Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

[weltweit]

Deaths are still pretty significant, in fact isn't todays number the largest for the last week?

 

[Chilli.s]

Looking at all those graphs and numbers, I can't see any peak, all I see is more and more.

 

[Azrael]

And bingo, Hancock explicitly links the new testing capacity to large scale contact tracing, the "new priority" for testing.

Unctuous git that he is, I'll reluctantly admit that he's done a fair job of directing his Westminster scheming to outflanking the advisors' crushing nihilism and quietly building up a suppression system. While all the speculation was "herd immunity" by stealth, it was actually (a shadow of) South Korea by stealth.

 

[Azrael]

Surely these medical idiots they wheel out every day should be impartial?

I know they're covering their arses for the collosal fuck ups they've made so far, but they're doctors. Where's their integrity? They seem to out bullshit Boris at times.

They applied an influenza plan to a coronavirus because it was all they had and got tens of thousands needlessly killed. They're in a world of shit and they know it. (Apart from Whitty, who appears to believe he can transmute SARS-CoV-2 into the flu by sheer force of will, and crush opposition with relentless waves of aggressive fatalism.)

 

[Lurdan]

More detail from the ONS report I linked to above

• Between 1 March and 17 April 2020, there were 90,232 deaths occurring in England and Wales that were registered by 18 April; 20,283 of these deaths involved the coronavirus (COVID-19).
• When adjusting for size and age structure of the population, there were 36.2 deaths involving COVID-19 per 100,000 people in England and Wales.
• London had the highest age-standardised mortality rate with 85.7 deaths per 100,000 persons involving COVID-19; this was statistically significantly higher than any other region and almost double the next highest rate.
• The local authorities with the highest age-standardised mortality rates for deaths involving COVID-19 were all London Boroughs; Newham had the highest age-standardised rate with 144.3 deaths per 100,000 population followed by Brent with a rate of 141.5 deaths per 100,000 population and Hackney with a rate of 127.4 deaths per 100,000 population.
• The age-standardised mortality rate of deaths involving COVID-19 in the most deprived areas of England was 55.1 deaths per 100,000 population compared with 25.3 deaths per 100,000 population in the least deprived areas
• In Wales, the most deprived areas had a mortality rate for deaths involving COVID-19 of 44.6 deaths per 100,000 population, almost twice as high as the least deprived area of 23.2 deaths per 100,000 population.

 

[Petcha]

They applied an influenza plan to a coronavirus because it was all they had and got tens of thousands needlessly killed. They're in a world of shit and they know it. (Apart from Whitty, who appears to believe he can transmute SARS-CoV-2 into the flu by sheer force of will, and crush opposition with relentless waves of aggressive fatalism.)

It's astonishing. Even to a layman like me. I'd fall on my sword if I was one of these idiots who were supposed to be the experts on this shit. They've got just as much blood on their hands as the idiots they were 'advising'. They put that slide up every day showing the different countries' trajectories and unless I'm not mistaken, we're fucked. And they gloss over it.

'next slide please'

 

[SpineyNorman]

The entire country's forbidden from leaving their homes without "reasonable excuse". It's the most sweeping and draconian curb on individual liberty in centuries, going far further than anything imposed in the world wars.

I force myself to say it's justified by the extraordinary circumstances, but won't downplay just how severe it is. Worry about those who don't share my view, and try and get it quashed in the courts before a surveillance and suppression system's in place, because its legal basis (an obscure public health act from 1984) is, at best, dubious.

I've said for weeks that I'd oppose all but the most minor and evidence-based easing (and perhaps not even that) until the virus can be suppressed by other means. That remains my view.

More draconian than anything in the two world wars is quite a claim too, what about being sent over the top?

 

[Teaboy]

Looking at all those graphs and numbers, I can't see any peak, all I see is more and more.

My understanding was that it was never likely to be a peak but a plateau. Maybe I have that wrong but in the last week or so it's become all about a peak.

 

[Azrael]

More draconian than anything in the two world wars is quite a claim too, what about being sent over the top?

Comment related specifically to civilian restrictions on movement, not conscription (although given our fruit picking woes, who knows ...).

