The UK response - Part II - read OP

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Nothing at all to say so? Grand.

Yes.

Adding the word “fact” after a statement does not make it one.

Yuh haven’t provided anything to support your claims, so we can presume it is bollocks.

Professor Moriarty

Aegir wrote: »

Yes.

Adding the word “fact” after a statement does not make it one.

Yuh haven’t provided anything to support your claims, so we can presume it is bollocks.

It's really enjoyable having such an interesting and informed discussion with you. You make such insightful and relevant arguments and points without recourse to ad hominem and reductio ad absurdum responses. Admirable.

bob mcbob

theological wrote: »

Not fully accurate. The incidence of the virus is in decline according to the KCL data. It dropped by 200 cases a day between the last value.

It is possible that the higher number of positive test results are because more people are being tested.

You'd need to do more work to explain that Britain will follow France. The lockdown easing in France was done in phases like in Britain. It would also require analysis of what was eased when in both places and behavioural analysis of what happened since. Lockdown easing in the UK took place gradually from May, not from July.

The lowest (average) level of daily infections was recorded on 9th July - that is why the pub opening is important. It was 545 - since then it has doubled.

However despite as you said an increase in the number of tests, the number of tests that are positive is also increasing. The (average) number of positive tests was 0.59% on the 9th July, it is now 0.71%.

theological

bob mcbob wrote: »

The lowest (average) level of daily infections was recorded on 9th July - that is why the pub opening is important. It was 545 - since then it has doubled.

However despite as you said an increase in the number of tests, the number of tests that are positive is also increasing. The (average) number of positive tests was 0.59% on the 9th July, it is now 0.71%.

The KCL data published last Thursday an incidence rate of 1400ish a day which is lower than the start of July. Similarly it has under 21000 cases of symptomatic coronavirus. Which is also lower than the start of July. The latest snapshot from August 12th for app users shows over 1200 per day and 0.9 R. The virus is probably still in decline with this data.

The testing data is an incomplete figure. The KCL data is estimated on a survey of 4 million people who report symptoms and test results. It's probably more accurate than the picture from testing alone.

It is possible that more people are tested which means that the positive tests per day can be increasing even when the general prevalence of the virus is in decline.

bob mcbob

theological wrote: »

The KCL data published last Thursday an incidence rate of 1400ish a day which is lower than the start of July. Similarly it has under 21000 cases of symptomatic coronavirus. Which is also lower than the start of July. The latest snapshot from August 12th for app users shows over 1200 per day and 0.9 R. The virus is probably still in decline with this data.

The testing data is an incomplete figure. The KCL data is estimated on a survey of 4 million people who report symptoms and test results. It's probably more accurate than the picture from testing alone.

It is possible that more people are tested which means that the positive tests per day can be increasing even when the general prevalence of the virus is in decline.

Ok so the KCL data is based on a survey of volunteers who download the app - is this correct. So how do you know this is representative?

For sake of argument, if this 4 million are mainly middle age, middle class, university educated people who live in large urban areas then it is merely highlighting the rate of Covid in this subsection of society not the country as a whole.

theological

bob mcbob wrote: »

Ok so the KCL data is based on a survey of volunteers who download the app - is this correct. So how do you know this is representative?

For sake of argument, if this 4 million are mainly middle age, middle class, university educated people who live in large urban areas then it is merely highlighting the rate of Covid in this subsection of society not the country as a whole.

It is based on about 4 million people across the UK and positive test results being reported. Pretty much every area has contributors. You can check out how many are in each area here.

The model is then used to estimate how many people across the whole UK have the virus at any given time and how many new cases there are per day.

The test figures only tell us the positive cases of those who have gone to be tested. So, it is possible that the prevalence of the virus is still in decline and that more people are getting a test. This is good, if that trend continues the KCL figure and the government testing figure might get closer aligned.

The latest figure for new cases per day on the KCL model is 1010 and an R of 0.8 across the UK.

bob mcbob

theological wrote: »

It is based on about 4 million people across the UK and positive test results being reported. Pretty much every area has contributors. You can check out how many are in each area here.

The model is then used to estimate how many people across the whole UK have the virus at any given time and how many new cases there are per day.

The test figures only tell us the positive cases of those who have gone to be tested. So, it is possible that the prevalence of the virus is still in decline and that more people are getting a test. This is good, if that trend continues the KCL figure and the government testing figure might get closer aligned.

The latest figure for new cases per day on the KCL model is 1010 and an R of 0.8 across the UK.

Surely if the virus is in decline and the number of people being tested is increasing, this should mean that the % age of positive tests should be declining.

