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
So no, you've not seen the data and cannot provide a link to the data.
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.
Another way of looking at it - scaled to per 100k population per area
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've Googled it and can't find it. Would be genuinely fascinated to see it as it runs counter-factual to both the reported actualite of the time and logic. I'm not saying they - or more likely the reporting of what they have said - are wrong. Its just that when someone comes out with proof the moon is made of cheese you need to see the data.
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.
No - I never suggested they were going to alter their decision for political gain, which you implied
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.
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.
Like I said. You have a long long list of complaints about the Tories. And you will demonstrate your annoyance by voting Tory.
They've taken you for a chump mate. They can act with utter disdain for all of you knowing that you're voting for them no matter how hard they screw you over.
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.
Not many. A few, a well publicised few. It is not remotely plausible for the overwhelming majority of homes or their staff.
Do you really think every care home in the country should have done that? Residents have been banned from seeing their families for the past year, you think care staff should have been too?
Bear in mind the care sector is overwhelmingly female, do you think mothers who work in care should have been separated from their children for the past 12 months?
How about thinking for a second before you rant. I have carers in my family, none of them would have agreed to be separated from their children for 12 months to live on site in a care home. 🤦♂️
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
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.”
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.
Like I said. You have a long long list of complaints about the Tories. And you will demonstrate your annoyance by voting Tory.
They've taken you for a chump mate. They can act with utter disdain for all of you knowing that you're voting for them no matter how hard they screw you over.
Voting is sometimes about choosing the lesser evil.
If the Lib Dems or another party sort themselves out then I could be tempted to vote for them. But they haven't done. At least the Tories have tried for the past 12 months - they've not gotten everything right but they've at least made decisions, put ideas forwards.
What have the opposition done?? Carp from the sidelines after the fact?
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
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.
It's like the overseas travel myth, when it only accounted for 0.5% of infections during the first wave. Once the virus got here in January, closing the borders was pointless until we eliminated it here, which was never going to happen.
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
Poor chap. His entire message has become 'Lockdown Earlier, Lockdown Harder', and yet all the nation seems to care about is that June 21 not slip by a single day, come hell or high water...
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
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.”
A big issue is the direct democracy angle in Switzerland - it's long been a stumbling block for joining Europe. Large numbers of Swiss politicians would like to join the EU... But the Swiss believe in the right to change all their laws by referenda. And that is written into their constitution.
The EU wants laws that can't been changed at a national level, to govern agreements.
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
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.
Another factor is how one attributes a death to a cause. Suppose that an infected hospital patient is discharged to a care home, infects an agency-staffed carer but nobody else, and then the carer goes on to infect dozens of other patients at multiple homes. Are those deaths caused by staff infections, or the index patient?
Having said that, I have no trouble believing that most care home deaths were not due to hospital discharge policy. There were just not that many discharged patients, compared with hundreds of thousands of staff going in and out every day, transmission can be asymptomatic, and the infections occurred when community infection rates were high. It has always been, to me, a classic case of a compelling narrative ("Matt Hancock caused thousands of deaths...") and magical thinking ("we could have prevented this if only..."), garnished with a slice of hindsight and latent guilt, running ahead of the evidence. There are many such cases in this pandemic.
Poor chap. His entire message has become 'Lockdown Earlier, Lockdown Harder', and yet all the nation seems to care about is that June 21 not slip by a single day, come hell or high water...
All Journalists care about is filling column space / air time.
Which means stories move on quickly especially if the story is your plans for June are up in smoke.
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
So no, you've not seen the data and cannot provide a link to the data.
At times you are simply unfair
I have quoted the Guardian as the source of the story and others on here have posted tweets about it and it is an important issue
I know I am getting on and we do not share our politics but sometimes I maybe do post something that is relevant
What do you expect on ConHome? It's all they are talking about on LabourList. True enough, the Canary lost interest mid way through Wednesday morning, and is blaming Starmer and Blair...
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
Especially if masks are worn around people's necks.
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.
The care home CEOs I talk to are clear that the vector was staff and visitors. They don’t blame the government for the block booking decision they made in the context of fears about the NHS being overwhelmed
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
From a quick look, I guess the key quesion is testing - hospital acquired infection requires hospital stay within 14 days of positive Covid test. So, does someone discharged asymptomatic ever get tested? Or at least, within 14 days? Does someone who is dishcharged and dies in the care home before any other cases are detected ever get tested? Was post-mortem testing at all common early 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.
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
So no, you've not seen the data and cannot provide a link to the data.
At times you are simply unfair
I have quoted the Guardian as the source of the story and others on here have posted tweets about it and it is an important issue
I know I am getting on and we do not share our politics but sometimes I maybe do post something that is relevant
See my post below - the flow chart of infection sources is quite interesting. Even if you shift *all* the uncertain outcomes to causing an outbreak, it doesn't change very much.
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
So no, you've not seen the data and cannot provide a link to the data.
At times you are simply unfair
I have quoted the Guardian as the source of the story and others on here have posted tweets about it and it is an important issue
I know I am getting on and we do not share our politics but sometimes I maybe do post something that is relevant
You miss the general point which is that if you are quoting numerical evidence - this site likes to see the actual evidence.
You may have noticed that from polling data the devil is in the detail not the press release / headline story.
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
The issue is you are drawing a conclusion, however tentatively, based on n=1. It’s confirmation bias on your part.
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
So no, you've not seen the data and cannot provide a link to the data.
At times you are simply unfair
I have quoted the Guardian as the source of the story and others on here have posted tweets about it and it is an important issue
I know I am getting on and we do not share our politics but sometimes I maybe do post something that is relevant
This is a data obsessed site, don't be surprised if people ask to see the numbers!
As I noted you lauded Gove's number earlier on this year when it was clear that Gove was spinning.
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.
