Covid-19

[taio]

It’s not the government failure that is the story, but your prediction of how I’ll react to it?

I didn’t make the claim of 100K tests per day. The government - who have been in power for ten years, and bear full responsibility for the state of the NHS made the claim. A government full of Diane Abbott’s would do far better than the clown show we’ve seen so far.

You suggested the ambitious goal was an attention grabbing lie. We'll know whether you're correct or not over the next few days. If you are incorrect I think you'll hold your hands up and admit you are wrong and recognise the success of meeting the ambitious goal.

The NHS has coped remarkably well during the pandemic. A key priority was to ensure capacity within the NHS during the emergency which has so far been achieved.

[claretonthecoast1882]

Good job this thread wasn't spoilt by dicks politically point scoring

[AndrewJB]

A bloated mess - what absolute Tory ********.

Just as a matter of interest, where would this "army" of procurement managers have found the money, given the lack of funding from your government over the last ten years, to invest in ventilators, PPE and mortuary space ?
Ringo - style - out of thin air ?

Have you got figures for the total number of curator's (sic), diversity managers and PR staff and their salaries - I wouldn't mind betting they are insignificant in the grand, multi-billion pound scheme of things.

Tories now add the NHS to the long list of others to blame for a disastrous death toll. Who'd have thought it ?

Of course they blame the NHS, and ignore the fact their “reforms” and underfundiimg weakened it.

[Grumps]

You suggested the ambitious goal was an attention grabbing lie. We'll know whether you're correct or not over the next few days. If you are incorrect I think you'll hold your hands up and admit you are wrong and recognise the success of meeting the ambitious goal.

The NHS has coped remarkably well during the pandemic. A key priority was to ensure capacity within the NHS during the emergency which has so far been achieved.

Not a chance that will happen. If the target is reached he will complain it should have been reached the day before, or it should have been 105k

[Paul Waine]

I'll be if we're carrying out 100k tests per day,we may reach 100k capacity in a few days,but that wasn't what was promised,and what's the point of having 100k capacity if it's not being utilised,good factual article by the BBC here https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51943612

This snippet caught my eye:However, on 22 April, Dominic Raab, standing in for Prime Minister Boris Johnson, said: "I've set the goal of 100,000 tests a day by the end of this month and I'm delighted to say that the expansion of capacity is ahead of plans, even though demand has, thus far, been lower than expected."

Rightly or wrongly that statement has given the government wriggle room if the 100k isn't hit,as if they reach capacity,they'll claim the target's been met,is this disingenuous absolutely,but that's how politicians absolve themselves of blame,whatever party their representing.

The press were more detailed and rigorous in their questioning today,let's hope this continues,as the government need to be held to account.

Hi tiger76, I'm disappointed by the BBC report. It's jumping about all over the place. Given it's about "100,000 tests by 30th April" I'd have expected it would have provided details about (a) all the testing capacity, number of sites, how many tests each site can carry out, number of mobile units, areas they are operating in and their testing capacity, plus the home test capacity; b) then add details about how each of these different testing facilities operate, what happens to the swabs after collected at the sites and at home and how quickly the results are communicated back to the person tested, for example, are results sent out by mail, express courier, email etc; c) testing demand side, it would have been interesting if there was a table of how the gov't has expanded the number of groups that is eligible for testing, at first it was limited, because capacity was limited, but now we've got a situation where capacity is well ahead of (apparent) demand, is this really the case? have there been fewer people among the eligible groups at each stage that had symptoms than was expected? or are there other reasons why fewer people are coming forward than there is capacity to test? (it can't all be about 240 mile round trips from Devon to Gatwick - which is all the BBC seems to say). Maybe there should be a comparison between locations of test centres and populations living with X miles of the centre, (or 30 mins drive, 60 mins drive) and so on.

This would be the sort of stuff a data modeller would be looking at. Maybe there is someone on SAGE, or a sub-committee, that has been tasked to develop these models. BBC doesn't appear to have explored these facts.

Just my view, of course - but that's the sort of stuff I'd be asking to tackle testing capacity v testing demand question.

And, beyond 100,000, I'd be interested in plans to add capacity beyond 100,000 in the weeks and months ahead.

Have a great day. Stay safe. Keep well.