Instead this number has increased roughly 20% in a month admittedly from a low number.

theological

bob mcbob wrote: »

Surely if the virus is in decline and the number of people being tested is increasing, this should mean that the % age of positive tests should be declining.

Instead this number has increased roughly 20% in a month admittedly from a low number.

That is only true if you are assuming that all people who have the virus are being tested, which has never been the case.

If there is a gap between the people who are being tested, and the people who are actually positive with the virus, it is possible that as more people are getting tested more are being counted as positive, even when the overall rate of infection is declining. (Which is what the KCL data seems to be showing at present)

BonnieSituation

Dave0301 wrote: »

So it is beginning to look like PHE is on the way out if tomorrow's exclusive in the Telegraph is to be believed.

Some info below, and link to the article here. It is fairly critical of PHE and its chief executive.



Someone had to take the blame for a poor initial response to the outbreak, and you can be sure it wasn't going to be anyone in the sitting cabinet.

The potential appointment of Dido Harding is beyond me. I still don't see what expertise she has that warranted her role in Test & Trace, let alone this.

It just came up on BBC News 24 as breaking news that she's confirmed as getting the new job.

Madness.

Peregrinus

theological wrote: »

That is only true if you are assuming that all people who have the virus are being tested, which has never been the case.

If there is a gap between the people who are being tested, and the people who are actually positive with the virus, it is possible that as more people are getting tested more are being counted as positive, even when the overall rate of infection is declining. (Which is what the KCL data seems to be showing at present)

it seems to me that if you have:

- declining rates of infection in the population as a whole, and

- increasing testing rates in the population, but

- a rise in the proportion of tests which yield a positive result

. . . this can only be accounted for by assuming that testing is being much, much better targeted than it was in the past - i.e. while you have raised the number of tests, you have raised even more the proportion of those tests which are administered to the people most at risk of infection. People who are actually infected are now much, much more likely to have that infection confirmed by testing than was the case a few weeks ago.

Which is good. But it would imply that the UK's testing programme was, until recently, very poorly targetted.

Joe_ Public

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It just came up on BBC News 24 as breaking news that she's confirmed as getting the new job.

Madness.

In tory led Britain, failure is rewarded. Fox, Grayling, Patel, Williamson, Harding....the list is endless. Being completely incompetent or worse at your job is no bar against advancement. Loyalty trumps all.

John Penrose, harding hubby, is among other things, the uks official "anti corruption champion." I'm not even making that up, that is his official title.

theological

Joe_ Public wrote: »

In tory led Britain, failure is rewarded. Fox, Grayling, Patel, Williamson, Harding....the list is endless. Being completely incompetent or worse at your job is no bar against advancement. Loyalty trumps all.

John Penrose, harding hubby, is among other things, the uks official "anti corruption champion." I'm not even making that up, that is his official title.

I don't think tracing the a majority of contacts is a failure.

There are other reasons why I think she shouldn't be heading up this body but that isn't one of them. It would have been better if someone who is qualified in public health got this job.

bob mcbob

Joe_ Public wrote: »

In tory led Britain, failure is rewarded. Fox, Grayling, Patel, Williamson, Harding....the list is endless. Being completely incompetent or worse at your job is no bar against advancement. Loyalty trumps all.

John Penrose, harding hubby, is among other things, the uks official "anti corruption champion." I'm not even making that up, that is his official title.

I think this sums up the Tory cabinet at present (A's hire A's - B's hire C's)

https://www.business.com/images/content/58a/da19d2f87b1207f7216dd/0-0-/

Professor Moriarty

BonnieSituation wrote: »

It just came up on BBC News 24 as breaking news that she's confirmed as getting the new job.

Madness.

Magnificent. Ignore the clusterfúck that was track and trace under her management and appoint her to manage epidemics. Because she is competent, holds relevant qualifications, has the best interests of the ordinary person at heart compliant with receiving direction from Cummings.

Joe_ Public

theological wrote: »

I don't think tracing the a majority of contacts is a failure.

There are other reasons why I think she shouldn't be heading up this body but that isn't one of them. It would have been better if someone who is qualified in public health got this job.

Are you possibly confusing the tracing done by the £10bn private operation headed by Dido with that done by pre existing health authorities who are doing the majority of the heavy lifting?

Figures released last week showed that serco and sitel (Dido's "army" of contact tracers) were reaching 56% of contacts while the comparable figure for local health officials was 98%. I suppose 56% is a majority, if thats what you mean, but I'm not sure even Dido's biggest fans would include that under the banner "world beating."

Not to mention the app debacle, the "cherry on top of Dido's cake", as Matt Hancock so memorably put it.

