Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

[brogdale]

There's a similar system for applying for UC online only they give you a range of possible ID check providers. Well, they let me choose from two; of which neither thought I existed but which now probably have enough data about me to spoof my identity

Kleptocracy as scamocracy.

 

[SpookyFrank]

If only the bloody government had listened.



Worth reading the full report, including his thoughts on possible future waves.

Coronavirus: SAGE urged government to lockdown a week earlier, UK's chief scientific adviser says

"There will be decisions made that will turn out not to be the right decision at the time," Sir Patrick Vallance says.

news.sky.com

I look forward to seeing how the official inquiry manages to whitewash this.

Also worth remembering that 'full lockdown' was announced on the 23th, late in the evening, but enforcement such as it was didn't start until (I think) the 26th.

 

[brogdale]

I got ID'ed at the supermarket the other day (I am 34) and the driving licence I showed could have been anyone's because I was wearing a mask

Oh don't get me started on the photo ID thing; the number of scenes that have arisen when I've been asked to show my driving licence and when presented they claim that my (pre-photo) folded, paper licence is "not" a driving licence.

 

[brogdale]

The Byline piece suggests that the justification offered for the engagement of the Goldman owned Credit Rating agency was to "..minimise the risk of fraud."

 

[zahir]

I know loads of people that have had tests brogdale (both drive through and walk-in) and none have had that problem or mentioned anything approaching it. Seems quite odd, I'll ask about and see what's going on.

It isn’t a new issue. I’m sure some people will be getting round it by getting a home test in someone else’s name. This report is from early June:


Although the applying for a home testing kit does not require a credit check, the process uses the credit check company TransUnion to verify applicants’ identity. As the tests use data from the electoral roll, this could cause difficulties for people without stable addresses such as asylum seekers, refugees and travellers.

Those who do not complete or pass the TransUnion checks are instead required to go to a drive-through testing centre, which may not be possible for people without access to a vehicle.

The Department of Health and Social Care has denied the system is discriminatory and said an equalities impact assessment has been carried out.

A rapid needs assessment carried out by Doctors of the World (DOW), found that digital exclusion, fear of being reported to the Home Office and language barriers were preventing excluded patients from ordering the test.

Anna Miller, UK policy and advocacy manager for DOW, said: “The COVID-19 testing system has been set up with very little consideration of how migrant and other excluded communities, particularly those who have had their healthcare entitlements removed, access NHS services and take part in public health protection measures.”

Disadvantaged groups may not be able to access COVID-19 antigen tests online

 

[elbows]

If only the bloody government had listened.

I've got a slightly different take on what this does to the blame compared to how the Sky article phrases it.

Its a blame split. The last delay he describes, down to government, is only part of the fatal delay. The experts and the data they used are responsible for earlier delay, eg it wasnt the government that declared we were 4 weeks behind Italy when we were 2 weeks behind Italy, it was Vallance. But certainly once they had finally twigged what stage of epidemic we had reached, additional government delay was a disgrace too. Some lives were still saved due to actions of individuals during that final week of delay, because many people had twigged how serious and imminent it was by then and started to heavily modify their behaviour from that week of March 16th rather than waiting for useless Johnson to announce lockdown on the 23rd.

Looking at the realistic best-case, apart from various specific things we should have done for a lot longer to get prepared and have the right data, when it comes to lockdown timing the earliest we could have hoped for was the week of March 9th. Lockdown was still a mostly unthinkable thing for governments in Europe until that week, because by then Italy was forced to act in a draconian manner. If our experts had read the situation properly then the week of the 9th should have been the week to make those tough decisions and communicate them to the public by the end of that week at the latest. Which turns out to have been the very time both government and experts like Vallance were having a final go at promoting the original plan and desperately trying (and failing) to use herd immunity as a justification for their inaction. Friday 13th

 

[brogdale]

It isn’t a new issue. This is from a report in early June:

Although the applying for a home testing kit does not require a credit check, the process uses the credit check company TransUnion to verify applicants’ identity. As the tests use data from the electoral roll, this could cause difficulties for people without stable addresses such as asylum seekers, refugees and travellers.