It's not raining where I am at present. A chance to get out for a walk this morning. I missed my daily exercise yesterday, it was raining so hard - don't tell the gov't, anyone, I'll try and do extra today and tomorrow to make up.

[Paul Waine]

Not a chance that will happen. If the target is reached he will complain it should have been reached the day before, or it should have been 105k

Oops, sorry Grumps. Your post was immediately above mine. Maybe our friend, JackM, won't notice/or maybe he'll make an allowance for the 90 mins or so between out 2 posts?

Have a great day. Stay safe. Keep well.

[martin_p]

This would be the sort of stuff a data modeller would be looking at. Maybe there is someone on SAGE, or a sub-committee, that has been tasked to develop these models. BBC doesn't appear to have explored these facts.

Maybe it’s because they are journalists trying to put together an easy to digest article rather than data modellers putting together a scientific analysis?

And if we’re running under capacity why had all the home test kits run out in the first hour this morning?

[Brucefanclaret]

Some care homes thought for themselves and closed to visitors before being forced to
They sourced PPE and had plenty. They test everyones temp every few hours, and now have the testing kits.
And guess what... They have had no outbreaks.
Sometimes you just have to think for yourself and not wait to be told what to do
A bit like those wanting a statement regarding face masks.... If you want one, get one and wear it.

And maybe some Homes found that their problem started when a hospital discharged someone back to their care without testing whether they had the virus. Or a visiting GP or District Nurse inadvertently brought it in. Or a Care Worker who was personally symptom free but nevertheless caught the virus from a family member or whatever. And maybe some Homes found that they couldn’t get PPE because when they went to their usual supplier, they were told “Sorry - we’ve been told it all has to go to the NHS. It’s not as straightforward as ‘stupid or greedy Care Home owners fail to protect staff and residents’........

[RingoMcCartney]

Posted a while back-

Right here we go!

A challenge for the weekend for all those keyboard Prime Ministers, wanting to judge the government's handling of the unprecedented global pandemic.


Name one person, just one person in the whole world, in any country you like , that right now, has all the available facts at their disposal, regarding the 2019 Covid 19 global pandemic. Who can therefore, draw objective conclusions and assessments and be in a strong position to name and shame who got it right and who got it wrong.

Just one! Stay safe and keep well. Enjoy both the research and all your weekends!

















(Given it's a CURRRENT and ongoing crisis with little or no real sign as to when, / if it's not going to rumble on for months/ years , end, I think you're going struggle to find anyone!! )

One person. Any names yet!?

Thought not. Anyway I'll let you all carry on your research. Still think you're going to struggle though.

Keep well and stay safe one and all.

[RingoMcCartney]

Good job this thread wasn't spoilt by dicks politically point scoring

Dont knock it. They're sticking, steadfast, to the script.

Remember!?

"Do not, under any circumstances, let a good crisis go to waste"

[Paul Waine]

Maybe it’s because they are journalists trying to put together an easy to digest article rather than data modellers putting together a scientific analysis?

And if we’re running under capacity why had all the home test kits run out in the first hour this morning?

On your second point, I'd hazard a guess that the capacity for home test kits isn't "100,000."

My point wasn't that I expect journalists to also be fully qualified data modellers, it's that I'd expect journalists to speak with data modellers (we do now know they exist) and try and put some facts into their article when it is presented as an article about quantities.

[TheFamilyCat]

Posted a while back-





One person. Any names yet!?

Thought not. Anyway I'll let you all carry on your research. Still think you're going to struggle though.

Keep well and stay safe one and all.

You seem confident enough to be able to blame WHO and China for everything while exonerating our government from all responsibility.

So my answer is you.

[Grumps]

And maybe some Homes found that their problem started when a hospital discharged someone back to their care without testing whether they had the virus. Or a visiting GP or District Nurse inadvertently brought it in. Or a Care Worker who was personally symptom free but nevertheless caught the virus from a family member or whatever. And maybe some Homes found that they couldn’t get PPE because when they went to their usual supplier, they were told “Sorry - we’ve been told it all has to go to the NHS. It’s not as straightforward as ‘stupid or greedy Care Home owners fail to protect staff and residents’........

