harries though she did make the point in yesterday's press conference
The question is are you disputing PHE figures of 286 transfer deaths in care homes or not
Have PHE published the data? Have you seen the data? Can you provide a link?
I have quoted from the front page of the Guardian but also Tim Bales tweet quoted just now reaffirms the story
My concern is that the promised increase in vaccinations has not really come. We have had a small uplift but nothing more. Germany now seems to be delivering 1m vaccinations a day. I am not sure why we are not.
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
The 20% rise is driven by Scotland and delayed reporting. Given we're talking about an England decision, the relevant data is -
and there is no cause for concern - flat line of under 100 hospital admissions per day and no rise in total beds occupied still at nugatory levels.
The Scottish numbers are pretty small and are being driven by greater Glasgow where nearly half the new cases in all of Scotland are. But the latest "newly reported" figure (why are we using this crap instead of actual dates?) for Scotland for hospital admissions is 16. I don't see how that is driving the UK figure.
The data quoted is to the 23rd and the 7 day admissions rise for England then is 13%, with Wales extremely low and Scotland running considerably above 20%. All of the numbers are low hence the percentages swing around a bit. England hasn't had a day in triple figures for weeks, whilst 16 in Scotland scaled up to England would be over 160.
But the UK increase in hospitilisations is currently 20% in the last 7 days. Scotland is roughly 1/12th of that figure. I agree that if you "scaled it up" it would produce a higher rate but why would you when its only a small part of the whole? England is going to break back through the 100 admissions a day figure imminently if it hasn't already.
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
I would be fascinated to see that PHE data. What we know is that the number of excess Covid deaths in care homes was more than 19k, not 286. Covid outbreaks in homes directly after the release of residents from hospital is both well known and mapped.
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
There's a few glaring logic flaws in your issue there. Such as that the 19k deaths were throughout the entire pandemic and yet the not testing residents was in March 2020 and by early April 2020 the testing was in place. Do you think deaths in January 2021, or November 2020, or even June 2020 were because of an absence of testing before discharge in March 2020?
The simple fact of the matter is that if the virus is prevalent in the community then staff members who live in the community are going to be infected and they are going to bring it into work with them - and that is essentially unavoidable even with the strictest of restrictions.
The only realistic way to stop the virus from infecting homes is to stop the virus infecting anyone in the community. Which is why notions like "risk stratification" last year were patent codswallop.
So many care homes had staff sleeping on site and not going home. Once pox gets into a closed environment it can kill whomever it pleases. Deliberately not testing patients let it in.
Comments
After a long fallow period, back on form.....
And it won't be as easy a one to break as many of the others!
I posted this last night from todays Guardian front page as I expect it will surprise many
New data from Public Health England(PHE) released yesterday found that the transfer of patients with covid from hospital to care homes resulted in 286 deaths, 96 outbreaks in care homes were related to this problem - about 1.6% of all care home outbreaks
And this confirms Jenny Harries comments today that the release of patients to care homes was a much smaller issue than the introduction of covid into care homes by staff and visitors
I would also suggest this article by Ed Conway of Sky should be read by everyone who listened to, or has an interest in Cummings appearance at the select committee, as I believe this is very prescient and is more than likely to be the conclusion of any enquiry unto the handling of covid 19
http://news.sky.com/story/dominic-cummings-recollection-of-coronavirus-spread-was-seen-through-lens-of-hindsight-12318568
Not a few people might get sick. But the NHS might collapse. That was the threat.
This should have been over months ago. It must end 21/6. No ifs, no buts, no excuses.
Given its seasonality in the UK, I fail to see how we are going to be in a clearly and significantly better position to unlock until next summer at the earliest.
They have a big lead at the moment. So they can run the risks of letting people down only to turn around and say “Liberty matters” in June and get credit from the libertarians plus those who are data driven
And if the data goes the other way they’ve laid the groundwork
We really only have a few days left for vaccines that are going to be effective by 21st June. We have missed an opportunity here to go from a pretty safe 75% to a very safe 80%+. That said, I still think we should proceed with the 21st unless there is a material increase in hospitalisations over the next 14 days. In the last week these have increased by 20%. If that continues at that rate for the next fortnight we have a problem and the government faces some difficult choices.