Those who do not complete or pass the TransUnion checks are instead required to go to a drive-through testing centre, which may not be possible for people without access to a vehicle.

The Department of Health and Social Care has denied the system is discriminatory and said an equalities impact assessment has been carried out.

A rapid needs assessment carried out by Doctors of the World (DOW), found that digital exclusion, fear of being reported to the Home Office and language barriers were preventing excluded patients from ordering the test.

Anna Miller, UK policy and advocacy manager for DOW, said: “The COVID-19 testing system has been set up with very little consideration of how migrant and other excluded communities, particularly those who have had their healthcare entitlements removed, access NHS services and take part in public health protection measures.”

Disadvantaged groups may not be able to access COVID-19 antigen tests online

Credit reference database check requirements could prevent people from ordering home testing kits.

www.mobihealthnews.com

This, exactly.

It's pretty obvious that many of the 'Top 20' local authorities 'at risk' of local lockdown are in all probability merely districts with higher numbers of people that will fail to "pass" the credit rating gate-keepers. Hence, in certain parts of Leicester, the state has been to compelled to step in and compensate for market failure by providing targeted door-to-door testing delivery as shown on last night's C4 News.

Come the fabled enquiry, it will be interesting to see if any mention is made of this potential contributory factor to the local lockdown outbreaks or will they just go for the more convenient dog-whistle stuff about "multi-generational households" that have the temerity to live in small, terraced housing?

 

[elbows]

This, exactly.

It's pretty obvious that many of the 'Top 20' local authorities 'at risk' of local lockdown are in all probability merely districts with higher numbers of people that will fail to "pass" the credit rating gate-keepers. Hence, in certain parts of Leicester, the state has been to compelled to step in and compensate for market failure by providing targeted door-to-door testing delivery as shown on last night's C4 News.

Come the fabled enquiry, it will be interesting to see if any mention is made of this potential contributory factor to the local lockdown outbreaks or will they just go for the more convenient dog-whistle stuff about "multi-generational households" that have the temerity to live in small, terraced housing?

A midreading of the situation if you ask me. The multi-generational household stuff is likely a real driving factor at the moment, there is no point hiding away from this just because it could also be used as a dog whistle. And given that plenty of people have to be tested in those areas in order for those areas to show up as hotspots in the first place, I dont completely understand your point about that either.

There are many issues of inustice, poverty, living and working conditions which have left some far more exposed to this virus than others. Plenty will deserve huge criticism for that, and for decades of fostering these conditions. But it makes less sense to me if we zoom in too narrowly on one particular failed aspect of the testing system as actually being responsible for the situations in those places after the first peak was behind them. Other failures deserve plenty of blame, such as not sharing the postcode-level data with the local authorities in a comprehensive and timely manner. And not allowing local authorities to communicate with their households about all aspects of the pandemic, not paying attention to minority language communication material, etc.

 

[zahir]

This is the Doctors of the World assessment referred to in that report:

https://www.doctorsoftheworld.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/covid-full-rna-report.pdf?download=1

 

[brogdale]

A midreading of the situation if you ask me. The multi-generational household stuff is likely a real driving factor at the moment, there is no point hiding away from this just because it could also be used as a dog whistle. And given that plenty of people have to be tested in those areas in order for those areas to show up as hotspots in the first place, I dont completely understand your point about that either.

There are many issues of inustice, poverty, living and working conditions which have left some far more exposed to this virus than others. Plenty will deserve huge criticism for that, and for decades of fostering these conditions. But it makes less sense to me if we zoom in too narrowly on one particular failed aspect of the testing system as actually being responsible for the situations in those places after the first peak was behind them. Other failures deserve plenty of blame, such as not sharing the postcode-level data with the local authorities in a comprehensive and timely manner. And not allowing local authorities to communicate with their households about all aspects of the pandemic, not paying attention to minority language communication material, etc.