All of it quite possible, perhaps some care homes isolated those returning from hospitals?
Perhaps some suppliers said that, perhaps some care homes then went elsewhere
I never said stupid or Greedy, your words not mine. I just think some have been better managed than others.

[Grumps]

Oops, sorry Grumps. Your post was immediately above mine. Maybe our friend, JackM, won't notice/or maybe he'll make an allowance for the 90 mins or so between out 2 posts?

Have a great day. Stay safe. Keep well.

[RingoMcCartney]

You seem confident enough to be able to blame WHO and China for everything while exonerating our government from all responsibility.

So my answer is you.

Me!!??

Not once have I said "that right now, I have all the available facts at my disposal, regarding the 2019 Covid 19 global pandemic." Not once!

I did point out that when the WHO declared on the 3rd of March 2020

"However, there are some important differences between COVID-19 and influenza.

First, COVID-19 does not transmit as efficiently as influenza, from the data we have so far.

With influenza, people who are infected but not yet sick are major drivers of transmission, which does not appear to be the case for COVID-19.


Evidence from China is that only 1% of reported cases do not have symptoms, and most of those cases develop symptoms within 2 days"


Thats not blaming. That's simply pointing out that it looks as they themselves, did not "have all the available facts at their disposal, regarding the 2019 Covid 19 global pandemic.!"



As for China, they may have, "all the available facts at their disposal, regarding the 2019 Covid 19 global pandemic." But given they are run by a secretive, brutal , tyrannical communist regime that silences critical voices we'll probably never know.

So you're assertion is utterly wrong Family Cat. Its certainly not me. But you've a whole world out there to go at.

Try again. God loves a tryer.

Keep well and stay safe

[evensteadiereddie]

Good job this thread wasn't spoilt by dicks politically point scoring

He said with no irony whatsoever.

[TVC15]

Good job this thread wasn't spoilt by dicks politically point scoring

At least most people have cottoned on that ignoring certain posters and their stupid questions / comments is the best thing for the thread.

[Grumps]

At least most people have cottoned on that ignoring certain posters and their stupid questions / comments is the best thing for the thread.

I can still see yours

[jackmiggins]

Quite pathetic - I’m done with this thread. Dread to think what would happen if you ‘two’ disagree.

[claretonthecoast1882]

He said with no irony whatsoever.

yup

[Grumps]

Quite pathetic - I’m done with this thread. Dread to think what would happen if you ‘two’ disagree.

There is a god!

[jackmiggins]

All my best mate - agree to disagree, but let’s all get through this together.

[Grumps]

All my best mate - agree to disagree, but let’s all get through this together.

Thanks

[tiger76]

Sounds good now can they deliver?jury's out for now,time will tell

UK 'on track to make huge progress' on testing

House of Commons

Parliament

On the topic of testing, UK Labour leader Sir Keir says "demand has gone through the roof" but "sites were unable to cope with number of people booking the test".

He asks if the government is still hoping to be able to carry out 250,000 tests a day - as previously stated by the prime minister.

Dominic Raab says the government is "on track to make huge progress" and adds that the 250,000 figure remains an aspiration.

He adds that the government's target of testing 100,000 by the end of the month is "only the first stepping stone toward the wider testing tracking tracing we will need" to make progress towards the second phase.

On testing, Dominic Raab says current figures are:

Testing capacity = 73,400
Tests carried out = 43,563

[martin_p]

Sounds good now can they deliver?jury's out for now,time will tell

UK 'on track to make huge progress' on testing

House of Commons

Parliament

On the topic of testing, UK Labour leader Sir Keir says "demand has gone through the roof" but "sites were unable to cope with number of people booking the test".

He asks if the government is still hoping to be able to carry out 250,000 tests a day - as previously stated by the prime minister.

Dominic Raab says the government is "on track to make huge progress" and adds that the 250,000 figure remains an aspiration.

He adds that the government's target of testing 100,000 by the end of the month is "only the first stepping stone toward the wider testing tracking tracing we will need" to make progress towards the second phase.

On testing, Dominic Raab says current figures are:

Testing capacity = 73,400
Tests carried out = 43,563

It seems odd that the capacity is being quoted as 30k more than test carried out when it seems impossible to book a test after the first hour or so on the website.