I think businesses will all be allowed to reopen, but would expect Social Distancing and masks to continue in most settings.
But the path of least resistance is to open up June 21. It would be a big call to accelerate so I don’t see them taking that risk.
What I am suggesting is they will open on June 21 but are being downbeat now for tactical purposes
There does seem to be a concerted effort to sweep the death toll under the vaccinations rug. That we have a fantastic vaccination record was not predicated on the wholesale slaughter of so many by so few. We could have not acted with such irresponsible stupidity AND developed the vaccine programme.
- More than 70% of hospitalisations have previously been from the 2-dosed cohort
- Accordingly, for every 9 people in hospital from outside the 2-dosed cohort, you would expect around 21 from the 2-dosed cohort (if no-one was vaxed).
- Instead, we have only 1 person from the 2-dosed cohort. (9-1 out of every 10)
- So the vaccination reduces the number from c.21 to c.1; 95%+ successful in preventing hospitalisations
But that's ok, because medicine safety is handled by the independent MHRA. I've dealt with them a bit (being on the receiving end of their scrutiny when doing applications for CPRD data - which was much more testing than the scrutiny from the organisation that gave me a few 100k of their money to do the research, despite MHRA standing to gain a few 10k from me for data access if approved) and I don't think I've come across a more impressive organisation. I do trust them.
I also think that, even if our government was engaged in a mass conspiracy about AZN side effects (odd to admit to them at all and phase out AZN for under 40s if so?) then it's unlikely that the US, not needing AZN particularly - and with AZN a threat to the profits of their own companies - would engage in the same. Likewise many EU countries and the EU commission, who have taken every opportunity to trash AZN. Why would they not delight in highlighting a more serious risk.
I'm under 40. I'm an epidemiologist. I've done some work with pharma adverse effects in the past and have many colleagues in that area. I weighed up the risks and took the AZN vaccine when it was offered.
https://mobile.twitter.com/BristOliver/status/1398168871073468416
We need to be realistic about the possibility of a delay. That does not mean we’ll never open up nor does it mean a significant delay. But there is a realistic possibility. We don’t and can’t know for sure yet.
I would say that if you dislike the likely delay to unlocking and the reason for the delay, you should blame the person responsible. But instead you will sing His praises and keep ramping his government. So perhaps they know there are millions of gullible cultists out there who will cheer on anything they do and that is what drives their actions / non-actions.
I would be interested in your observations on Ed Conways rather lengthy piece
The Pfizer production network has scaled up brilliantly- though it's still got a way to go to solve this problem globally. 8 billion people = 16 billion jabs needed from somewhere.
But in terms of Europe, France has got about 20 million Pfizer doses booked in for delivery in June (source: https://covidtracker.fr/vaccintracker/). If you consider that France has done about 34 million jabs so far, that's huge. (For comparison, the UK has done about 61 million doses so far).
So it's swings and roundabouts. Though there's no question that the UK really needed the doses it got earlier in the year.
I know a few on here have lost parents and elderly relatives, may they rest in peace, but for the rest of us it is the testimony of people you know, even virtually or second hand, by which we naturally make our assessments.
So, for me personally a couple of small anecdotes by which I assessed stuff: my wife has an Indian born co-worker, who even though he doesn't originate from one of the hotspot States in the northern plains, has had 3 relatives succumb to COVID.
Secondly, in my youth I sometimes used to frequent or pass through Hyde Market. There was, categorically, no shortage of old ladies, despite some hundred of their number being missing. And though 215 murders is a comprehendible number, spreading that over decades and a mid sized town meant the demographics were hardly touched.
I think Leon is right to an extent, the politics of COVID deaths will ultimately be the politics of 'someone else'. The lockdown affects us all, the deaths are, for most people, second hand (like the bit in High Fidelity where the reaction to a death travels through the different degrees of separation). We know the politics of this: it is politics of mass unemployment in the 80s and the various reactions of single-employer northern towns, multi-employer towns (where typically 5-10% were directly affected), and southern shires. And we know how that played out. For COVID the pain n is spread more evenly.