 

[maomao]

More detail from the ONS report I linked to above

• Between 1 March and 17 April 2020, there were 90,232 deaths occurring in England and Wales that were registered by 18 April; 20,283 of these deaths involved the coronavirus (COVID-19).
• When adjusting for size and age structure of the population, there were 36.2 deaths involving COVID-19 per 100,000 people in England and Wales.
• London had the highest age-standardised mortality rate with 85.7 deaths per 100,000 persons involving COVID-19; this was statistically significantly higher than any other region and almost double the next highest rate.
• The local authorities with the highest age-standardised mortality rates for deaths involving COVID-19 were all London Boroughs; Newham had the highest age-standardised rate with 144.3 deaths per 100,000 population followed by Brent with a rate of 141.5 deaths per 100,000 population and Hackney with a rate of 127.4 deaths per 100,000 population.
• The age-standardised mortality rate of deaths involving COVID-19 in the most deprived areas of England was 55.1 deaths per 100,000 population compared with 25.3 deaths per 100,000 population in the least deprived areas
• In Wales, the most deprived areas had a mortality rate for deaths involving COVID-19 of 44.6 deaths per 100,000 population, almost twice as high as the least deprived area of 23.2 deaths per 100,000 population.

Wtf is age standardised mortality? Are they literally counting old people as less than 1 death because they had less years left to live?

 

[Azrael]

It's astonishing. Even to a layman like me. I'd fall on my sword if I was one of these idiots who were supposed to be the experts on this shit. They've got just as much blood on their hands as the idiots they were 'advising'. They put that slide up every day showing the different countries' trajectories and unless I'm not mistaken, we're fucked. And they gloss over it.

'next slide please'

I'd have done what the establishments in most European countries did: adapt the plan on the fly, impose swift lockdown, and use the time bought to throw resources into developing a suppression system.

(Well, within the parameters advisors are operating in: given a free hand, my policy would've been swift travel bans and quarantine to try and keep the virus out as much as possible.)

Just our luck to get stuck with advisors who retreated into the thickets of denial and insisted that, if you just wished hard enough, this would turn into the flu and all would be well. One of the all time worst examples of fitting the terrain to the map.

 

[Cid]

My understanding was that it was never likely to be a peak but a plateau. Maybe I have that wrong but in the last week or so it's become all about a peak.

It's supposed to be a peak... How that peak is shaped depends on various things, but certainly the idea is to get R0 as less than 1, i.e to create a situation where you still have transmission, but the rate of transmission is reducing rather than increasing. The idea of 'flattening the curve' was to have a more plateau-like peak, but it's still essentially increasing cases on one side, decreasing cases on the other. A continuous plateau effectively means you're getting nowhere - that might have been the ideal for the 'herd immunity' ideas early on - i.e just let it rip through the population at a constant but manageable rate. But when I say say 'ideal' I mean... yeah. That wasn't going to happen. So yes, the intention of most countries is absolutely to see a steady reduction after the sharp peak caused by poor initial control.

 

[Cid]

I think with UK figures, especially with the weekend discrepancies, it's still really too early to get a useful idea of what's happening on that level.

 

[Azrael]

In more positive news, Scotland at least cleared out their "testing's for losers" CMO, and both they and Wales have helped drag England towards a suppression strategy. Speaking to those in the Westminster quarantine zone, everyone's sick of Whitty and his unrelenting negativity. He's not getting anything close to a free hand.

We are, achingly slowly, inching towards something resembling an effective suppression system, but dear Lord progress is hard fought.

 

[Cid]

Wtf is age standardised mortality? Are they literally counting old people as less than 1 death because they had less years left to live?

It seems to be a weighting method that adjusts mortality figures to a standard population. My brain isn't working at the moment, but some info here (WHO).

 

[Artaxerxes]

Coronavirus: Black African deaths three times higher than white Britons - study

(Source: Associated Press)

"It must be their watermelon smiles"​

I've seen some headlines that map inequality metrics to racial ones and tie them to covid deaths.

Thinking back I've also seen mostly white people in stories of covid deaths of illnesses aside from minorities who died while working directly for NHS.

 

[Lurdan]

Wtf is age standardised mortality? Are they literally counting old people as less than 1 death because they had less years left to live?

Well according to the ONS :

Age-standardised mortality rates are used to allow comparisons between populations that may contain different proportions of people of different ages. The 2013 European Standard Population is used to standardise rates.

Having failed O level maths (more than once) I can't really comment.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Does anyone know what proportion of new cases are coming from transmission in hospitals and care homes?

In the region of 20-25% I think.

 

[Doodler]

They applied an influenza plan to a coronavirus because it was all they had

If you've got yourself a nice new hammer everything looks like a nail, even lumps of nitroglycerine.

 

[maomao]

It seems to be a weighting method that adjusts mortality figures to a standard population. My brain isn't working at the moment, but some info here (WHO).