We should be stronger on surge vaccination to get our way out of this. 10% of the vaccine supply could surge vaccinate areas covering 1 million people a week.
I'd advocate a 2-3 week cycle in which
- All over 18s to get their first jab - Every hitting 6 weeks from 1st vaccination in the surge period gets v their second jab - House to house and assisted walk up book in at front of clinic as necessary - The sort of voluntary restrictions we have already seen.
Firrst cycle ending 4th June and covering Bolton, Blackburn, Bedford. Kirklees, Hyndburn, Burnley, Rossendale, Bury, Leicester (just over 2m in that lot over 2 weeks)
The surge vaccination is to vaccinate the way out of local restrictions quickly.
Then on 4th June you will surely have a ready set of next locations for this.
The plan IS probably something like this, but communication of it is really, really weak. We need central government articulating a plan beyond sit tight and don't go anywhere. Testing is just testing. Sit tight and we'll do everything in our power to suppress these local waves quickly by this and this and this in these areas, would be more like it.
I'm 50, 8 weeks on from 1st vaccination, 3 weeks from 2nd vaccination, not a dicky bird on calling me back in, no indication whatsoever that I'm likely to be called in sooner (going to dial 119. today, as you have to cancel and only then take pot luck that you can rebook sooner online) . Maybe a little straw on the wind for my wife, 5 weeks vaccinated and working on an industrial site near Dewsbury, in that Fox's Biscuits have now been surge vaccinated.
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
So no, you've not seen the data and cannot provide a link to the data.
At times you are simply unfair
I have quoted the Guardian as the source of the story and others on here have posted tweets about it and it is an important issue
I know I am getting on and we do not share our politics but sometimes I maybe do post something that is relevant
This is a data obsessed site, don't be surprised if people ask to see the numbers!
As I noted you lauded Gove's number earlier on this year when it was clear that Gove was spinning.
Well maybe I should just ask you before I post if you are OK with it
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
The best summary I've seen so far is page 10 of the report
Interesting, my father's view is that the major finding of the future inquiry will be is that at the start of the pandemic we didn't understand the nature of the asymptomatic infections with Covid-19, I wonder if the same applies to care homes?
Does this report take into account asymptomatic infections?
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
It depends how the staff got infected, those 65% could be (the proportion is speculative as there was no functional case tracing at that time) indirect cases, if they caught it from another workplace. Cross site staff seems to be the cause of my Mother in Laws care home outbreaks.
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
Grrr - Insurers now have to ensure existing customers get same quote as new customers. What happened to searching the market or challenging your existing supplier when they send out your renewal. I have never paid the renewal quote, yet don't often have to move.
Just subsidizing the lazy. Same thing with energy prices. We just need rules to prevent rip offs and exploitation of the vulnerable. The rest of us should be subject to the marketplace.
1.6% of care home outbreaks in England "potentially seeded" by confirmed Covid +ve discharges
2 reports on this in Scotland so far: Oct (statistical) & Apr (incl genomic sequencing). Findings inconclusive & Scot Gov have stuck to line that no proven link
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
I see you edited the post again to change its meaning. Funny that. If you had any self-respect you wouldn't have the need to do that.
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
Hospitals where everyone wears PPE have been the biggest spreader of Covid
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.
For the last available data (25th May) England actually has lower admissions than the previous week:
Scoop with @GeorgeWParker: All is not well between Boris Johnson and cabinet secretary Simon Case, due to latter's ties with Dominic Cummings, according to multiple senior civil servants across Whitehall
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
I see you edited the post again to change its meaning. Funny that. If you had any self-respect you wouldn't have the need to do that.
I quoted you precisely - 'PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.'
If you had any self respect you'd own your own words.
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
I see you edited the post again to change its meaning. Funny that. If you had any self-respect you wouldn't have the need to do that.
I quoted you precisely - 'PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.'
If you had any self respect you'd own your own words.
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
That's not what I wrote, which is why you needed to edit it.
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
Hospitals where everyone wears PPE have been the biggest spreader of Covid
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
It depends how the staff got infected, those 65% could be (the proportion is speculative as there was no functional case tracing at that time) indirect cases, if they caught it from another workplace. Cross site staff seems to be the cause of my Mother in Laws care home outbreaks.
And this raises an interesting general point about how far you should/can follow lines of infection and conseqent deaths.
One cock-up in test and trace, missing one person early on, might give you an infection chain that wasn't stopped that includes tens, even hundreds of deaths. Likewise, potentially, for one hospital discharge of an infected person. But how far do you go?
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
The best summary I've seen so far is page 10 of the report
Interesting, my father's view is that the major finding of the future inquiry will be is that at the start of the pandemic we didn't understand the nature of the asymptomatic infections with Covid-19, I wonder if the same applies to care homes?
Does this report take into account asymptomatic infections?
How could it? They weren't bring tested.
I'm not sure this holds up but it will form part of the buckets of whitewash I expect the inquiry use.
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
Hospitals where everyone wears PPE have been the biggest spreader of Covid
Indeed.
PPE helps reduce the risk but it doesn't stop it perfectly. Especially when the PPE is incorrectly worn, eg staff wearing masks around their necks.
Worth noting too that residents aren't expected to wear PPE in a care home, or socially distance. Quite rightly too, I think trying to tell a 99 year old with dementia that they can't walk around in their own home and must wear a mask would be a form of torture, but it does mean that once an infection gets in that without vaccines it can spread like wildfire.
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
The best summary I've seen so far is page 10 of the report
Interesting, my father's view is that the major finding of the future inquiry will be is that at the start of the pandemic we didn't understand the nature of the asymptomatic infections with Covid-19, I wonder if the same applies to care homes?
Does this report take into account asymptomatic infections?
How could it? They weren't bring tested.
I'm not sure this holds up but it will form part of the buckets of whitewash I expect the inquiry use.
