Release all restrictions, cases drop like a stone

So the restrictions easing didn't have an impact because they had a 7 day lag, but schools closing didn't have a 7 day lag and therefore did impact it?

 

A quick logic check tells me that doesn't seem right...

There was a total of 2,448,780 reported cases of Covid in the UK in 2020. 60% of that is 1,469,268 by my count. The up to date Covid hospital admissions for the entire pandemic is 486,029 patients.

According to this: https://www.theguardian.com/society...ht-covid-while-hospital-inpatients-in-england


40,600 cases were contracted in hospitals between August 2020 and March 2021. There were 3,992,631 cases recorded in the UK in that time period. That's 0.01% of all cases.
Edit: 1% sorry (Thanks TM)

I think what you mean is that 60% of people who were in hospital who tested positive for Covid were found to have contracted it there?

Best I have for that is one article from June last year that states, in two Midlands hospitals, 60% of covid cases 'in recent days' we're contracted within the hospital.

https://www.hsj.co.uk/acute-care/ex...vid-cases-caught-on-the-wards/7027819.article

Still would be surprised if that number is remotely close to correct. And that's not me denying that there's room for improvement in reducing transmission in hospital and care environments.

 

Peston’s comments made me look into it but it’s the Zoe study that I’ve been monitoring. It’s very notable how different the figures are and I know which I trust: https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-estimates-updated-vaccine

This model shows you with high confidence the actual prevalence of infection, not just the actual (which can be easily affected by reducing access to testing, as we’ve seen in the past few weeks).

We all have our motives for wanting lockdown to end/remain. Personally, I’m in favour of it ending but the lack of transparency from the government is very worrying. That’s my point.

 

There is a great case study when you compare Scotland and England in terms of Infection rates. Scotland peaked around 2 to 3 weeks before England on 28 June with an equivalent 7 day rate of close to 500 per 100,000. Since 28 June this has now fallen rapidly and stands at 203 per 100,000 today.

The UK (England dominates 90% of the population) peaked at 502 per 100,000 on 19 July and has fallen rapidly since then.

Now I'm no scientist but I do like numbers, the rates and falls are very similar between Scotland and the UK but three weeks apart.

For all those who don't know, Scottish schools tend to finish up at the end of June with English two or three weeks later. That may well be a spurious correlation but it sort of fits the data.

 

Is that all? Ok, I can probably live with that.

 

Think your Maths needs a quick check.

 

Its going well in Holland since restrictions were dropped isn"t it ? Get a grip with reality man , plenty of problems with lifting restrictions

 

Honest answer is that I’m friends with people at PHE and they’ve made me very aware of the limitations of their capabilities, in addition to the fact that reducing access to testing has serious impacts on the results of ‘actual’ cases. For the above reasons, using big data to model is more likely to show a true picture of what we’re experiencing today.

Our test system is no better than other developed countries, and our vaccination programme isn’t either. I’m unsure where you have good those particular stats from. In the case of vaccinations, we had a head start and are now behind a lot of European nations our vaccinate rate of our population and volume of vaccines administered.

As I’ve said in both posts, I’m not trying to argue what the data says today, or what the Zoe model shows. I’m trying to highlight that the government hasn’t actually told us what information and models THEY have used to make this decision now. THAT is what worries me.

 

Testing has clearly dropped markedly in the area which you've always blamed for the majority of infections...schools. I've already said that I wasn't just talking about stadiums either. As Farnham so eloquently puts it, there's also been many "jam packed pubs all standing in front of a screen yelling at a football match". Shock, horror that I should attribute any of it to hospitality though.

 

Sorry, doing 3 things at once 1% sounds better.

Still a bit lower than 60% mind

 

I agree, it shows how many people don’t really understand the limits of data methodologies and are used to calling science ‘fact’. Science is just observable, evidenced-based testing of hypotheses. It can still show misnomers if the methodology isn’t understood.

Regarding the testing worldwide, its important to recognise it isn’t always comparing the same thing because of different testing regimes - so it’s a bit of a moot point to just compare on volume. However, I get your point that the testing system did eventually work. However, if the testing has been scaled back (there is evidence to suggest it has) then it would deflate the actual positive cases of covid being reported after a two week lag.

I don’t begrudge anyone from having strong views about any of the things in this thread though. There’s no right answer to this - it’s a sociological discussion that needs to be debated.

 

The latest research shows that even a mild case of Covid has a similar effect on cognitive function as a stroke. Admission to hospital makes it much worse.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00324-2/fulltext

 

You be an insufferable cuuunt as much as you like. Doesn’t make you right.

Cases dropping has nothing to do with easing lockdown restrictions as the figures are seven days in lag, as well you know.

The figures will drop next week regardless as the schools are closed, as well you know.

Cases and particularly hospitalisation will continue to drop given the continuing vaccination program, as well you know.

You have been calling out lockdown as a bad idea all along, the fact that cases are dropping now is absolutely no indication whatsoever of lockdown being wrong all along, as well you know.

Eight pages of this thread, you keep responding, and all you’ve done is make yourself look an absolute pillock claiming conclusions where you know there aren’t any.

You crack on though flower.

 

I'm not sure using a figure quoted from a couple if days in two hospitals a year ago is fair in any circumstance, nevermind when the person is quoting it as "60%+ (I believe) of new cases last year were in hospital."

As much as I dislike the Guardian, they have used official NHS stats to get their figures and are attempting to criticise the government with them so their estimation is not likely to be on the low side.

Absolutely a startling number I agree.