Anyhow, I've rambled a bit beyond what I intended, so I'll leave it there.
https://twitter.com/changed_gear/status/1398024695878983683?s=21
Of course many mistakes were made and not just in the UK but across the world and lessons have to be learnt
Instead of shouting about law suits and starting wars, the vaccine task force just got on with it.
The upsurge in India ended pretty much any chance of getting further external supplies from there for a while.
The issue is really making good on the "second dose promises" as this makes clear. Overall vaccinations have gone up substantially - if you look before and after the couple of days around 20th March, there is a step change.
From what I can see, the plan was to guarantee the second doses from existing supply lines and anything else would speed up more first doses.
For the same level of population infection this reduces hospitalizations by two-thirds.
This is why countries on the continent are opening up even with higher case rates and lower vaccination rates than us. They know that the vaccination of the most vulnerable gives them the leeway to do so.
From memory a major part of the problem was that, in the absence of large scale testing ability, public health official made guesses about informal signs of infectivity and time periods of incubation. And the level of a symptomatic transmission was simply not understood, or subject to confirmation bias.
I thank you!
Given that in many cases, the infection chain has actually been demonstrated, it should be provable - to the level of a scientific paper.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/june-2021/the-road-to-hartlepool-pier/
It compares the travails of the current Labour Party with the situation in the 1930s when George Lansbury was leader and the aftermast. There are also references to George Orwell out-Liddling Rod Liddle.
It is a good read.
https://www.ft.com/content/4169ea4b-d6d7-4a2e-bc91-480550c2f539
Sure, everyone would prefer it if positive tests were failing not rising, but if they are not translating into serious illness, surely that’s an important step forward we have to take as a society towards living with an endemic virus?
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/
and there is no cause for concern - flat line of under 100 hospital admissions per day and no rise in total beds occupied still at nugatory levels.
The MPs are going to need evidence of the re-emergence of the Black Death before they let the Government get away with any further general extensions.
Because we don't need any general extensions beyond 21st June. By then, the risk to the population will be a low risk to those who are awaiting their second jab - and the higher risk to refuseniks. It will be very much less than the toll taken from road traffic accidents - a price we pay for going about our lives.
How many BBC presenters are there? Maybe 10k? Say 5k had AZN. So 1/5000 death rate from that sample. A standard approach* to working out the 95% confidence interval for the death rate in the general populaion includes 0 in the lower bound on those data. So the incidence and sampe size combined are not enough for useful information.
If there were 20 deaths in that 5000 sample, then you'd have useful data (and a lower 95%CI that was not compatible** with a 1 in 100k or lower risk). That's why, as someone else posted, high numbers of cases among Iranian politicians was a pointer to official under-reporting there.
*this approach doesn't really work for such a low number of cases (edit: just run the numbers through the proper approach for such low incidence and the 95% CI still comforatble includes 1 in 100k)
**outside the 95% confidence interval - could still be a statistical fluke, probability of seeing such numbers if true incidence was 1/100k would be <5% (if ouside the 99% CI then less than 1% and so on...)
Tis a pity with such a fine collection as mine...
I've been consistently saying that we should keep the border closed until after normal life is resumed and that the border should be the last thing to reopen.
I've been consistently attacking the government for its cowardly and timid reopening of domestic life.
I've been consistently saying there's zero excuses for delay.
I'm saying I will not under any circumstances support the government for any delay.
But other than that . . . yeah well done, I've not cheered on any of that!
If there are delays to 21 June I hope letters get sent to the 1922 Committee. Clear enough for you?
This is important as there is a public perception that tens of thousands died from patents being released to care homes when the number quoted is 286
This is not about politics but genuine fact checking
I understand why the Government have to deny mistakes as having a consequence.
To this day, despite the evidence to the contrary Blair claims he was right over Iraq. He does this because an admission of error makes all the lives lost, lost for nothing.