I was talking about the first wave, see the Jenny Harries quotes I mentioned above.
The government will survive that, it is the screw ups they made in September/November/January that will cost them.
Remember schools being open for a day when it was clear they should be shut and the fact the DFE was preparing to take legal actions against councils who wanted to close schools because it wasn't safe.
What do you expect on ConHome? It's all they are talking about on LabourList. True enough, the Canary lost interest mid way through Wednesday morning, and is blaming Starmer and Blair...
Excellent news that Labour are obsessing about it... the canary is bonkers
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
The best summary I've seen so far is page 10 of the report
Interesting, my father's view is that the major finding of the future inquiry will be is that at the start of the pandemic we didn't understand the nature of the asymptomatic infections with Covid-19, I wonder if the same applies to care homes?
Does this report take into account asymptomatic infections?
How could it? They weren't bring tested.
I'm not sure this holds up but it will form part of the buckets of whitewash I expect the inquiry use.
As I understand it, the report is using COVID deaths and working backwards to see where the victim was and where other people in the same care home were.
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
I see you edited the post again to change its meaning. Funny that. If you had any self-respect you wouldn't have the need to do that.
I quoted you precisely - 'PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.'
If you had any self respect you'd own your own words.
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
That's not what I wrote, which is why you needed to edit it.
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
65% of outbreaks were in homes with no recent hospital records? That rules them out straight away!
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
So the issue circles back to the fiasco of the government's initial PPE procurement (and indeed PPE advice), which was especially fiascotic in relation to care homes....
PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.
? So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing? Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
I see you edited the post again to change its meaning. Funny that. If you had any self-respect you wouldn't have the need to do that.
I quoted you precisely - 'PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus.'
If you had any self respect you'd own your own words.
Liar, liar, pants on fire.
That's not what I wrote, which is why you needed to edit it.
Last chance to prove you’re not a pound shop HYUFD.
a. I wrote the words ‘PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus’ b. I did not write the words ‘PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus’
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
The best summary I've seen so far is page 10 of the report
Interesting, my father's view is that the major finding of the future inquiry will be is that at the start of the pandemic we didn't understand the nature of the asymptomatic infections with Covid-19, I wonder if the same applies to care homes?
Does this report take into account asymptomatic infections?
How could it? They weren't bring tested.
I'm not sure this holds up but it will form part of the buckets of whitewash I expect the inquiry use.
As I understand it, the report is using COVID deaths and working backwards to see where the victim was and where other people in the same care home were.
Indeed. If 65% of care homes hadn't had any residents in hospital in the prior period you can rule them out effectively as being caused by the hospital.
Grrr - Insurers now have to ensure existing customers get same quote as new customers. What happened to searching the market or challenging your existing supplier when they send out your renewal. I have never paid the renewal quote, yet don't often have to move.
Just subsidizing the lazy. Same thing with energy prices. We just need rules to prevent rip offs and exploitation of the vulnerable. The rest of us should be subject to the marketplace.
Surely you mean the lazy were subsidising you before and now they aren't
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.”
Yet again EU bullying fails to overcome democracy and national sovereignty.
We should certainly help the brave Swiss as much as possible.
The problem with the EU which has become clear since 2016 is they seem to have created a 21st century version of the Monroe doctrine. They clearly see the entire European continent (except Russia) as their sphere of influence and expect all countries within it to follow their values and principles.
Unfortunately, when their values and principles collide with the will of voters in places such as the UK and Switzerland this leads to venom from the Commission and they begin to see strong, respected democracies as a larger threat than regimes such as China.
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.
We should be stronger on surge vaccination to get our way out of this. 10% of the vaccine supply could surge vaccinate areas covering 1 million people a week.
I'd advocate a 2-3 week cycle in which
- All over 18s to get their first jab - Every hitting 6 weeks from 1st vaccination in the surge period gets v their second jab - House to house and assisted walk up book in at front of clinic as necessary - The sort of voluntary restrictions we have already seen.
Firrst cycle ending 4th June and covering Bolton, Blackburn, Bedford. Kirklees, Hyndburn, Burnley, Rossendale, Bury, Leicester (just over 2m in that lot over 2 weeks)
The surge vaccination is to vaccinate the way out of local restrictions quickly.
Then on 4th June you will surely have a ready set of next locations for this.
The plan IS probably something like this, but communication of it is really, really weak. We need central government articulating a plan beyond sit tight and don't go anywhere. Testing is just testing. Sit tight and we'll do everything in our power to suppress these local waves quickly by this and this and this in these areas, would be more like it.
I'm 50, 8 weeks on from 1st vaccination, 3 weeks from 2nd vaccination, not a dicky bird on calling me back in, no indication whatsoever that I'm likely to be called in sooner (going to dial 119. today, as you have to cancel and only then take pot luck that you can rebook sooner online) . Maybe a little straw on the wind for my wife, 5 weeks vaccinated and working on an industrial site near Dewsbury, in that Fox's Biscuits have now been surge vaccinated.
Looking at the graphs it appears to me the difference is case seeding rather than anything to do with particular differences in terms of vaccines.
Remember even if you're at herd immunity and have a transmission of 0.8 that means that 1 case newly introduced to the system will result in 5 new total. We're simply seeing this play out with arrivals from India I think.
The solution is the same as it ever was - keep calm and carry on jabbing. Leicester needs to get a shift on mind.
That's a real shin-breaker, not to mention hip girdle-breaker, on the front.
Yeah that looks really dangerous to pedestrians. If they have some provision for driver operation when the automatics fail or similar, it also looks very dangerous to cyclists given the design seems to block the view to the side for a driver.
I suspect the June 21st lockdown end will proceed largely as planned, with the exception of perhaps some limits on capacity at the largest music and sporting venues until most people have had their second Covid vaccination jab.