Bow to your greater knowledge here.
That said, I'd imagine that the initial discovery of the 'hotspot(s)' could conceivably have been made as a result of hospital admissions, rather than effective testing. Undeniably the testing has subsequently/belatedly ? occurred as a result of the door-to-door testing teams deployed by the state. To me that looks like covering for the market failure of the discriminatory digital exclusion that contributed to the undiagnosed transmissions in the first place.

 

[zahir]

Mobile testing in Blackburn as well:

Introducing new local measures to control virus spread | The Shuttle: Blackburn with Darwen Council News

 

[zahir]

Another report:

OK, THIS is why we need working Digital Identity in the UK... | THINK Digital Partners : THINK Digital Partners

'HSJ' reveals that you'll have to be on a credit reference file to prove your ID and get an online COVID-19 check. So that's totally fair and unproblematic, right?

www.thinkdigitalpartners.com

HSJ’ news site yesterday revealed yet another reason why we need to find some sort of workable Digital ID for the vast majority of our fellow citizens; thin-file applicants who want to avoid getting COVID-19 can’t get an online Government check for the virus if they’re not solvent enough to be on a credit reference database.

Or as the campaigning healthcare site – which has made all of its excellent coronavirus crisis coverage free to air – puts it, “Disadvantaged groups may be excluded from the government’s online coronavirus test and trace system because it requires a credit reference database check to decide whether to deliver a home test.”

If you’re not on such a file, don’t worry; it ‘only’ means you’ll have to get in your car and go to one of the drive-in ones.

Which won’t be a problem at all for the poor or non-mobile, will it?

The story, in any case, as unearthed by the publication is that the online application process for a postal test overseen as part of the service uses a credit check company – TransUnion – to verify applicants’ Identity.

“However, people who do not pass the checks carried out by the firm – or don’t want them to be carried out – are being told they need to apply instead for a drive-through test, which for many will make it difficult or impossible,” it adds.

The online application site asks for basic details such as name, mobile number, email address and address but, then requests permission to access the TransUnion database, the publication has discovered.

Anyone who refuses is told they have to start again and choose the drive-through option, but if they accept and their Identity can’t be verified against the TransUnion database, they are again told they need to go to a drive-through testing centre.

The Department of Health and Social Care denied the system was discriminatory and said an equalities impact assessment has been carried out – although it did not share this with HSJ when asked.

It said the vast majority of users were able to pass the identify verification process and successfully order a kit, but would not give a percentage, when asked. Where individuals could not prove their identity, there were “a range of in-person services” available, a spokeswoman said.

It argued that without this form of identity verification, other countries had experienced widespread fraudulent orders for testing kits.

A spokeswoman added: “No credit check is required. Our identity verification process has been an effective means of stopping fraudulent orders and is based on international evidence.

“Our testing call centre is available to support anyone who has trouble with the identity verification process, and there are a range of other in-person testing mechanisms that do not require Identity verification.”

A TransUnion spokeswoman is then quoted as saying it’s conducting “stringent Identity checks on behalf of the NHS to help ensure testing kits are sent to the correct recipients and to minimise the risk of fraud” – and that verification does indeed use information from an individual’s credit report.

 

[elbows]

Bow to your greater knowledge here.
That said, I'd imagine that the initial discovery of the 'hotspot(s)' could conceivably have been made as a result of hospital admissions, rather than effective testing. Undeniably the testing has subsequently/belatedly ? occurred as a result of the door-to-door testing teams deployed by the state. To me that looks like covering for the market failure of the discriminatory digital exclusion that contributed to the undiagnosed transmissions in the first place.

Well I dont want anything I say to be an excuse for the testing regime, because it has been riddled with so many issues.