For example, PHE determine X deaths were due to infected hospital discharges, Y due to staff and Z due to visitors, but there's also a large number of unknown cause (e.g. if someone may have been discharged with infection - not all were tested - and someone visited who later turned out to be infected). The government runs with the X known deaths figure, neglecting to say that it could be much larger if the many unknowns were also due to hospital discharge.
Did Covid spontaneously explode into these care homes when patients were released from hospital? No. The cult will defend literally anything to try and use the hindsight defence that "we did nothing wrong". Tell that to the families of the dead.
As it's turned out you could argue their caution was warranted, which would mean they could keep to the June 21st date because they anticipated shortfalls in vaccine supply.
* For example, I thought I would be double-dosed in time for the Scotland v England football match, but instead I will likely be double-dosed by the 4th Test against India.
and
Here is a tip - use independent data/observations /anything to verify official stats always and if it does not tie up then at least question it
These PHE figures seem to confirm that (in England)
The is exactly my point about the Cult of Boris. People will sit and complain about all the stuff they think the government have done wrong. Of the businesses closes, opportunities gone and loved ones list. And then show their disgust by voting Tory.
That prannock Trump said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose votes. The Tory equivalent is the government incompetence closing someone's business and killing their granny and them showing their disgust by voting Tory.
It isn't just because Labour have imploded and the LibDems self-destructed in 2015. Its because people have decided they will forgive the liar of literally any transgression. Politically it truly is a phenomenon we haven't seen the likes of before.
The simple fact of the matter is that if the virus is prevalent in the community then staff members who live in the community are going to be infected and they are going to bring it into work with them - and that is essentially unavoidable even with the strictest of restrictions.
The only realistic way to stop the virus from infecting homes is to stop the virus infecting anyone in the community. Which is why notions like "risk stratification" last year were patent codswallop.
@Paristonda got the closest with Johnson I reckon but alas Comrade Corona of the Wuhan Battalion narrowly failed in his glorious mission.
And to be fair you seem to have conflated the two, when my question to you was do you agree with Ed Conway and that his commentary is likely to be prescient to the conclusion of any enquiry
I am not playing politics, I am endeavouring to provide the platform for a sensible debate
There will be a rise, but how rapid and how far?
The unvaxxed are not immune, nor do they have zero or negligible risk of being seriously ill, but their rate of serious illness is considerably less than that of the vaxxed cohorts prior to vaccination. They are also far more likely to pull through - at least to the point of leaving hospital.
There is a real concern about lingering effects - the eightfold rise in organ damage for the hospital survivors and the rate of prolonged symptoms for some of even the "mild" cases - but that will be weighed up in the decision.
It boils down to how many younger and healthier people we will be willing to allow to be seriously ill or chronically affected. This number is, as said, considerably lower than the equivalent number in the older and more vulnerable cohorts, even if it is not zero or negligible. It's all a question of trade-offs.
Then, against that, they'll have to weigh up the expected changes over time of the numbers vaccinated. If each week removes 500k from those left unprotected, that points to a higher economic and freedom cost in delaying until however-many-more are vaxxed; if it's 1.5 million a week, it's a different trade-off; if it's 2.5 million a week, it's another one yet again.
For me, my closest loved-ones should all have been offered at least one dose by 21st June, so I'm not a disinterested judge of this.
My best guess is that they will look at the figures and unless the hospitalisations are skyrocketing - which I very much doubt they will be, given all we know - they'll open up to a considerable degree at least.
Do you think that with the prevalence of Covid in the community there is some sort of magical shield around care home staff that would magically protect them from being infectious and bringing the infection into work with them?
Considering you're using data from the entire pandemic despite the fact that the policy with care homes was changed all the way back in April 2020, you are either being entirely dishonest with your data or you haven't thought this through. It seems like PHE have actually thought it through unlike you.
On Wednesday, Bern announced it was formally withdrawing from negotiations to codify future relations with the EU into a single overarching “framework agreement” — a back-and-forth exchange that has dominated an increasingly fraught relationship with Brussels since 2014.