We could mention her previous dismal failure as head of Talk Talk too, but that seems almost superfluous at this stage. Lucky for her, there was no consultation or interview process - no time for those kind of democratic trifles anymore - or poor Dido might have actually been forced to confront some harsh home truths.

theological

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Are you possibly confusing the tracing done by the £10bn private operation headed by Dido with that done by pre existing health authorities who are doing the majority of the heavy lifting?

Figures released last week showed that serco and sitel (Dido's "army" of contact tracers) were reaching 56% of contacts while the comparable figure for local health officials was 98%. I suppose 56% is a majority, if thats what you mean, but I'm not sure even Dido's biggest fans would include that under the banner "world beating."

Not to mention the app debacle, the "cherry on top of Dido's cake", as Matt Hancock so memorably put it.

We could mention her previous dismal failure as head of Talk Talk too, but that seems almost superfluous at this stage. Lucky for her, there was no consultation or interview process - no time for those kind of democratic trifles anymore - or poor Dido might have actually been forced to confront some harsh home truths.

At the moment the UK is doing better at controlling the spread of the virus than many other countries in Europe.

I'd be interested to see the workings on the 56%, but the overall figure is in the high 70's. I'd regard that as successful. That's a huge number of people off the streets who could have been spreading the virus to others.

On that metric I wouldn't call Track and Trace in the UK a "failure" overall.

There are other reasons why this appointment is probably wrong, but your stated reason isn't a good one.

You're preaching to the converted on the app. I've got nothing to add.

Joe_ Public

theological wrote: »

At the moment the UK is doing better at controlling the spread of the virus than many other countries in Europe.

I'd be interested to see the workings on the 56%, but the overall figure is in the high 70's. I'd regard that as successful. That's a huge number of people off the streets who could have been spreading the virus to others.

On that metric I wouldn't call Track and Trace in the UK a "failure" overall.

There are other reasons why this appointment is probably wrong, but your stated reason isn't a good one.

You're preaching to the converted on the app. I've got nothing to add.

I'm happy for the uk if the current numbers are showing consistent positive trends, truly happy for the people who have had a hard time. However, having a robust test and trace system is vital for if or when there is a second wave or surge in cases again which has to be accepted as a possibility. If it doesnt happen, fantastic.

Last figure i saw for tracing contacts was 71% which figures - if local health teams, independent of Dido Harding, are reaching 98% and Dido's crew are doing 55% then you'd expect an overall score somewhere around the low to mid 70s.

Attached below link from telegraph on poor performance of serco, running 50% and below for previous weeks. This is success only in the bizzarro universe where Boris Johnson talks about the Uk being the envy of the world or Jenny Harries refers to the uk as "an exemplar of preparedness."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/06/nhs-test-trace-contacting-fewer-half-contacts-people-testing/

theological

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I'm happy for the uk if the current numbers are showing consistent positive trends, truly happy for the people who have had a hard time. However, having a robust test and trace system is vital for if or when there is a second wave or surge in cases again which has to be accepted as a possibility. If it doesnt happen, fantastic.

It isn't just the figures showing this. It is also the measures that have been put in place.

There's a reason why Leicester's lockdown will be completely eased on Wednesday.

I agree with you on the necessity of a track and trace system, and I'm sure the current system could do with being improved, but I don't think it is a failure. It is good that over 70 percent of people are coming off stream. As for whether or not that is down to local health teams or the centralised team I don't mind. There's always going to be things to be learned, and there's always things that can be improved.

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Magnificent. Ignore the clusterfúck that was track and trace under her management and appoint her to manage epidemics. Because she is competent, holds relevant qualifications, has the best interests of the ordinary person at heart compliant with receiving direction from Cummings.

could you provide some evidence to back up your claim that she is "Compliant with receiving direction from Cummings"?

theological

theological wrote: »

At the moment the UK is doing better at controlling the spread of the virus than many other countries in Europe.

I'd be interested to see the workings on the 56%, but the overall figure is in the high 70's. I'd regard that as successful. That's a huge number of people off the streets who could have been spreading the virus to others.

On that metric I wouldn't call Track and Trace in the UK a "failure" overall.

There are other reasons why this appointment is probably wrong, but your stated reason isn't a good one.

She is only the interim head until a full time replacement can be appointed. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53813480

Oddly the Guardian neglected to include that bit, but I guess that wouldn't have created as much outrage.

Joe_ Public

theological wrote: »

It isn't just the figures showing this. It is also the measures that have been put in place.

There's a reason why Leicester's lockdown will be completely eased on Wednesday.

I agree with you on the necessity of a track and trace system, and I'm sure the current system could do with being improved, but I don't think it is a failure. It is good that over 70 percent of people are coming off stream. As for whether or not that is down to local health teams or the centralised team I don't mind. There's always going to be things to be learned, and there's always things that can be improved.