[Paul Waine]

On testing, Dominic Raab says current figures are:

Testing capacity = 73,400
Tests carried out = 43,563

I'm wondering, should we have a sweep on (1) capacity, (2) tests carried out and (3) what is a "good achievement" by the gov't and what is a "fail." Measured by numbers reported as available/performed on 30th April and, I assume, reporting will be one or two days after the 30th.

I'll start things off:
(1) 85,000 (2) 58,000 (3) "good achievement."

[Paul Waine]

It seems odd that the capacity is being quoted as 30k more than test carried out when it seems impossible to book a test after the first hour or so on the website.

I've not looked into this. Is the website the only way to book a test? Is that the way to book a home test kit, or does it allow you to book, shall we call it "click and collect" at any of the testing sites? How do the mobile testing teams fit into the booking site?

[IanMcL]

Spanish TV saying that there is a variant, which affects children.

UK HAS MORE CHILDREN AFFECTED THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY

When will our Gov actually stop treating us like mushrooms?

[tiger76]

It seems odd that the capacity is being quoted as 30k more than test carried out when it seems impossible to book a test after the first hour or so on the website.

Without knowing all the details i'd agree it's odd,and yet the government insist that supply is outstripping demand,capacity's fine and dandy,but if it's not being used effectively,it's ultimately pointless.Let's hope they can iron out the logistics,and get the maximum use possible out of what's available.

[TVC15]

The 250k a day was only ever a target if the anti bodies test is ever proved to be robust enough to launch. So yes very much an aspiration.

The language of the 100k tests promise made by Hancock by the end of the month started to change to “capacity” more than a week ago.
Now the website cannot cope with the volumes of people applying to actually book a test “capacity” is now changing to “demand”.
Promise and guarantee is also changing to aspiration.

I don’t think a drop dead date or a fixed target number is really the point to be honest - it’s more about direction of travel and how quickly we get there.
Right now the media seem obsessed with the date and number and no doubt the extreme amongst the media will start to ask whether Hancock should resign. But by Friday that date has passed and hopefully they can move on and maybe Hancock and others will not make the same mistake again in bowing to media pressure for dates and numbers.

It was pleasing to see the Labour leader say today that he did not think the exact date and number was the key thing either.

[CombatClaret]

Any one notice in PMQ's there was a little nugget of how the government intends to hide it's incompetence, When asked about why we've handled it so poorly compared to other European countries response was essentially
'it's too early to compare our response to other countries and when it does it should be on a per capita basis".

As John Burn-Murdoch who has been doing some of the best statistical analysis out there for the FT points out:

"There is no relationship...All per-capita figures do is make smaller countries look worse... Population alone is a bad thing to adjust for if wanting assess how bad an outbreak is."

There are multiple problems with per-capita comparisons, for example Belgium currently the highest Europe, includes anyone suspected of dying of Covid without requiring a positive test.

Once the autopsy begins the government will switch to this per captia number making it sounds far more palatable: hundreds per million, far nicer and blunter than the tens of thousands of individual deaths.
They will use it because the UK might not end up top of the per capita list. So they can argue this against any accusation that ours was the highest overall death toll in Europe.

Coincidentally it is exactly how Trump supporters and alt-right US groups are demanding the US response to be measured in as it looks far better that way too.

[dsr]

Any one notice in PMQ's there was a little nugget of how the government intends to hide it's incompetence, When asked about why we've handled it so poorly compared to other European countries response was essentially
'it's too early to compare our response to other countries and when it does it should be on a per capita basis".

As John Burn-Murdoch who has been doing some of the best statistical analysis out there for the FT points out:

"There is no relationship...All per-capita figures do is make smaller countries look worse... Population alone is a bad thing to adjust for if wanting assess how bad an outbreak is."

There are multiple problems with per-capita comparisons, for example Belgium currently the highest Europe, includes anyone suspected of dying of Covid without requiring a positive test.

I think he must have been misquoted or at least only partially quoted there. Sweden has 2,000 deaths, Germany has 6,000, but I doubt that any serious statistician would argue that that menas Sweden have been vastly more successful at restraining the disease. You have to look at it per capita, among other factors.

[martin_p]

I've not looked into this. Is the website the only way to book a test? Is that the way to book a home test kit, or does it allow you to book, shall we call it "click and collect" at any of the testing sites? How do the mobile testing teams fit into the booking site?