If not then yes there would be some shift of Tory voters to the anti lockdown ReformUK, including in the Chesham and Amersham and Batley and Spen by elections
- It's very interesting just how slow the increase is.
Remember how fast Original Covid exploded? Then, even with Tier 3 restrictions, how fast the more transmissible Kent Variant exploded across the country, needing Tier 4/lockdown restrictions to hold it down?
This one is more transmissible yet. And we have far lower restrictions in place right now than the Tier 3 which Kent Covid blew straight through.
It's such a massive pointer towards vaccines working very well at inhibiting transmission. Herd immunity isn't a binary on/off that strikes when we hit the Herd Immunity Threshold. It's a remorseless build up, like piling weight onto a sprinter. Until they can't even walk more than a few steps (herd immunity threshold).
Without that weight, the original sprinter blasted out of the blocks last March. The Kent Covid sprinter was even faster; we'd put a load of hurdles and fences around the first sprinter which stopped him, but Kent Covid was fast enough to jump those until we raised them higher. Now B.1.617.2 is truly Olympic class at sprinting, and those hurdles have been lowered a long way - but we've loaded this new sprinter up with so much weight, they're just staggering around. We may not have put enough weight on - yet - to push it prone, but it can't get around other than very slowly.
Scoop with @GeorgeWParker: All is not well between Boris Johnson and cabinet secretary Simon Case, due to latter's ties with Dominic Cummings, according to multiple senior civil servants across Whitehall
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.”
Yet again EU bullying fails to overcome democracy and national sovereignty.
We should certainly help the brave Swiss as much as possible.
The problem with the EU which has become clear since 2016 is they seem to have created a 21st century version of the Monroe doctrine. They clearly see the entire European continent (except Russia) as their sphere of influence and expect all countries within it to follow their values and principles.
Unfortunately, when their values and principles collide with the will of voters in places such as the UK and Switzerland this leads to venom from the Commission and they begin to see strong, respected democracies as a larger threat than regimes such as China.
This would be OK but their “values and principles” seem essentially to be about extra-judicial reach for its own sake.
It’s not like the EU is “progressive” versus a reactionary U.K./Switzerland/Norway.
Grrr - Insurers now have to ensure existing customers get same quote as new customers. What happened to searching the market or challenging your existing supplier when they send out your renewal. I have never paid the renewal quote, yet don't often have to move.
Just subsidizing the lazy. Same thing with energy prices. We just need rules to prevent rip offs and exploitation of the vulnerable. The rest of us should be subject to the marketplace.
Surely you mean the lazy were subsidising you before and now they aren't
Ah yes, the lazy, like my 85-year-old great aunt who was being charged £800 by Direct Line for her home insurance. She moved to Churchill (same underwriter) and it was £140.
The financial ombudsman upheld her complaint and DL refunded her for 6 years - not the 20 or so she'd been overcharged, but £3,500 is better than nothing - but sure, lazy.
Grrr - Insurers now have to ensure existing customers get same quote as new customers. What happened to searching the market or challenging your existing supplier when they send out your renewal. I have never paid the renewal quote, yet don't often have to move.
Just subsidizing the lazy. Same thing with energy prices. We just need rules to prevent rip offs and exploitation of the vulnerable. The rest of us should be subject to the marketplace.
Surely you mean the lazy were subsidising you before and now they aren't
Yes it does. Not sure what your point is.
I am in favour of free markets with proper protection of the vulnerable. I don't want the state controlling what prices I sell stuff at. Loss leaders is normal commercial practice. It leads to a more efficient market if there is competition.
Grrr - Insurers now have to ensure existing customers get same quote as new customers. What happened to searching the market or challenging your existing supplier when they send out your renewal. I have never paid the renewal quote, yet don't often have to move.
Just subsidizing the lazy. Same thing with energy prices. We just need rules to prevent rip offs and exploitation of the vulnerable. The rest of us should be subject to the marketplace.
Surely you mean the lazy were subsidising you before and now they aren't
Ah yes, the lazy, like my 85-year-old great aunt who was being charged £800 by Direct Line for her home insurance. She moved to Churchill (same underwriter) and it was £140.
The financial ombudsman upheld her complaint and DL refunded her for 6 years - not the 20 or so she'd been overcharged, but £3,500 is better than nothing - but sure, lazy.
You really can't go back more than 6 years for that is the law.
On topic, no it shouldn’t be controversial. I posted yesterday if it’s two weeks later what’s the problem, and was accused of writing two weeks off completely unnecessarily inflicting unnecessary pain, especially on business.
It’s one of those things where the offence isn’t there in reality, it’s just in people’s heads. Mary Whitehouse syndrome.
The Day is coming anyway. In history books it was a government of wisdom, that unlocked from this cautiously and carefully being responsible with evidence on one hand, competing voices and emotions on the other.
A similar thing is the air travel, where some get emotional why was it not stopped? The continued arrivals during pandemic by air shouldn’t be political football at all, it should be seen as addiction by the human race.
One of the genuine issues the government does have, when it runs tests events, like in clubs, pubs, stadia, the evidence from the test becomes less relevant very quickly.
Grrr - Insurers now have to ensure existing customers get same quote as new customers. What happened to searching the market or challenging your existing supplier when they send out your renewal. I have never paid the renewal quote, yet don't often have to move.
Just subsidizing the lazy. Same thing with energy prices. We just need rules to prevent rip offs and exploitation of the vulnerable. The rest of us should be subject to the marketplace.
Surely you mean the lazy were subsidising you before and now they aren't
Yes it does. Not sure what your point is.
I am in favour of free markets with proper protection of the vulnerable. I don't want the state controlling what prices I sell stuff at. Loss leaders is normal commercial practice. It leads to a more efficient market if there is competition.
