The virus. PPE. Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
cambsno said:
At some point the declining economy will cause more lives to be lost, and you need to factor in the cost of mental health and people struggling to survive. Its a fine line and you need a lot of data to review.
Click to expand...
Yes, without a doubt.
I listened to the Private Eye podcast on the situation yesterday, https://www.private-eye.co.uk/rss/itunes/page_94_ep52.mp3 and their doctor, Phil Hammond, made what I feel were a lot of very good points about the government decisions, lack of accountability and the anticipated added effect of deprivation, damage to the economy etc - well worth listening to IMO
 
Garry Edwards said:
Yes, without a doubt.
I listened to the Private Eye podcast on the situation yesterday, https://www.private-eye.co.uk/rss/itunes/page_94_ep52.mp3 and their doctor, Phil Hammond, made what I feel were a lot of very good points about the government decisions, lack of accountability and the anticipated added effect of deprivation, damage to the economy etc - well worth listening to IMO
Click to expand...

But did he give an alternative plan or better still did he map out a plan 2 years ago?
 
Kay Burley and Sky News totally walk todays tw@t badge
 
More or Less (Radio 4, this morning) analysed Matt Hancock's claim to have met the 100,000 test target by last Thursday. Without being too controversial this was shown to have been a "less than accurate" statement. Going by programme's assessment, the actual number of tests performed and assessed seems to have been in the region of 70,000 per day by the end of the month.

I had hoped we'd passed the "ignorance is strength" phase with the current government. Unfortunately they seem unable to report their failures honestly, which doesn't bode well for the next few months.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
More or Less (Radio 4, this morning) analysed Matt Hancock's claim to have met the 100,000 test target by last Thursday. Without being too controversial this was shown to have been a "less than accurate" statement. Going by programme's assessment, the actual number of tests performed and assessed seems to have been in the region of 70,000 per day by the end of the month.

I had hoped we'd passed the "ignorance is strength" phase with the current government. Unfortunately they seem unable to report their failures honestly, which doesn't bode well for the next few months.
Click to expand...

What was the justification for claiming 100k? I don't know. If it included home tests sent out then I'm not sure what to think really. Even tests completed is only a part of the pictures as they have to be processed and the results compiled and used somehow so at what point do we take the daily snap shot and what version of "tests per day" is acceptable?

I don't want to defend the government per se but I do think it's easy to critisise without being specific enough and easy knock and offer nothing in return.
 
Donnie said:
LOL, brilliant, ah you are good. Honestly, thats like Eddie Large and the other Chuckle brother rolled into one. You definitely have a place in comedy. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

Well, tell that to the government press briefings that say we are past the peak, and that metrics are coming down!!! If you can give me evidence that the R rate is above 1 and that deaths are trending up I would like to see it!
 
cambsno said:
Well, tell that to the government press briefings that say we are past the peak, and that metrics are coming down!!! If you can give me evidence that the R rate is above 1 and that deaths are trending up I would like to see it!
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised if the trend is still upwards in the Middlesbrough area and probably other areas too as the lockdown still seems to be largely ignored by some. It was reported that there was a street bbq in one area not too far from me and where I live it's almost like normal with the usual procession of cars, motorbikes and pedestrians. It really is hard to believe there's a lock down at times.
 
cambsno said:
Well, tell that to the government press briefings that say we are past the peak, and that metrics are coming down!!! If you can give me evidence that the R rate is above 1 and that deaths are trending up I would like to see it!
Click to expand...

I often wonder about the press briefings, does the minister about to conduct the proceedings get told as he walks towards the lectern "stick to the script and for F's sake don't let your nose grow".
 
woof woof said:
I don't want to defend the government per se but I do think it's easy to critisise without being specific enough and easy knock and offer nothing in return.
Click to expand...
I'd suggest listening to the programme. In my opinion it's always been very reliable and non-sensational. It may also be worth seeing what https://fullfact.org/ has to say on the subject when they have analysed his statements.
 
mikew said:
Out of date PPE spreads the virus

https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/ppe-face-masks-past-expiry-4104658
Click to expand...

"But staff who contacted GrimsbyLive say they fear PPE past its expiry date could have resulted in nurses being infected with Covid-19."

I hate things like this. It could have but I do wish we could get better than this. The infections could have been due to poor sanitation, they could be due to incorrect fitting or removal or it could be other factors. The endless stream of "could" stories like this gets wearing. Anything could. I do wish things could be more certain or at least quantified somehow.