In regards hospital data, for a long time I had no useful localised test data (because pillar 2 data wasnt shown), so deaths per hospital trust was one of the only things I could look at instead. Certainly during May there were a bunch of places where the deaths had fallen well below their peak, but were still somewhat persistent, not dwindling to the same extent as seen elsewhere. Leicester was one of those for a time, but their hospital data looked quite a lot better before the time Leicester was highlighted for being a hotspot based on test results. And when the authorities see a hospital with worrying data, they have to do a proper investigation because sometimes what this data is showing is transmission within the hospital itself, as opposed to a community outbreak. But yes, it is plausible that at times it will be hospital indicators which cause authorities to offer more accessible testing in a particular location. It happened in my town, Nuneaton, which turned out to mostly be a case of hospital infections, with some community transmission too but nothing that would really stand out as a hotspot. The hospital outbreak showed up clearly in the hospital data in a way that I havent seen im most other hospitals data. I am watching closely to see if the steady trickle of deaths we continued to have here after the first peak remains much diminished after they got a handle on this recent hospital outbreak, and if it does then that may imply the issue here was mostly hospital-related all the way along. I should also say that the 'pop-up, military-operated test facilities' were sent to Nuneaton on several occasions, and when they noticed the hospital outbreak this was done again, on a slightly more sustained basis. But this did not lead to a large and sustained rise in detected cases here, so we werent sent down the same path as Leicester.

Its really difficult to build a full picture of the history of hotspots like Leicester because the testing regime has changed on several occasions, and there were lengthy periods where I dont think any authorities had a proper system for spotting this stuff. They've only started to zoom in properly since the first peak was well behind us, and it is certainly true that the both the amount of testing offered, and various barriers to testing, can contribute to a distorted picture of which places are bad, and how bad compared to everywhere else. Age/severe disease demographics of who is testing positive make a difference too, and can mean that all sources of data dont always seem to match up in a neat way. For example when the mayor of Leicester was being somewhat resistant to local lockdown, one of the reasons was that their hospital data didnt look too bad at the time, and would have been unlikely to raise a red flag in June. So he wasnt sure if the large number of positives in Lecicester was more a result of additional testing than anything else. I would guesstimate that parts of Leicester did have a real problem that needed tackling, but the picture that we and the authorities have may still have been a bit distorted, and the Leicester lockdown was treated as a bit of an experiment. All the same, the numbers were high enough that doing nothing wasnt an option.

 

[zahir]

There will also be a lot of probable coronavirus cases dealt with by GPs where there hasn’t been testing and there’s no hospitalisation. It would be interesting to know how the number of these cases compares with the numbers actually getting a positive test result.

 

[kabbes]

Oh don't get me started on the photo ID thing; the number of scenes that have arisen when I've been asked to show my driving licence and when presented they claim that my (pre-photo) folded, paper licence is "not" a driving licence.

It is still a valid driving licence but, of course, it’s not a valid photo ID. So if they’re asking for it as shorthand for “photo ID” then it’s not good to them

 

[two sheds]

Wouldn't it have been better to use the information on the Census register to check against applications? I thought that was supposed to give the definitive list of everyone in the UK.

 

[IC3D]

The money being pissed away on testing should be building up NHS labs and creating jobs. It's fucking scandalous.

 

[elbows]

Another reason it is better to look at ONS death data than the daily PHE stuff:

Hancock calls for urgent review into coronavirus death data in England

Deaths recorded in England may have included people who tested positive months before they died.

www.bbc.co.uk

The government have an obvious interest in playing up any erroneous overcounting in order to attempt to cast doubt on the level of death caused by government failings, but since the ONS numbers are so much higher than the PHE ones anyway, I feel like taking a shit on their spin.

 

[zahir]

There must also be plenty of deaths where there was never a positive test result.

 

[elbows]

There must also be plenty of deaths where there was never a positive test result.

