Coronavirus

[RobertT]

In England and Wales, since w/e 19th June - we have seen a reduction of c1,500 less excess deaths.  Should this not be taken off?

Yes - not that you'd count it against Covid as an odd positive, but more that you track the impact of a Pandemic on the health systems/society as a whole.  The result of shurdowns and reduced mobility could likely be a short term boon against accidental death for example.  It's key to keep tracking it for months later as well - we could see an uptick in Cancer deaths if people skipped treatment, also the other discussion about long term impacts on health.  Someone could recover but then die a year or two later thanks to the impact on their body weakening their immune system, or creating a new underlying condition.

As much as the direct immediate death count is sexy for reporters, the Govt needs to understand how to adapt policy and healthcare delivery for future Pandemics.

[Bogus Dave]

Separate studies by ONS and ZOE (kings college London) both concluding that total infections in the population remaining static. Confirmed cases moving upwards slowly, which would indicate its test and trace slowly working rather than an increase in spread - we’re getting better at directing infected people to testing, rather than having more infected people

I think generally we’re in as good a position now as we’re going to be with things

[pauld]

Separate studies by ONS and ZOE (kings college London) both concluding that total infections in the population remaining static. Confirmed cases moving upwards slowly, which would indicate its test and trace slowly working rather than an increase in spread - we’re getting better at directing infected people to testing, rather than having more infected people

Excellent, although I suspect it's an increase in testing rather than "test and trace working". Even the govt have admitted test and trace is a shambles which is why they've started to hand it over to local authorities as Sercco have abjectly failed to implement tracing properly - 50% failure rate. If that can be implemented by proper PH professionals and improved we could see the infection rate start to fall which is what we should be aiming for.

[Saxondale]

But they said it was world beating. Please don't tell me they were, um, I cant hardly bring myself to say it, lying.

[Flashheart]

But they said it was world beating. Please don't tell me they were, um, I cant hardly bring myself to say it, lying.

Or world beatingly incompetent.

I don't know which would be worse.

[pauld]

So the clearly failing PHE is to be scrapped, even though it was rated as excellent just 3 years ago by an international body appointed to scrutinise govt Public Health efforts, sure went downhill fast. But the man who oversaw that decline, Matt Hancock, is taking no responsibility for that failure and has instead decided to create a new body, also answerable to him, to be comprised of the wreckage of PHE and the already failing privatised Serco Test and Trace programme (falsely branded as NHS Test and Trace so the NHS can take the blame for Serco's failures).

Serco's Test and Trace has so far managed to contact roughly 50% of those testing positive, a dismal rate of failure. It has been led in that failure by the serial fuck-up Dido Harding, she of TalkTalk data breach fame and other private sector fiascos, and husband of a Tory MP who has for years, entirely coincidentally, been demanding the abolition of PHE and the privatisation of the NHS. The new body will be led by that very same Dido Harding, so that she can continue her track record of fucking up on a grand scale. It makes you wonder if the priority is tackling the virus, or just driving through the ongoing privatisation of public health.

[STFC_Manc]

So the clearly failing PHE is to be scrapped, even though it was rated as excellent just 3 years ago by an international body appointed to scrutinise govt Public Health efforts, sure went downhill fast. But the man who oversaw that decline, Matt Hancock, is taking no responsibility for that failure and has instead decided to create a new body, also answerable to him, to be comprised of the wreckage of PHE and the already failing privatised Serco Test and Trace programme (falsely branded as NHS Test and Trace so the NHS can take the blame for Serco's failures).

Serco's Test and Trace has so far managed to contact roughly 50% of those testing positive, a dismal rate of failure. It has been led in that failure by the serial fuck-up Dido Harding, she of TalkTalk data breach fame and other private sector fiascos, and husband of a Tory MP who has for years, entirely coincidentally, been demanding the abolition of PHE and the privatisation of the NHS. The new body will be led by that very same Dido Harding, so that she can continue her track record of fucking up on a grand scale. It makes you wonder if the priority is tackling the virus, or just driving through the ongoing privatisation of public health.

Can I ask where you are getting your numbers from? 50% of those testing positive?

The only mention of 50% in the below link is this... despite figures suggesting that only around 50% of people from the same household as a person infected with Covid-19 were being contacted.

If you are in the same household and you don't know the person has tested positive and you need to isolate then you are an idiot... I'm not going to pretend its a world beating test and trace but atleast get the facts right

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53733600

[Batch]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/serco-sacked-nhs-test-trace-coronavirus-contact-a4521321.html

Official figures show that local teams manage to contact 98 per cent of close contacts of people who tested positive for Covid-19 before asking them to self-isolate.

This plummets to 56 per cent of close contacts in cases handled either online or by call centres.

[STFC_Manc]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/serco-sacked-nhs-test-trace-coronavirus-contact-a4521321.html

That's what I've already called out...

[pauld]

That's what I've already called out...

No it's not. Close contacts are not the same as "in the same household".

[Batch]

^^^ this.

it may be one source is more accurate than the other, but mine is explicitly saying 56% of all close contacts traced. can't verify it correct, obviously

[pauld]

And here's Dido Harding holding the wooden spoon award she scooped when in charge of TalkTalk for Britain's shoddiest customer service, two years running



No experience of public health, and shit at the things she does have experience in. I mean, who else would you trust with the nation's fightback against COVID?

[STFC_Manc]

No it's not. Close contacts are not the same as "in the same household".

Have you looked at the BBC article? The one batch links to doesn't have much detail.

[pauld]

Have you looked at the BBC article? The one batch links to doesn't have much detail.

No I looked at the govt stats, that both articles were based on. Close contacts are not the same as members of the same household, it means someone you have been in prolonged (i.e. 10 mins or more) close contact with. So someone you were sat next to at work or in the pub or on a bus journey, not someone you passed in the street, for example. But it doesn't have to mean same household (although clearly it could). And you were right by the way, it's not 50% it's more like 55%. Still a massive failure.

[STFC_Manc]

No I looked at the govt stats, that both articles were based on. Close contacts are not the same as members of the same household, it means someone you have been in prolonged (i.e. 10 mins or more) close contact with. So someone you were sat next to at work or in the pub or on a bus journey, not someone you passed in the street, for example. But it doesn't have to mean same household (although clearly it could). And you were right by the way, it's not 50% it's more like 55%. Still a massive failure.

Have you actually looked at the govt stats though?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/909104/NHS_T_T_Week10_ods.ods

This will provide the data tables up to 5th August, the latest version.  Total close contacts reached on table 10 was 74% for the last week available.  On the same table it then splits it into complex (95.2%) and non complex (61.1%)

Then table 11 provides the split of non complex by household (57.4%) and non household (67.1%) contacts contacted.

My points stands, why they present household contacts, as they should never need to receive a call to tell them to isolate, so the stats are misleading.

It seems that c20% of people are providing contact details for close contacts, this is something the general public need to help support, the gov can't do it without our help.