My point was that your claim the lazy were being subsidised is fallacious, they are now merely paying a fair price. You on the other hand have lost your subsidy and also having to pay the fair price for the product. No one is telling you what you have to charge just that you have to charge all people the same.
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!
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.
That last is interesting on stats. It was an anecdotal noticing of an anomalous-looking number of deaths that raised suspicion about Shipman - but on differently focused datasets:
In March 1998, Dr Linda Reynolds of the Brooke Surgery in Hyde expressed concerns to John Pollard, the coroner for the South Manchester District, about the high death rate among Shipman's patients. In particular, she was concerned about the large number of cremation forms for elderly women that he had needed countersigned. Police were unable to find sufficient evidence to bring charges and closed the investigation on 17 April.[17] The Shipman Inquiry later blamed the Greater Manchester Police for assigning inexperienced officers to the case. After the investigation was closed, Shipman killed three more people.[18] In August, taxi driver John Shaw told the police that he suspected Shipman of murdering 21 patients.[19] Shaw became suspicious as many of the elderly customers he took to the hospital, who seemed to be in good health, died in Shipman's care. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman
- It's very interesting just how slow the increase is.
Remember how fast Original Covid exploded? Then, even with Tier 3 restrictions, how fast the more transmissible Kent Variant exploded across the country, needing Tier 4/lockdown restrictions to hold it down?
This one is more transmissible yet. And we have far lower restrictions in place right now than the Tier 3 which Kent Covid blew straight through.
It's such a massive pointer towards vaccines working very well at inhibiting transmission. Herd immunity isn't a binary on/off that strikes when we hit the Herd Immunity Threshold. It's a remorseless build up, like piling weight onto a sprinter. Until they can't even walk more than a few steps (herd immunity threshold).
Without that weight, the original sprinter blasted out of the blocks last March. The Kent Covid sprinter was even faster; we'd put a load of hurdles and fences around the first sprinter which stopped him, but Kent Covid was fast enough to jump those until we raised them higher. Now B.1.617.2 is truly Olympic class at sprinting, and those hurdles have been lowered a long way - but we've loaded this new sprinter up with so much weight, they're just staggering around. We may not have put enough weight on - yet - to push it prone, but it can't get around other than very slowly.
With the lag given for India to be put on the red list we effectively gave ourselves (Or where the passengers live) a surge viral hit too with everyone returning. It's that and a combo of loosening restrictions. As you point out it does look like the vaccines are working.
Grrr - Insurers now have to ensure existing customers get same quote as new customers. What happened to searching the market or challenging your existing supplier when they send out your renewal. I have never paid the renewal quote, yet don't often have to move.
Just subsidizing the lazy. Same thing with energy prices. We just need rules to prevent rip offs and exploitation of the vulnerable. The rest of us should be subject to the marketplace.
Surely you mean the lazy were subsidising you before and now they aren't
Yes it does. Not sure what your point is.
I am in favour of free markets with proper protection of the vulnerable. I don't want the state controlling what prices I sell stuff at. Loss leaders is normal commercial practice. It leads to a more efficient market if there is competition.
When a group being subsidised complain about their subsidy being withdrawn it is fair enough to question their motives.....is it really because of a more efficient market or cost to them?
Not sure what the new rules are but I would think capping the benefit to those who move/cost to those who are loyal at around 10% would be a fair solution and better than either the current situation where the cost to being loyal can be many times that, or a market where there is little incentive to ever shop around.
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
The best summary I've seen so far is page 10 of the report
Interesting, my father's view is that the major finding of the future inquiry will be is that at the start of the pandemic we didn't understand the nature of the asymptomatic infections with Covid-19, I wonder if the same applies to care homes?
Does this report take into account asymptomatic infections?
How could it? They weren't bring tested.
I'm not sure this holds up but it will form part of the buckets of whitewash I expect the inquiry use.
As I understand it, the report is using COVID deaths and working backwards to see where the victim was and where other people in the same care home were.
Indeed. If 65% of care homes hadn't had any residents in hospital in the prior period you can rule them out effectively as being caused by the hospital.
Sadly not. Certainly the local experience here is that care homes with any spare capacity were being told to accept patients even if they had not previously been resident in those homes. In many cases this was without any medical history at all. Many private care homes simply refused.
It is, isn't it? Combines the population proportionality with a roughly geographical location.
Slightly mystified that there appears to be a population in the ‘virtually empty’ space between Glasgow and Edinburgh though.
Och, it's jist a few nomad-type chiels in the Great Scottish Central Desert, plowtering with their camels amidst the ruins of the Kelpies and the weel-kent oasis of Bathgate on the trade route to Borrowstounness and its market for IrnBru flavour incense and myrrh.
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.
For the last available data (25th May) England actually has lower admissions than the previous week:
It does bounce about a bit but there's no reason to panic.
Scotland on the other hand ...
Admission weeks are a lagging indicator
Firstly because the data takes a while to be completely collected.
And then because there is a lead time between initial symptoms and symptoms serious enough to require hospital treatment.
Which means the first time we will know there is a problem is 2 weeks (7-10 days for symptoms to worsen, 3-5 days for complete data collection) after the infection rates start to rise, and we aren't quite there yet.
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!
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.
That last is interesting on stats. It was an anecdotal noticing of an anomalous-looking number of deaths that raised suspicion about Shipman - but on differently focused datasets:
In March 1998, Dr Linda Reynolds of the Brooke Surgery in Hyde expressed concerns to John Pollard, the coroner for the South Manchester District, about the high death rate among Shipman's patients. In particular, she was concerned about the large number of cremation forms for elderly women that he had needed countersigned. Police were unable to find sufficient evidence to bring charges and closed the investigation on 17 April.[17] The Shipman Inquiry later blamed the Greater Manchester Police for assigning inexperienced officers to the case. After the investigation was closed, Shipman killed three more people.[18] In August, taxi driver John Shaw told the police that he suspected Shipman of murdering 21 patients.[19] Shaw became suspicious as many of the elderly customers he took to the hospital, who seemed to be in good health, died in Shipman's care. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman
Yes.