You can book a home test or one at a test centre.

[martin_p]

You can book a home test or one at a test centre.

Just looked at the website. As it stands you can’t book a home test kit or at a regional test centre in Wales. Tests are still available at regional test centres in England, Scotland and NI.

[cblantfanclub]

Re. Ringo comment - "has all the available facts at their disposal, regarding the 2019 Covid 19 global pandemic."

I suspect a lot of people have all the available facts as by definition they are available - the issue is interpretation and that is what our scientists and government are supposed to do and eventually will be judged on.

[Devils_Advocate]

What a pr*ck

[ksrclaret]

Oh dear, oh dear.

They don’t do themselves any favours, do they?

[tiger76]

What a pr*ck

He's only been in the house for a few months,not a good start.I have TBH this is the 1st time I've heard of him.

Further info about him Since 2 March 2020, Roberts has been a member of the Welsh Affairs Select Committee and the Procedure Committee.

Yet another example of why MP'S shouldn't post on Twitter,it'll always come back to bite them on the behind.

[Devils_Advocate]

Yet another example of why MP'S shouldn't post on Twitter,it'll always come back to bite them on the behind.

I get your point and it is a correct one but from our perspective as the voting public it can be a good thing as we really see the true colours of some of the people in charge

There was a post on here a bit ago which really reflected on the calibre of politician we have in general across the board and it really is a sad state of affairs

There's too many people who follow the extremes and become too tribal and I think this is what has lead to politicians who are far better at playing to their audience than representing their country in a competent manner with integrity

[Damo]

A bloated mess - what absolute Tory ********.

Just as a matter of interest, where would this "army" of procurement managers have found the money, given the lack of funding from your government over the last ten years, to invest in ventilators, PPE and mortuary space ?
Ringo - style - out of thin air ?

Have you got figures for the total number of curator's (sic), diversity managers and PR staff and their salaries - I wouldn't mind betting they are insignificant in the grand, multi-billion pound scheme of things.

Tories now add the NHS to the long list of others to blame for a disastrous death toll. Who'd have thought it ?

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ystem-10bn
How many ventilators, ppe, mortuary space would £10 billion buy?

Screenshot_20200429-161933_Samsung Internet.jpg (664.38 KiB) Viewed 2450 times

How many ventilators, ppe, mortuary space would another £5billion buy

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 05439.html
Here's another £5million wasted (a paltry figure I know given how much it costs to run the NHS each day)

But yeah it's completely underfunded and everything wrong with the nhs is this current government's fault.

[CombatClaret]

I think he must have been misquoted or at least only partially quoted there. Sweden has 2,000 deaths, Germany has 6,000, but I doubt that any serious statistician would argue that that menas Sweden have been vastly more successful at restraining the disease. You have to look at it per capita, among other factors.

"It is far too early to make international comparisons, if they are they should be done on a per captia basis." - Raab, PMQs

The no1 aim here will be to present the UK as not having the highest number of deaths and so they can repeat numbers like 400(... per million) instead of 30,000.

[dsr]

"It is far too early to make international comparisons, if they are they should be done on a per captia basis." - Raab, PMQs

John Burn-Murdoch must have been misquoted. Not Raab.

[CombatClaret]

John Burn-Murdoch must have been misquoted. Not Raab.

I took them all directly from his twitter. From a while ago but it's still bearing out.

PC.jpg (167.77 KiB) Viewed 2425 times

[dsr]

I took them all directly from his twitter. From a while ago but it's still bearing out.

PC.jpg

Interesting. So it's just coincidence that the countries with the most deaths are the ones with the highest population?

Does he do the same graph with linear scales? There is a reason for logarithmic scales when graphically representing acceleration, but this one isn't. It's comparing deaths per head. Unless this scale compress the date while keeping the ratios exact? Any idea?

I'll tell you one thing that is counter-intuitive. The Scots have saved a lot of lives by voting against independence, if he's right. If country size is irrelevant to number of deaths, then the UK has a fairly fixed number coming if its population was 7m or 70m, and Scotland would have had only a small proportion of them. Wheras if Scotland had been a separate country, Scotland would have had a full country's ration of deaths, the same as the rest of the UK put together.

