Stats for Bradford Royal Infirmary. I've posted them regularly so didn't bother explaining, sorry.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Stats for Bradford Royal Infirmary. I've posted them regularly so didn't bother explaining, sorry.
And the R0 you want to measure is that of the wild virus in the general population which in turn gives a measure of the effectiveness of the Lockdown/control measures.
Thanks - physically can't follow and remember all individual posts.
Very interesting data.
kingrollo
Guru
Don't fully understand it - but was reading it's .7 in the UK at the moment - but if it goes above 1 we are back to where we were 3 weeks ago.
Wobblers
Euthermic
- Location
- Minkowski Space
That's not quite true: we can infer from the experiences of other countries.
In every country where there has been a lack of testing potential cases followed up by rigorous contact tracing for those exposed to the virus, there has been a substantial outbreak.
China (outside of Hubei province), Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea all implemented programs of testing, contact tracing and quarantine of those infected. They have managed to contain the disease to a very small fraction of the population.
The lesson is quite, quite clear. The only way to prevent mass transmission and illness is by rigorous testing of those showing symptoms and exhaustive contact tracing of people exposed to carriers. We have no other means of preventing a mass outbreak. I see no evidence of the UK government understanding this. The UK's testing strategy is still in disarray. We are still, even now, failing to test those who are symptomatic - something that has been shown to be essential. (Because testing only those who present at hospitals fails to track the virus in the community.) We have no means of performing contact tracing. (And no, a half arsed smart phone app doesn't count because many people don't have one, batteries go flat, they get forgotten, and most importantly of all, by relying on self-reporting most cases will be missed because most cases are very mild.)
In short, the government's strategy - or lack of, to be more accurate - makes a second wave after lockdown restrictions are lifted almost inevitable. It will happen. The only question is when - will the second wave happen four weeks or six weeks after the lockdown ends?
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
Hold on, aren't we re-starting contact tracing?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/uk-to-start-coronavirus-contact-tracing-again
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/17/uk-to-start-coronavirus-contact-tracing-again
Wobblers
Euthermic
- Location
- Minkowski Space
No.
Matt Hancock saying that we should restart contact tracing is not a statement that we are restarting contact tracing.
Do you understand the scale of the operation China undertook in order to confine the epidemic in Hubei province? From the WHO report, there were 1800 teams performing contact tracing. That is a major logistical challenge, and the UK has a larger outbreak. There is an absence of the preparation required for this, and it will need to be fully in place by the time that restrictions are lifted in order to prevent a second wave. Further, we lack the testing capacity to test those showing symptoms far less check contacts for the presence of the virus. Again, this is something that needs to be in place before the end of lockdown.
Given Hancock's dismal record in failing to expand testing capacity in a timely manner, and his equally dismal record in meeting his promises over PPE supplies, it is not reasonable to expect him to achieve his promises over contact tracing. Especially when you consider the magnitude of the task required. And the very short timescales.
kingrollo
Guru
That's quoting the health secretary .........not a reliable source.
And remember China was already a surveillance society with facial recognition and individual tracking systems and social sanction procedures in place prior to the outbreak.
Vallance was asked this last week and said, as is true, although the numbers are encouraging, there are still an awfully large number of people that have the virus at present, even if the transmission rate is below 1 (which they believe it is). So the number of people infected at any one time needs to come down a lot.
If you take Lombardia that's had 36 out of the last 37 days with deaths at crudely around 200 (rounding up in some cases). Someone might wonder well what's special about 200? It may have some relevance as that's showing how high 'high' death rates can continue. Lombardia has a population of 10.1 million. The UK is 66 million. Scaled up Lombardia still has higher hospital death rates than the UK did at it's worst (with large bounds of uncertainy and all sorts of recording issues in both countries). Even now, even though loads of things were said about Italy being 2-4 weeks ahead of the UK etc. Of course the region had a few days with deaths of over 500, but most of the 'high' days were around 300-400. The daily deaths are still very, very high and one explanation may be that around 15% of the population in Lombardy has had it*, meaning that even with R below 1, an enormously large enough people were still getting it 2-4 weeks ago to then turn up in hospital/die 2-4 weeks later. In Italy as a whole numbers in ICU started falling around 2.5 weeks ago, but it's still crudely at about two-thirds of the level that it was at it's highest (for the whole of Italy, so not much relevance for particular regions).
*All we know for certain is 0.66% of the population in Lombardia have had the virus. Locally it's quite likely that 15% has had it in a number of very bad clusters. Everywhere in the region, an average, a lot less likely that it's 15%, but it could be. It's why the WHO has been saying the last couple of days that there's evidence in many locations only 2-3% of the population has had it.
vickster
Legendary Member
They’re using Smartphone Apps in Asia I think, don’t know how keen the GB public will be to have such on their phones using data, even if they have a smart phone