It actually doesn't seem to be what I thought but rather adjusts for unusually young or old populations (so I think it would actually show a higher rate in London as the population is young but the disease is hitting older than average).

 

[Azrael]

As feared, serious judicial review of lockdown is launched.

 

[two sheds]

As feared, serious judicial review of lockdown is launched.

This could be interesting though:

He is also seeking minutes of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) meetings this year, some of which involved Boris Johnson’s adviser Dominic Cummings.

 

[Azrael]

Very.

Someone was gonna do it. Can't leave the population twisting in the wind with no clear exit strategy and not expect blowback. Exactly why Whitehall needed to transparently announce and build the alternative suppression system from the moment the lockdown was imposed.

If Whitty attempts the unhinged "leave people languishing indefinitely in a semi-locked down dystopia 'cause South Korea can't be right and this virus must be the flu" plan suggested by his hopeless briefings, we ain't seen nothing yet.

 

[Cid]

I don't think that will go anywhere... I mean, I have a law degree (first class, open university), which qualifies me to know that I know fuck all about law... although generally; emergency, parliamentary supremacy. But the disclosure and some of the reasons behind the case might make it interesting. Probably only in some tangential graun articles, and maybe some outraged DM articles though.

 

[Azrael]

As noted earlier on the thread, lockdown's imposed via secondary legislation enabled by an obscure public health act from (too perfectly) 1984. Courts can quash it all.

Parliament could, of course, enshrine a lockdown in primary legislation, but that'd be an extremely cumbersome process (any variation would require an amendment or fresh act), and there's no guarantee it'd pass Tory benches packed with people who'd like to "run hot".

Commentator and lawyer David Allen Green's asked to be kept informed, so at the least, it should be taken seriously.

 

[Cid]

As noted earlier on the thread, lockdown's imposed via secondary legislation enabled by an obscure public health act from (too perfectly) 1984. Courts can quash it all.

Parliament could, of course, enshrine a lockdown in primary legislation, but that'd be an extremely cumbersome process (any variation would require an amendment or fresh act), and there's no guarantee it'd pass Tory benches packed with people who'd like to "run hot".

Commentator and lawyer David Allen Green's asked to be kept informed, so at the least, it should be taken seriously.

As noted earlier, having a law degree qualifies you to know that you know fuck all about how the law works in practice, not having one... Just toss a coin.

 

[kalidarkone]

In my job, grounds maintenance, we're not having to be that close to each other that much and, perhaps more importantly, we're not interacting with people who are likely to be infected or who are highly vulnerable should they become infected.

The masks we have are standard dust mask type PPE, and given the apparent shortage of specialist PPE, I think it's better that it's reserved for those of you in frontline medical positions, but thanks for your suggestion.

FRSM are not specialist and we have plenty of those. It's the fp33 that in short supply.

How do you know who is likely to be infected or not? Or who is highly vulnerable? The answer is you dont and for that reason should be treating everyone including yourself as being positive for covid. Unless you have evidence otherwise It's the best way to keep yourself and others safe.

 

[Azrael]

As noted earlier, having a law degree qualifies you to know that you know fuck all about how the law works in practice, not having one... Just toss a coin.

Oh, I wouldn't be surprised to see a judge spike it all, whatever the law says. Judges are people (mostly). I suspect that the Dred Scott comparison was what made the prorogation case unanimous. But given Lord Sumption's scepticism about the lockdown, could go either way.

If nothing else, hope this cans Whitty's opposition to the South Korean suppression system once and for all.

 

[Cid]

Oh, I wouldn't be surprised to see a judge spike it all, whatever the law says. Judges are people (mostly). I suspect that the Dred Scott comparison was what made the prorogation case unanimous. But given Lord Sumption's scepticism about the lockdown, could go either way.

If nothing else, hope this cans Whitty's opposition to the South Korean suppression system once and for all.

I'll just say this: generally, if parliament seems to be on board, the courts won't stir up trouble. That is the fundamental underpinning of the UK system. An individual judge's opinion will not necessarily reflect their legal opinion. I might do a bit more reading on it if I have time... But that's how the law works here. Judicial review isn't an easy track at the best of times, and in a situation of national emergency even less so. Like I said, echoing m'colleague Arthur Jackson, it may be more about trying to get disclosure wrt earlier discussions.

 

[Azrael]

He's certainly after disclosure, and if it ends there, could be very useful. Sounds like he may accept the replacement of the "no leaving your home without reasonable excuse" regime with something like the German light-touch lockdown.

If it ends up aiding Hancock in getting his suppression system the support and resources it needs from PHE and advisors, good.