£10bn they are ploughing into track and trace. £10bn! I dont think everyone over there is as blase as you about where all that money is going. One expensive shell out only to learn what experts were telling them months ago and most other countries followed - local health teams were best placed and the most efficient way to do the job.

£10bn! The entire budget for PHE is £300m yet they are to be the fall guys while the likes of Dido Harding get looked after. I think we are certainly learning things alright.

bob mcbob

Aegir wrote: »

She is only the interim head until a full time replacement can be appointed. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-53813480

Oddly the Guardian neglected to include that bit, but I guess that wouldn't have created as much outrage.

Not just the Guardian - here is the Telegraph's view on it

Dido Harding's unstoppable upward rise is an egregious example of the chumocracy at work

Harding's career has been dotted with failures, yet she is part of the club, so on she goes

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/18/dido-hardings-unstoppable-upward-rise-egregious-example-chumocracy/

theological

Joe_ Public wrote: »

£10bn they are ploughing into track and trace. £10bn! I dont think everyone over there is as blase as you about where all that money is going. One expensive shell out only to learn what experts were telling them months ago and most other countries followed - local health teams were best placed and the most efficient way to do the job.

£10bn! The entire budget for PHE is £300m yet they are to be the fall guys while the likes of Dido Harding get looked after. I think we are certainly learning things alright.

If this money saves lives then it is well spent. From what I understand the national team is supplementing local track and trace at this stage.

You ignored my other point. It isn't just that the numbers happen to be good by coincidence. This is because of the measures that have been put in place in local areas.

Joe_ Public

theological wrote: »

If this money saves lives then it is well spent. From what I understand the national team is supplementing local track and trace at this stage.

You ignored my other point. It isn't just that the numbers happen to be good by coincidence. This is because of the measures that have been put in place in local areas.

Ignored what exactly? I said i was truly happy if uk numbers were showing good trends and will be great if that continues. That said, the numbers arent all that low, its just other European countries have experienced surges to varying degrees, including ireland. According to latest ons figures, there are still an estimated 3,800 daily cases in the uk. Its not that much lower than it was. And it is under control in Leicester now. Lockdowns work, but i think we knew that already.

I'd have greater confidence now that local councils are being empowered to tackle local outbreaks, though it is going to take more time for that process to become fully effective. Of course, why this had to take over 5 months, countless billions and lives lost to finally become policy is pretty much a national scandal but i know you will ignore that so pointless talking more about it.

As for Dido Harding, I'm struggling to think how the head of any £10bn operation could report with a 56% success rate and expect not to be called a failure. Actually mind boggling, that one.

If thats what £10bn buys you in modern Britain, I'd be a little concerned about the future quite frankly.

Joe_ Public

In relation to the £10bn, here's where .5% of it went anyway.

McKinseys is where junior health Secretary Helen "yes we can blame the scientists" Whately once earned a crust. It also happens to be where a certain Dido Harding met her future husband, Mr anti corruption champion himself, John Penrose.

https://twitter.com/JonAshworth/status/1295745649288318980?s=20

Professor Moriarty

Aegir wrote: »

could you provide some evidence to back up your claim that she is "Compliant with receiving direction from Cummings"?

Who do you think is running the country? Why do you think he would appoint her?

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Who do you think is running the country? Why do you think he would appoint her?

You seem to be lost. The Conspiracy forum is over there ——>

Joe_ Public

Joe_ Public wrote: »

In relation to the £10bn, here's where .5% of it went anyway.

McKinseys is where junior health Secretary Helen "yes we can blame the scientists" Whately once earned a crust. It also happens to be where a certain Dido Harding met her future husband, Mr anti corruption champion himself, John Penrose.

https://twitter.com/JonAshworth/status/1295745649288318980?s=20

So who should have done it?

Joe_ Public

Aegir wrote: »

So who should have done it?

Sure, god, i dont know. There must be 100s of fine consulting firms across the uk that could have done it. But what was it they were lacking? What critical layer of expertise did mckinseys have that they didnt? Tough one.

There must be 100s of tech firms could have worked on the app, but they just lacked the missing ingredient that Faculty had. Wonder what that was.

Lots of firms could have done good jobs on ppe or testing but what did they lack that the likes of Pestfix or Randox had? It'll come to me in a minute.

What did Serco have that other firms lacked when it came to the nightingale labs contract? What is it about the name of Serco ceo Rupert Soames that feels oddly familiar?

It really seems that there's a consistent pattern here, just have to work out what it is.

Professor Moriarty

Aegir wrote: »

You seem to be lost. The Conspiracy forum is over there ——>

That's very clever and very original.