I do hope that the relabeling of out of date ppe was only done after a responsible and correct risk assessment and I do hope that any clusters like this can be looked at quickly. Surely it's possible to look at ppe kit, analyse and test it and how aging affects it and come up with something better than could.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
woof woof said:
I wouldn't be surprised if the trend is still upwards in the Middlesbrough area and probably other areas too as the lockdown still seems to be largely ignored by some. It was reported that there was a street bbq in one area not too far from me and where I live it's almost like normal with the usual procession of cars, motorbikes and pedestrians. It really is hard to believe there's a lock down at times.
Click to expand...

I don’t see any of that. Round here there is literally the odd person you see with someone else but even the odd 16 yo hanging by coop is standing a couple of meters from their mate!!
 
mex said:
I often wonder about the press briefings, does the minister about to conduct the proceedings get told as he walks towards the lectern "stick to the script and for F's sake don't let your nose grow".
Click to expand...

I don’t think they do lie, in order to lie wouldn’t they need to actually answer the question asked!!!
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I'd suggest listening to the programme. In my opinion it's always been very reliable and non-sensational. It may also be worth seeing what https://fullfact.org/ has to say on the subject when they have analysed his statements.
Click to expand...

I doubt the questions I asked will be answered by listening to that.

It's the obsessive part of me that wants to see questions asked clearly and answered clearly. I feel that a lot of the fud at the moment is because no one is clearly defining.
 
cambsno said:
I don’t think they do lie, in order to lie wouldn’t they need to actually answer the question asked!!!
Click to expand...

I'd be surprised if they outright lie. I think it's likely they'll bend reality and use some highly questionable statistical technique or definition but I would be a little surprised if they actually lie.

I think this is why it's important to be very clear both in the question which is asked and the answer given.
 
joxby said:
Kay Burley and Sky News totally walk todays tw@t badge
Click to expand...
Fed up with Sky News. They are in effect pushing the “Wuhan lab accident” hypothesis without any evidence. Of course “anything” is possible, maybe the virus came from outer space (like the bats?), you have to have some evidence ... and produce it to run these suggestions.
 
cambsno said:
I don’t see any of that. Round here there is literally the odd person you see with someone else but even the odd 16 yo hanging by coop is standing a couple of meters from their mate!!
Click to expand...

My area is bad for it. MY area made the national news for lockdown busting and for having the highest infection rate in the UK, I think...
 
woof woof said:
What was the justification for claiming 100k? I don't know. If it included home tests sent out then I'm not sure what to think really. Even tests completed is only a part of the pictures as they have to be processed and the results compiled and used somehow so at what point do we take the daily snap shot and what version of "tests per day" is acceptable?

I don't want to defend the government per se but I do think it's easy to critisise without being specific enough and easy knock and offer nothing in return.
Click to expand...
You can argue till the cows come home, but the point is Hancock changed the basis for counting tests to include those sent out, in some cases without a return address to get his fiddled figure.

However, numbers tested would mean completed tests by any normal standard.
 
sphexx said:
You can argue till the cows come home, but the point is Hancock changed the basis for counting tests to include those sent out, in some cases without a return address to get his fiddled figure.

However, numbers tested would mean completed tests by any normal standard.
Click to expand...
No one ever stated how the tests would be counted. All the media emphasis has been on setting up the drive through testing sites and how many people were being processed per day. There has been little attention to how many tests the labs were processing. So the only change in what is being counted is down to the media.
The emphasis on testing numbers in the media for the UK and abroad is the number of people tested. Not tests processed.
 
Last edited:
sphexx said:
However, numbers tested would mean completed tests by any normal standard.
Click to expand...
This is the point made by the More Or Less team. Despite Alan's scepticism, the programme is in the old tradition of BBC fairness and accuracy. If only every report conformed to similar standards there would be a lot more confidence in what we are told.
 
sphexx said:
You can argue till the cows come home, but the point is Hancock changed the basis for counting tests to include those sent out, in some cases without a return address to get his fiddled figure.

However, numbers tested would mean completed tests by any normal standard.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think you're going to get tests completed, analysed and collated in one day so there's a minefield there for anyone wanting to critisise. I may be wrong. Is it possible to "complete" in one day? I don't know. What do you mean by "complete?"

I'm not arguing as such but what I'd like to see is a lot more specifics and clarity not just endless vague statement from one side and endless vague whinging from another.

I'd really like to know how many test are included and what they are and how they are defined. Ditto with the constant critics, I'd like to know what they're critisising, why and what exactly they want and if any of this is possible.
 
Last edited:
AndrewFlannigan said:
This is the point made by the More Or Less team. Despite Alan's scepticism, the programme is in the old tradition of BBC fairness and accuracy. If only every report conformed to similar standards there would be a lot more confidence in what we are told.
Click to expand...

I'm getting jaded.