Having had a look at the flow chart below, the weak link is the Hospital confirmed source (15%) vs community (85%).
But this is quite low in the flow (lots of paths eliminated at this point). Assuming that the percentages for the various other things are representative, this would mean the maximum number of deaths, if *every single infection was in hospital* would be in the order of 1.6K
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.”
Yet again EU bullying fails to overcome democracy and national sovereignty.
We should certainly help the brave Swiss as much as possible.
The problem with the EU which has become clear since 2016 is they seem to have created a 21st century version of the Monroe doctrine. They clearly see the entire European continent (except Russia) as their sphere of influence and expect all countries within it to follow their values and principles.
Unfortunately, when their values and principles collide with the will of voters in places such as the UK and Switzerland this leads to venom from the Commission and they begin to see strong, respected democracies as a larger threat than regimes such as China.
This would be OK but their “values and principles” seem essentially to be about extra-judicial reach for its own sake.
It’s not like the EU is “progressive” versus a reactionary U.K./Switzerland/Norway.
I can't help wondering if they are just outraged that somebody actually made a decision
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
The best summary I've seen so far is page 10 of the report
Interesting, my father's view is that the major finding of the future inquiry will be is that at the start of the pandemic we didn't understand the nature of the asymptomatic infections with Covid-19, I wonder if the same applies to care homes?
Does this report take into account asymptomatic infections?
How could it? They weren't bring tested.
I'm not sure this holds up but it will form part of the buckets of whitewash I expect the inquiry use.
As I understand it, the report is using COVID deaths and working backwards to see where the victim was and where other people in the same care home were.
Indeed. If 65% of care homes hadn't had any residents in hospital in the prior period you can rule them out effectively as being caused by the hospital.
Sadly not. Certainly the local experience here is that care homes with any spare capacity were being told to accept patients even if they had not previously been resident in those homes. In many cases this was without any medical history at all. Many private care homes simply refused.
But then post-discharge they would have become a resident, so would now be showing up in the figures as a resident that had been in hospital.
It is, isn't it? Combines the population proportionality with a roughly geographical location.
Slightly mystified that there appears to be a population in the ‘virtually empty’ space between Glasgow and Edinburgh though.
Och, it's jist a few nomad-type chiels in the Great Scottish Central Desert, plowtering with their camels amidst the ruins of the Kelpies and the weel-kent oasis of Bathgate on the trade route to Borrowstounness and its market for IrnBru flavour incense and myrrh.
The first and last time Bathgate will be described as an oasis.
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.
For the last available data (25th May) England actually has lower admissions than the previous week:
It does bounce about a bit but there's no reason to panic.
Scotland on the other hand ...
Admission weeks are a lagging indicator
Firstly because the data takes a while to be completely collected.
And then because there is a lead time between initial symptoms and symptoms serious enough to require hospital treatment.
Which means the first time we will know there is a problem is 2 weeks (7-10 days for symptoms to worsen, 3-5 days for complete data collection) after the infection rates start to rise, and we aren't quite there yet.
Cases started to rise on the 16th - see 18-64 line on this
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.
We should be stronger on surge vaccination to get our way out of this. 10% of the vaccine supply could surge vaccinate areas covering 1 million people a week.
I'd advocate a 2-3 week cycle in which
- All over 18s to get their first jab - Every hitting 6 weeks from 1st vaccination in the surge period gets v their second jab - House to house and assisted walk up book in at front of clinic as necessary - The sort of voluntary restrictions we have already seen.
Firrst cycle ending 4th June and covering Bolton, Blackburn, Bedford. Kirklees, Hyndburn, Burnley, Rossendale, Bury, Leicester (just over 2m in that lot over 2 weeks)
The surge vaccination is to vaccinate the way out of local restrictions quickly.
Then on 4th June you will surely have a ready set of next locations for this.
The plan IS probably something like this, but communication of it is really, really weak. We need central government articulating a plan beyond sit tight and don't go anywhere. Testing is just testing. Sit tight and we'll do everything in our power to suppress these local waves quickly by this and this and this in these areas, would be more like it.
I'm 50, 8 weeks on from 1st vaccination, 3 weeks from 2nd vaccination, not a dicky bird on calling me back in, no indication whatsoever that I'm likely to be called in sooner (going to dial 119. today, as you have to cancel and only then take pot luck that you can rebook sooner online) . Maybe a little straw on the wind for my wife, 5 weeks vaccinated and working on an industrial site near Dewsbury, in that Fox's Biscuits have now been surge vaccinated.
Looking at the graphs it appears to me the difference is case seeding rather than anything to do with particular differences in terms of vaccines.
Remember even if you're at herd immunity and have a transmission of 0.8 that means that 1 case newly introduced to the system will result in 5 new total. We're simply seeing this play out with arrivals from India I think.
The solution is the same as it ever was - keep calm and carry on jabbing. Leicester needs to get a shift on mind.
It is not catch up I'm advocating. It is getting these locations AHEAD of other places on vaccination to effect suppression that I'm suggesting. Jump on the seed locations (or possibly just throw a ring round surrounding areas), so the can't seed other locations.
Comments
Scotland admissions are up 75% in the week to the 23rd - do the maths yourself. The UK rate is being disproportionally hit by it.
They've taken you for a chump mate. They can act with utter disdain for all of you knowing that you're voting for them no matter how hard they screw you over.
Do you really think every care home in the country should have done that? Residents have been banned from seeing their families for the past year, you think care staff should have been too?
Bear in mind the care sector is overwhelmingly female, do you think mothers who work in care should have been separated from their children for the past 12 months?
