COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Does that mean they won’t be updating their little graph of England showing the number of cases per ward?

Until they get the case data I assume not. They have not even updated the hospital data or death data both of which they should have as the case data is from other sources.

They really need a new IT system or provider as problems are happening too often. Its not like we need to rely on these systems in a time of crisis, is it?

Imagine if they are waiting to shoot that asteroid out of the sky and the system said - please come back later - if you still exist. We do not have the correct firing data just yet.
 
8CB33BC3-9AC2-461B-879D-ABB110BAB323.jpeg
Looks like care homes are the major source of outbreaks over last month, with a significant increase in the last week. Ring of steel seems to be made of plastic. Meanwhile, 3 ’incidents‘ in food outlet/restaurant settings in the last month, in a massive geographical area and 6 million people, and they’re shutting them all down, putting many out of business. It all looks a bit confused on the face of it...
 
Vallance told the committee earlier btw that 'because of the lag' in getting key data they had been using days old data to make big decisions based on 'assumptions' and 'worst case scenarios'.~

Or they could do what I do and watch both the 5 day old numbers and the up to date ones and note if trends change before they change officially.

As I said way back when it happened this is why we saw the build up in Bolton on here days before those only watching the 5 day old numbers did. And in a pandemic 5 days can mean many lives.
 
Until they get the case data I assume not. They have not even updated the hospital data or death data both of which they should have as the case data is from other sources.

They really need a new IT system or provider as problems are happening too often. Its not like we need to rely on these systems in a time of crisis, is it?

Imagine if they are waiting to shoot that asteroid out of the sky and the system said - please come back later - if you still exist. We do not have the correct firing data just yet.
I wouldn’t be shooting out any asteroid with the usual suspects, Serco.
I might be doing them a disservice but they are usually the ones given these kind of logistics and supplies jobs.
 
View attachment 4814
Looks like care homes are the major source of outbreaks over last month, with a significant increase in the last week. Ring of steel seems to be made of plastic. Meanwhile, 3 ’incidents‘ in food outlet/restaurant settings in the last month, in a massive geographical area and 6 million people, and they’re shutting them all down, putting many out of business. It all looks a bit confused on the face of it...
Just out of interest how do they manage to trace it back to where you became infected? For example if I go to work 5 days a week, the gym 3 times and a restaurant/pub on friday how would they work out which place I picked it up?
 
The Twitter thread on the numbers is a hoot when this kind of thing happens. Its as if nobody actually trusts the number on there.

Endless posts of lottery balls, abacuses and references to having a meeting to decide if they need a low or high number for the message of the day.

This is all nonsense, of course and its Twitter and why I avoid it but the government have created a perception problem by not getting to grips with these all too common technical glitches.

It gives the public ammunition to think they are not in control or are not being honest and eradicating that perception is key to the public doing hard things when you request it of them.

So tech issues may seem a trivial thing but not when it engenders mistrust.
 
Just out of interest how do they manage to trace it back to where you became infected? For example if I go to work 5 days a week, the gym 3 times and a restaurant/pub on friday how would they work out which place I picked it up?
Eating out places and gyms were supposed to take contact details so everyone could be traced , a sky investigation found hardly any pubs in manchester did it , i expect a lot didnt do it hence low numbers, taking the numbers as it whole it doesnt add up why the reported numbers are so low
 
It's almost impossible to form a reasonable criticism, because the quality of nearly all the data remains a farce.

I do trust that the SAGE membership has access to data sets we don't, and definitely have the relevant expertise to perform rigourous anaylsis... if not, their inboxes are probably jammed full of helpful groups of Phds and other experts.

I mean, we can't really gather much from the numbers from track and trace, because we know it's been a farce. Anecdotally, I used a coffee shop a dozen times and never scanned once, never saw anyone scan.

If SAGE have a lot of ancillary related data on footfall and so on, you could probably put together something that reads between the lines.

But the reality is whatever measures we get are a political compromise. It would be much easier if Boris's stock was higher, if he was a strong communicator with the public, had pulled less fast ones, was less compromised in his dealings with a lot of interested parties.

I have half an inkling I've been asymptomatic - if so, it probably came from one of someone closer to home, many neighbours have been heard coughing helpfully in the chronically unventilated corridors. No suprise, two families, 6 children in total, in two two-bed flats, both families mums at home with fathers with other kids, both rely on friends and family for childcare.
 
Just out of interest how do they manage to trace it back to where you became infected? For example if I go to work 5 days a week, the gym 3 times and a restaurant/pub on friday how would they work out which place I picked it up?
With great difficulty , do not treat these numbers as being representative of where infections are picked up, they are highly susceptible to what is known as ascertainment bias.
 
With great difficulty , do not treat these numbers as being representative of where infections are picked up, they are highly susceptible to what is known as ascertainment bias.
That's what I'm wondering, I see pub industry leaders trotting out these figures and as much as I would love to believe them because I love the pub, I just don't. Same with the gyms, indoors, hardly any cleaning or distancing and yet low figures.
 
The Twitter thread on the numbers is a hoot when this kind of thing happens. Its as if nobody actually trusts the number on there.

Endless posts of lottery balls, abacuses and references to having a meeting to decide if they need a low or high number for the message of the day.

This is all nonsense, of course and its Twitter and why I avoid it but the government have created a perception problem by not getting to grips with these all too common technical glitches.

It gives the public ammunition to think they are not in control or are not being honest and eradicating that perception is key to the public doing hard things when you request it of them.

So tech issues may seem a trivial thing but not when it engenders mistrust.
Unless we know what the "tech issues" are, it's hard to pick on the government (at least ours anyway) for this.

I work in a government related organisation, and we have been under a sustained attack for about a week now, and as a result we've had to put measures in place to try to minimize damage, and that includes not updating certain data within the organisation. We have pretty robust security, as we deal with the security of the country, but they can still get through it occasionally, most of this attack has been by email, but it's severely restricting what we can do with email, such as sending spreadsheets and attachments in general, and a lot of what we do send includes attachments.

(Unfortunately it hasn't prevented the cascade of pointless email, or I might consider it a bonus.)
 
Just out of interest how do they manage to trace it back to where you became infected? For example if I go to work 5 days a week, the gym 3 times and a restaurant/pub on friday how would they work out which place I picked it up?

Cross referencing, longitude and latitude.
 
'Dangerously flawed, impractical and ethically really difficult' - is how Whitty described the plan proposed by some scientists to shield the vulnerable and let the less vulnerable live as normal as they choose.

He said it is based on the false premise of herd immunity which 'never occurs'.

And impractical as Britain has a high level of 'multi generational households'
 
Last edited:
'Dangerously flawed, impractical and ethically really difficult' - is how Whitty described the plan proposed by some scientists to shield the vulnerable and let the less vulnerable live as normal as they choose.

He said it is based on the false premise of herd immunity which 'never occurs'.

And impractical as Britain has a high level of 'multi generational households'
As some of us keep saying
 
'Dangerously flawed, impractical and ethically really difficult' - is how Whitty described the plan proposed by some scientists to shield the vulnerable and let the less vulnerable live as normal as they choose.

He said it is based on the false premise of herd immunity which 'never occurs'.

And impractical as Britain has a high level of 'multi generational households'

Any more info on top of that? Are full or partial lockdowns to be expected for years? Until we get a vaccine?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top