“You’d never sign a contract like that in business,” said Philip Erzinger, the head of a Kompass Europe, an anti-framework agreement campaign group. “It was one sided. It required us to take on EU law without any mechanism for saying No. It would have been a direct interference in our system of direct democracy and cantons in Switzerland.”
https://www.ft.com/content/10ede16f-0b1e-4f4f-8fd6-4ec6ac090ed0?segmentId=114a04fe-353d-37db-f705-204c9a0a157b
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/mar/06/uk-statistics-authority-rebukes-gove-over-observers-brexit-figures
Jenny Harries has been so wrong on so much.
See this twitter thread, for example.
https://twitter.com/matthewlesh/status/1397962846256967684
Selected highlights.
10 March 2020: Harries resists calls to cancel large events, saying she was "following the science" and downplay the severity of the virus by saying most will just feel "a bit rough".
10 March 2020: Harries admits that the Government's strategy will allow "significant numbers" to die.
She focuses on handwashing, not ventilation, misinforming the public about how the virus spreads.
12 March 2020: Harries says wearing masks "not a good idea" and says that "people can adversely put themselves at more risk" by wearing masks.
20 March 2020: Harries says that the country has a "perfectly adequate supply of PPE"
25 March 2020: Harries is dismissive of the approaches taken by the likes of Singapore (370 times fewer deaths per capita then UK) and South Korea (57 times fewer) when giving evidence before Parliament.
6 March 2020: Harries says that testing is "not an appropriate mechanism as we go forward"
5 May 2020: Harries tells the Commons Health Select Committee that shortages were the reason for stopping testing. This completely contradicts her earlier claims that it was no longer the strategy and foreshadowing that testing would be stopped (5 March)
Please see my other comment
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/3412229#Comment_3412229
on why you can't draw the conclusions you are drawing from the data, but why you could get useful information from a lot of cases.
Yes, you can use a small sample, but only if you have sufficient cases, 20 deaths among BBC presenters (far fewer, probably, I haven't run the numbers as I don't know the sample size, which is also needed) and you start to have some evidence. Your logic is similar to - despite knowing that winning the lottery is very unlikely - buying a ticket anyway because your neighbour just won. It's common and it's how the human mind works (and why Camelot big up the winners and have the whole 'it could be you' slogan). Or, on a darker note, to the woman who was jailed for being unfortunate enough to have a 'statistically improbable' number of her chidren die from cot death. Very rare events happen all the time, because there ae an awful lot of people for them to happen to.
On evidence. Yep, all evidence is important. One death in a post-hoc constructed sample is not evidence. I didn't believe the Iraq claims because there was plenty of evidence to the contrary. I was, naively, luke-warm on the war because I thought it might be worthwhile in the end for the country and the region. Boy was I wrong!
https://www.leicestercityccg.nhs.uk/my-health/coronavirus-advice/coronavirus-vaccine/additional-covid-vaccination-clinics/
This thread on recent trends is good. I am not a lockdown enthusiast, but some of the signals that we are seeing to set off a sense of deja vu.
https://twitter.com/ADMBriggs/status/1397930238642819082?s=19
Have Labour, or the LibDems, or the Wazza Independents or anyone else come out against reopening for holidays? Have any of them said that we should reopen faster? Simply saying in hindsight "oh you should have put India on the red list sooner" doesn't count.
The only people in Parliament who seem to reflect what I am thinking on this now are people like Steve Baker etc who sit in the Tory Party. The Lib Dems get close and seem sometimes like they're on the cusp of actually growing some balls and developing some liberal policies, but then back away or don't push it hard.
2021 as Boris Johnson's exit date is 8.6 over on Betfair.
Not dipping my toe in because I've already got longer odds a while back.
The question is are you disputing PHE figures of 286 transfer deaths in care homes or not
"I am not competent to review the report (pdf linked in next tweet) but I note it does include this disclaimer:
Index hospital-associated cases would not be identified if the admitted patient was not tested for COVID-19 either due to asymptomatic status or testing practices."
https://twitter.com/WillAdamsWriter/status/1398185908264964101?s=19
Considering how hard it was to get a test in the early days of the pandemic, that is quite a select population. It appears those 286 deaths were from people known to have covid, but discharged anyway.