How about thinking for a second before you rant. I have carers in my family, none of them would have agreed to be separated from their children for 12 months to live on site in a care home. 🤦♂️
We should certainly help the brave Swiss as much as possible.
If the Lib Dems or another party sort themselves out then I could be tempted to vote for them. But they haven't done. At least the Tories have tried for the past 12 months - they've not gotten everything right but they've at least made decisions, put ideas forwards.
What have the opposition done?? Carp from the sidelines after the fact?
If you don't do the testing and tracing to find out then you won't know where the infections came from.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-assessment-of-hospital-associated-sars-cov-2-infection-and-care-home-outbreaks
Pretty comprehensive. As I said, if the virus is in the community then the staff will get it. The only way to protect care homes was to ensure there's no virus in the community, so the staff don't get it.
"Risk stratification" was bullshit whoever spouted it.
The EU wants laws that can't been changed at a national level, to govern agreements.
Having said that, I have no trouble believing that most care home deaths were not due to hospital discharge policy. There were just not that many discharged patients, compared with hundreds of thousands of staff going in and out every day, transmission can be asymptomatic, and the infections occurred when community infection rates were high. It has always been, to me, a classic case of a compelling narrative ("Matt Hancock caused thousands of deaths...") and magical thinking ("we could have prevented this if only..."), garnished with a slice of hindsight and latent guilt, running ahead of the evidence. There are many such cases in this pandemic.
--AS
Which means stories move on quickly especially if the story is your plans for June are up in smoke.
I have quoted the Guardian as the source of the story and others on here have posted tweets about it and it is an important issue
I know I am getting on and we do not share our politics but sometimes I maybe do post something that is relevant
Especially if masks are worn around people's necks.
From a quick look, I guess the key quesion is testing - hospital acquired infection requires hospital stay within 14 days of positive Covid test. So, does someone discharged asymptomatic ever get tested? Or at least, within 14 days? Does someone who is dishcharged and dies in the care home before any other cases are detected ever get tested? Was post-mortem testing at all common early on?
You may have noticed that from polling data the devil is in the detail not the press release / headline story.
As I noted you lauded Gove's number earlier on this year when it was clear that Gove was spinning.
I'd advocate a 2-3 week cycle in which
- All over 18s to get their first jab
- Every hitting 6 weeks from 1st vaccination in the surge period gets v their second jab
- House to house and assisted walk up book in at front of clinic as necessary
- The sort of voluntary restrictions we have already seen.
Firrst cycle ending 4th June and covering Bolton, Blackburn, Bedford. Kirklees, Hyndburn, Burnley, Rossendale, Bury, Leicester (just over 2m in that lot over 2 weeks)
The surge vaccination is to vaccinate the way out of local restrictions quickly.
Then on 4th June you will surely have a ready set of next locations for this.
The plan IS probably something like this, but communication of it is really, really weak. We need central government articulating a plan beyond sit tight and don't go anywhere. Testing is just testing. Sit tight and we'll do everything in our power to suppress these local waves quickly by this and this and this in these areas, would be more like it.
I'm 50, 8 weeks on from 1st vaccination, 3 weeks from 2nd vaccination, not a dicky bird on calling me back in, no indication whatsoever that I'm likely to be called in sooner (going to dial 119. today, as you have to cancel and only then take pot luck that you can rebook sooner online) . Maybe a little straw on the wind for my wife, 5 weeks vaccinated and working on an industrial site near Dewsbury, in that Fox's Biscuits have now been surge vaccinated.
It says 1.6% were seeded from *confirmed* Covid-positive patients. Most were *not being tested*!
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/983349/Data_linkage_approach_to_assessing_the_contribution_of_hospital-associated_SARS-CoV-2_infection_to_care_home_outbreaks_in_England.pdf
https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1398184022472335362
Does this report take into account asymptomatic infections?
So HMG playing fast and loose with PPE procurement was for nothing?
Well, not nothing, a few people got very rich.
Just subsidizing the lazy. Same thing with energy prices. We just need rules to prevent rip offs and exploitation of the vulnerable. The rest of us should be subject to the marketplace.
2 reports on this in Scotland so far: Oct (statistical) & Apr (incl genomic sequencing). Findings inconclusive & Scot Gov have stuck to line that no proven link
https://twitter.com/ChrisMusson/status/1398204142687076355?s=20
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/
It does bounce about a bit but there's no reason to panic.
Scotland on the other hand ...
Scoop with @GeorgeWParker: All is not well between Boris Johnson and cabinet secretary Simon Case, due to latter's ties with Dominic Cummings, according to multiple senior civil servants across Whitehall
"There are clearly feelings of mutual mistrust"
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1398203872175345666?s=20
If you had any self respect you'd own your own words.
That's not what I wrote, which is why you needed to edit it.
One cock-up in test and trace, missing one person early on, might give you an infection chain that wasn't stopped that includes tens, even hundreds of deaths. Likewise, potentially, for one hospital discharge of an infected person. But how far do you go?
I'm not sure this holds up but it will form part of the buckets of whitewash I expect the inquiry use.
PPE helps reduce the risk but it doesn't stop it perfectly. Especially when the PPE is incorrectly worn, eg staff wearing masks around their necks.
Worth noting too that residents aren't expected to wear PPE in a care home, or socially distance. Quite rightly too, I think trying to tell a 99 year old with dementia that they can't walk around in their own home and must wear a mask would be a form of torture, but it does mean that once an infection gets in that without vaccines it can spread like wildfire.
The government will survive that, it is the screw ups they made in September/November/January that will cost them.
Remember schools being open for a day when it was clear they should be shut and the fact the DFE was preparing to take legal actions against councils who wanted to close schools because it wasn't safe.
a. I wrote the words ‘PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus’
b. I did not write the words ‘PPE doesn't stop the spread of the virus’
Unfortunately, when their values and principles collide with the will of voters in places such as the UK and Switzerland this leads to venom from the Commission and they begin to see strong, respected democracies as a larger threat than regimes such as China.