The endless wrangling and arguing, the name calling, the skapegoat hunting, the game playing from the politicians on all sides and from the media many of who seem to be primarily interested in asking provocative questions designed to illicit a controversial soundbite... I just hoped for better in the UK.
 
woof woof said:
I'd be surprised if they outright lie. I think it's likely they'll bend reality and use some highly questionable statistical technique or definition but I would be a little surprised if they actually lie.

I think this is why it's important to be very clear both in the question which is asked and the answer given.
Click to expand...

To be fair, some of the questions asked are a) stupid and b) badly asked but I have noticed the stock response that Hancock in particular gives:

  1. Thats a great question
  2. Firstly I would like to pay tribute to....
  3. Tell us stuff we already know, making the government out to be amazing and the acts 'unprecidented', even if this is unrelated to the question
  4. Move on OR say that 'its too early to tell/say'
Repeat...
 
nilagin said:
No one ever stated how the tests would be counted. All the media emphasis has been on setting up the drive through testing sites and how many people were being processed per day. There has been little attention to how many tests the labs were processing. So the only change in what is being counted is down to the media.
The emphasis on testing numbers in the media for the UK and abroad is the number of people tested. Not tests processed.
Click to expand...

Of course you right no one stated how the test would be counted, but even the most gullible can see that the figures were shall we say doctored to fit the requirements of the government, as an example right up until the day before the magic 100,000 tests per day figure(by the way a number they have been unable to hit since)was achieved about 10,000 test a day had to be retested to double check a negative result or an inconclusive first test but on that magic day there was a sudden surge in retesting to around 50,000 just one example of their creative accounting.
 
woof woof said:
Well, I don't think you're going to get tests completed, analysed and collated in one day so there's a minefield there for anyone wanting to critisise. I may be wrong. Is it possible to "complete" in one day? I don't know. What do you mean by "complete?"
Click to expand...
The test itself takes a couple of hours, but before this you have to get the sample (say a swab) to a testing centre, which may be remote from the collection point, process the potentially infectious material to extract safe, purified RNA, and perhaps transport it to a second lab where the actual test is run in a qPCR machine. The turnaround will be largely determined by the logistics of all this. If everything is on one site, then you could certainly turn around a test in a working day.

But this is almost beside the point. Even if the turnaround time is (say) 72 hours, you can still legitimately be said to be running 100,000 tests a day if you actually deliver 100,000 results on the third day (and on other days in the peak period). Clearly you'll be doing the transport or prep work for one set of tests at the same time you are running another. But if you aren't delivering 100,000 results on any single day, you can't make this claim.
 
Last edited:
AndrewFlannigan said:
It seems to me that the time to worry is when the arguments are silenced.
Click to expand...

Are we back to the scenario in which the UK is a dictatorship?

All I want is an honest government that tries to do the right thing and admits when they get it wrong, remembering that hindsight is a wonderful thing none of us posses, and by "they" and "The Government" I include not just the elected politicians but also the scientists and other experts and modelers and analysers. It is IMO far too tempting and far to easy and far too simplistic just blaming "The Government" meaning the Conservative party government we have at the moment when the body of people we need to question and hold to account is very probably wider than that.

What I'd like from the media and the opposition to "government" and their actions is objectivity not bias and clear and concise and constructive questioning not just idiotic game playing soundbite fishing like "Do you agree that the shortage of ppe is a shameful failure of leadership?"

I know I'm asking too much.
 
Retune said:
The test itself takes a couple of hours, but before this you have to get the sample (say a swab) to a testing centre, which may be remote from the collection point, process the potentially infectious material to extract safe, purified RNA, and perhaps transport it to a second lab where the actual test is run in a qPCR machine. The turnaround will be largely determined by the logistics of all this. If everything is on one site, then you could certainly turn around a test in a working day.

But this is almost beside the point. Even if the turnaround time is (say) 72 hours, you can still legitimately be said to be running 100,000 tests a day if you actually deliver 100,000 results on the third day (and on other days in the peak period). Clearly you'll be doing the transport or prep work for one set of tests at the same time you are running another. But if you aren't delivering 100,000 results on any single day, you can't make this claim.
Click to expand...

On the highlighted, I'd guess that it isn't.

Does anyone know how many tests were run on 100k day?