Conversely, of course, Germany has saved itself a packet of deaths by merging East and West.

(Absurdity aside, I reckon that conclusion is only true in the early stages of spread, when it's likely to be more localised. Once the virus is country-wide, it's pretty obvious that the people with higher populations - all else being equal - will have more deaths.)

[Devils_Advocate]

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... ystem-10bn
How many ventilators, ppe, mortuary space would £10 billion buy?
Screenshot_20200429-161933_Samsung Internet.jpg
How many ventilators, ppe, mortuary space would another £5billion buy

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 05439.html
Here's another £5million wasted (a paltry figure I know given how much it costs to run the NHS each day)

But yeah it's completely underfunded and everything wrong with the nhs is this current government's fault.

Is this the same Lord Carter who was seen to have a massive conflict of interest in being made chairman of the NHS Co-operation and Competition Panel (CCP) whilst being chairman of one of the UKs biggest healthcare companies (McKeesons)?

This was at a time when the Tory's were pushing forward their heathcare reforms of which Lord Carters company were seen to benefit from a widespread programme of private involvement in public services (I believe Carter received a payment off MCKeeson of around £800k during this period)

As for the £5billion potential saving well at the time Carter presented his findings didn't Osborne cut working tax credits to the tune of £5b in one swoop.

This was peak austerity where the Tories looked to bleed dry any services or benefits that helped the working class whist they protected their rich pals in the private sector

[evensteadiereddie]

Nice one.

[Devils_Advocate]

Concerns have been mounting around the impacts this pandemic crisis is having on migrants due to some on the immigration rules currently in place

Priti Patel attended a Home Affairs Select Committee inquiry this morning (I watched some of it and read a few summaries of the session) where she failed to turn up with data and info requested to her a couple of weeks ago and proceeded to give very vague and non committal answers

link to the hearing https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/7 ... 919ad7d215

I have read some really sad individual stories of some of the gig economy migrants who are being hit hard and think we really need to adopt a more humane immigration policy whist in this crisis.

On the back of this mornings hearing the group JCWI have detailed 8 of the key questions the Home Secretary needs to answer.

https://www.jcwi.org.uk/Blog/8-question ... -to-answer

[FactualFrank]

I saw this on Facebook, and I'd wondered about it myself whenever I've seen people wearing gloves, such as those working behind the counter in shops, delivery drivers, postman etc.

gloves.jpg (46.47 KiB) Viewed 2337 times

[Damo]

Is this the same Lord Carter who was seen to have a massive conflict of interest in being made chairman of the NHS Co-operation and Competition Panel (CCP) whilst being chairman of one of the UKs biggest healthcare companies (McKeesons)?

This was at a time when the Tory's were pushing forward their heathcare reforms of which Lord Carters company were seen to benefit from a widespread programme of private involvement in public services (I believe Carter received a payment off MCKeeson of around £800k during this period)

So are we dismissing this entire report because of his ties to MCKeeson?

As for the £5billion potential saving well at the time Carter presented his findings didn't Osborne cut working tax credits to the tune of £5b in one swoop.

This was peak austerity where the Tories looked to bleed dry any services or benefits that helped the working class whist they protected their rich pals in the private sector

Without wanting (or having time to) get into a discussion about the benefit system in the UK, what relevance does that have regarding my point about the NHS?

[Devils_Advocate]

So are we dismissing this entire report because of his ties to MCKeeson?


Without wanting (or having time to) get into a discussion about the benefit system in the UK, what relevance does that have regarding my point about the NHS?

All large organisations have lots of wastage and Ive no doubt that anyone could go into any large company and make a list of potential savings. Implementing and realising these savings whist not causing degradation to the quality of product / service you deliver is another challenge entirely.

When the person tasked with assessing what savings could potentially be made has a conflicting interest to show the NHS as being bloated and badly managed and a prime candidate for more private influence then it is hard to trust the objectivity and validity of at least some of the findings

This was over 5 years ago so if this report was accurate then seeing as the UK government through the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) is responsible for the NHS be it through direct control or managed delegation then the buck still stops with the Tories whether it be because funding, policy or poor management

Just adding some context to the £5b that the govt were happy just to strip it away from workers and also some context to the motives of govt at that time and why again the report might have been more political motivated than a genuine desire to improve the NHS