England 72.9 / 46.1 | 23.6
Bury, 68.7 / 45.1 | 65.4
Kirklees, 66.4 / 44.3 | 108.7
Rossendale, 70.2 / 42.8 | 138.5
Bedford. 63.2 / 42.2 | 202
Bolton, 69.7 / 41.6 | 449.3 (Peaked)
Hyndburn, 66 / 40.3 | 80.2
Burnley, 65.1 / 39.2 | 84.3
Blackburn, 65.4 / 36.3 | 314
Leicester 54.8 / 31.5 | 63.2
Looking at the graphs it appears to me the difference is case seeding rather than anything to do with particular differences in terms of vaccines.
Remember even if you're at herd immunity and have a transmission of 0.8 that means that 1 case newly introduced to the system will result in 5 new total.
We're simply seeing this play out with arrivals from India I think.
The solution is the same as it ever was - keep calm and carry on jabbing. Leicester needs to get a shift on mind.
If not then yes there would be some shift of Tory voters to the anti lockdown ReformUK, including in the Chesham and Amersham and Batley and Spen by elections
- It's very interesting just how slow the increase is.
Remember how fast Original Covid exploded?
Then, even with Tier 3 restrictions, how fast the more transmissible Kent Variant exploded across the country, needing Tier 4/lockdown restrictions to hold it down?
This one is more transmissible yet. And we have far lower restrictions in place right now than the Tier 3 which Kent Covid blew straight through.
It's such a massive pointer towards vaccines working very well at inhibiting transmission. Herd immunity isn't a binary on/off that strikes when we hit the Herd Immunity Threshold. It's a remorseless build up, like piling weight onto a sprinter. Until they can't even walk more than a few steps (herd immunity threshold).
Without that weight, the original sprinter blasted out of the blocks last March. The Kent Covid sprinter was even faster; we'd put a load of hurdles and fences around the first sprinter which stopped him, but Kent Covid was fast enough to jump those until we raised them higher. Now B.1.617.2 is truly Olympic class at sprinting, and those hurdles have been lowered a long way - but we've loaded this new sprinter up with so much weight, they're just staggering around. We may not have put enough weight on - yet - to push it prone, but it can't get around other than very slowly.
He brought in a new Perm Sec, FFS.
Boris, Carrie, Dom; they’re all as bad as each other. Just different species of badness.
It’s not like the EU is “progressive”
versus a reactionary U.K./Switzerland/Norway.
The financial ombudsman upheld her complaint and DL refunded her for 6 years - not the 20 or so she'd been overcharged, but £3,500 is better than nothing - but sure, lazy.
I am in favour of free markets with proper protection of the vulnerable. I don't want the state controlling what prices I sell stuff at. Loss leaders is normal commercial practice. It leads to a more efficient market if there is competition.
It’s one of those things where the offence isn’t there in reality, it’s just in people’s heads. Mary Whitehouse syndrome.
The Day is coming anyway. In history books it was a government of wisdom, that unlocked from this cautiously and carefully being responsible with evidence on one hand, competing voices and emotions on the other.
A similar thing is the air travel, where some get emotional why was it not stopped? The continued arrivals during pandemic by air shouldn’t be political football at all, it should be seen as addiction by the human race.
One of the genuine issues the government does have, when it runs tests events, like in clubs, pubs, stadia, the evidence from the test becomes less relevant very quickly.
“The PM can’t fire two cabinet secretaries, but he could allow one to drift away."
https://www.ft.com/content/770e7eb5-24a1-4cd7-9427-829398f7afc6
Weird how the exact almost the exact same thing happened at Noble Bank after taking on Bitfinex (the CEO resigned in that case).
Whatever happened to Noble Bank?
https://twitter.com/robkhenderson/status/1398077087605473286
In March 1998, Dr Linda Reynolds of the Brooke Surgery in Hyde expressed concerns to John Pollard, the coroner for the South Manchester District, about the high death rate among Shipman's patients. In particular, she was concerned about the large number of cremation forms for elderly women that he had needed countersigned. Police were unable to find sufficient evidence to bring charges and closed the investigation on 17 April.[17] The Shipman Inquiry later blamed the Greater Manchester Police for assigning inexperienced officers to the case. After the investigation was closed, Shipman killed three more people.[18] In August, taxi driver John Shaw told the police that he suspected Shipman of murdering 21 patients.[19] Shaw became suspicious as many of the elderly customers he took to the hospital, who seemed to be in good health, died in Shipman's care.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman
Not sure what the new rules are but I would think capping the benefit to those who move/cost to those who are loyal at around 10% would be a fair solution and better than either the current situation where the cost to being loyal can be many times that, or a market where there is little incentive to ever shop around.
Firstly because the data takes a while to be completely collected.
And then because there is a lead time between initial symptoms and symptoms serious enough to require hospital treatment.
Which means the first time we will know there is a problem is 2 weeks (7-10 days for symptoms to worsen, 3-5 days for complete data collection) after the infection rates start to rise, and we aren't quite there yet.
Having had a look at the flow chart below, the weak link is the Hospital confirmed source (15%) vs community (85%).
But this is quite low in the flow (lots of paths eliminated at this point). Assuming that the percentages for the various other things are representative, this would mean the maximum number of deaths, if *every single infection was in hospital* would be in the order of 1.6K
As one of the original viral videos, the Charlie Bit My Finger clip is a little piece of internet history.
But now the much-loved clip of baby Charlie gnawing on his brother Harry's finger will be taken off YouTube after it was sold for $760,999 (£538,000).
The Davies-Carr family auctioned the clip as an NFT, a non-fungible token.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-57227290
My coat is the black cashmere one - thanks.