I do agree with setting targets as they do motivate but I do think that one day totals are next to meaningless and instead we should look at periods of time.
 
woof woof said:
Are we back to the scenario in which the UK is a dictatorship?
Click to expand...
I'm certainly not saying nor implying any such thing. I'm pointing out that too many think we should "get behind" the government during an emergency. I believe that at such times every citizen should scrutinise the actions of the government all the more carefully. This government has made the rod for its own back by behaving without the due care and attention necessary to protect the vulnerable members of society. It is only right that every citizen should hold them to account, in order that further errors are prevented.
 
cambsno said:
To be fair, some of the questions asked are a) stupid and b) badly asked but I have noticed the stock response that Hancock in particular gives:

  1. Thats a great question
  2. Firstly I would like to pay tribute to....
  3. Tell us stuff we already know, making the government out to be amazing and the acts 'unprecidented', even if this is unrelated to the question
  4. Move on OR say that 'its too early to tell/say'
Repeat...
Click to expand...
The “Press briefings” have become closer to government propaganda broadcasts now they introduced questions of their own choosing allegedly from members of the public.
 
woof woof said:
On the highlighted, I'd guess that it isn't.

Does anyone know how many tests were run on 100k day?

I do agree with setting targets as they do motivate but I do think that one day totals are next to meaningless and instead we should look at periods of time.
Click to expand...
Reports of testing for Trump etc quote 10 or 15 minutes for test sample taking to completion

I repeat, any count of tests have to based on numbers of results. Ideally it would be based on numbers communicated to the testee but that is obviously problematic, mail etc.

This new thing of ”Test Capacity“ is undefined as far as I know and seems pretty meaningless unless it referred to the potential number of tests actually taken and completed in hospitals & GP surgeries etc, which I’m fairly sure it doesn’t :(.
 
woof woof said:
On the highlighted, I'd guess that it isn't.

Does anyone know how many tests were run on 100k day?

I do agree with setting targets as they do motivate but I do think that one day totals are next to meaningless and instead we should look at periods of time.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's better to average over (say) a week. But my point is that turnaround time is separate to 'number of tests per day'. Otherwise, we'd have to say that for any test with a turnaround of >1 day, we were failing to 'do' any tests (all the way from collection to results) that day, which would be silly. I think the best approach is to take the end point, and count how many results are returned on a given day (or better a series of days that are then averaged).
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I'm certainly not saying nor implying any such thing. I'm pointing out that too many think we should "get behind" the government during an emergency. I believe that at such times every citizen should scrutinise the actions of the government all the more carefully. This government has made the rod for its own back by behaving without the due care and attention necessary to protect the vulnerable members of society. It is only right that every citizen should hold them to account, in order that further errors are prevented.
Click to expand...
And it’s a government led by a man with a proven record for lying ... actual lying, not obfuscation, being economical with the truth etc.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I'm certainly not saying nor implying any such thing. I'm pointing out that too many think we should "get behind" the government during an emergency. I believe that at such times every citizen should scrutinise the actions of the government all the more carefully. This government has made the rod for its own back by behaving without the due care and attention necessary to protect the vulnerable members of society. It is only right that every citizen should hold them to account, in order that further errors are prevented.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't suggest or imply we should get behind the government unless in this case we include the non elected people the government are taking advice from. Even then we should question but there has to be quality in there too.

Yes, we should scritinise but I think there's the quality and relevance of that scrutiny to consider. Yes the government should be held to account but what if they've taken the best advice available and done all they could? That is at least an outside possibility. I also think that the opposition and scrutiny needs to be of an acceptable standard and I do think much of it falls short. Shouting "I object" and "You're wrong/lying/going too far/not far enough" every day just isn't enough IMO.

Another thing I've said before which is worth throwing in again...

I think public opinion or at least how it is expressed through social media and the media are too influential. Policy seems at times to change depending on what's trending or in the media today. I can see why but is it right? But if the government didn't follow social media we'd get the Big Brother allegations even more.
 
tarric said:
Of course you right no one stated how the test would be counted, but even the most gullible can see that the figures were shall we say doctored to fit the requirements of the government, as an example right up until the day before the magic 100,000 tests per day figure(by the way a number they have been unable to hit since)was achieved about 10,000 test a day had to be retested to double check a negative result or an inconclusive first test but on that magic day there was a sudden surge in retesting to around 50,000 just one example of their creative accounting.
Click to expand...
But as the benchmark has always been how many tests per day that other countries were managing, it has never been established or even questioned whether it was number of people being tested per day or tests completed per day. As alot of test kits that were supplied were useless, it is only recently that they have had a supply of test kits that they could actually use, and more drive through sites have opened as a result, so of course there was a sudden surge in the number of people tested. As to the number of subsequent tests carried out falling, it still relies on people making themselves available for testing.
 
Retune said:
I think the best approach is to take the end point, and count how many results are returned on a given day (or better a series of days that are then averaged).
Click to expand...
That's fair enough, but don't attack the government for not reaching their goal figure if the labs aren't receiving the tests in a timely manner. As in my last post, it still needs people to apply for tests or turn up for tests on top of hospital admissions etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top