The ONS stuff picks up a load of those because if its mentioned on a death certificate but there was no test, it gets counted. And then the remaining missed ones explain a chunk of the difference between COVID-19 related deaths and the total excess death figures.

 

[elbows]

So that cunt Johnson wants people to go back to the office, probably because of all the businesses that rely on office workers passing by. Explains why Vallance was making public comments about no need to change the work advice, there is clearly a difference between what the experts are saying and what the government is doing. Similar to what happened with Whitty not exactly showing positivity towards pubs reopening some weeks ago.

 

[two sheds]

Does this mean that people who refuse to go back because their work environment isn't safe can start to be sacked?

 

[LDC]

Oh don't get me started on the photo ID thing; the number of scenes that have arisen when I've been asked to show my driving licence and when presented they claim that my (pre-photo) folded, paper licence is "not" a driving licence.

Paper driving licenses haven't been accepted as ID for years, aren't they all withdrawn? I'd be pissed off if my bank let someone use that to prove they were me to access my account or something, they don't prove anything. It's like claiming a bill is valid as ID.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Does this mean that people who refuse to go back because their work environment isn't safe can start to be sacked?

Presumably, yeah

 

[belboid]

Does this mean that people who refuse to go back because their work environment isn't safe can start to be sacked?

It would be dodgy, as it is still legally okay to refuse work you reasonably believe to be unsafe. You won’t be paid, of course, and it would be very wide mate to be a member of a union to be on the safe side.

 

[brogdale]

There will also be a lot of probable coronavirus cases dealt with by GPs where there hasn’t been testing and there’s no hospitalisation. It would be interesting to know how the number of these cases compares with the numbers actually getting a positive test result.

The reporting of the Leicester lockdown a couple of weeks back certainly pointed to stubbornly higher hospital admissions and high Pillar 2 positive tests of younger (more IT savy?) folk:



source

 

[brogdale]

Wouldn't it have been better to use the information on the Census register to check against applications? I thought that was supposed to give the definitive list of everyone in the UK.

No way I'd get a test then; I refused to engage with Lockheed for the last census.

 

[brogdale]

Paper driving licenses haven't been accepted as ID for years, aren't they all withdrawn? I'd be pissed off if my bank let someone use that to prove they were me to access my account or something, they don't prove anything. It's like claiming a bill is valid as ID.

They're only 'withdrawn' if you alert the DVLA to a change of address/details. If you've not moved since their introduction they will issue a new photo card replacement, but at a cost to the holder. So...fuck that for a game of soldiers.

 

[zahir]

Current NHS guidance:

Elective Admissions (including day surgery): patients should isolate for 14 days prior to admission along with members of their household. As and when feasible, this should be supplemented with a pre-admission test* (conducted a maximum of 72 hours in advance), allowing patients who test negative to be admitted with IPC and PPE requirements that are appropriate for someone who’s confirmed COVID status is negative.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2020/05/Operating-framework-for-urgent-and-planned-services-within-hospitals.pdf

So if you’re due for an operation you now need to isolate for 14 days beforehand, along with the rest of your household. Two weeks off work for everyone, with no sick pay.

 

[William of Walworth]

Paper driving licenses haven't been accepted as ID for years, aren't they all withdrawn? I'd be pissed off if my bank let someone use that to prove they were me to access my account or something, they don't prove anything. It's like claiming a bill is valid as ID.

They're only 'withdrawn' if you alert the DVLA to a change of address/details. If you've not moved since their introduction they will issue a new photo card replacement, but at a cost to the holder. So...fuck that for a game of soldiers.

100% correct.

If you haven't moved house since 1998, your old paper licence is still fully valid (for driving) so long as it's legible/not destroyed.

And people could be better off using (current) UK passports** for photo ID, given that the passport number is accessible for some purposes/on some databases as well as in physical format.

**Non-UK ones -- more complicated, and especially so to explain!