Scrutable

https://www.independentsage.org/indepen ... lockdowns/

Saying (amongst other things) data should be owned by the local authorities, what with them being the ones expected to do the legwork to put stuff in place. Which is “interesting” after one of the other recent articles (Reuters?) saying that every time anyone local tried to set anything up, it was shot down by PHE

shpalman wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 01, 2020 2:30 pm

https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2020/07/lin ... -old-data/

Lincoln also wonders about its Pillar 2 numbers.

https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news ... es-4284786

Scary account of Israel's unlockdown.

tl;dr: Scroll down that page and look at the graph.

Brightonian wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:22 pm

Scary account of Israel's unlockdown.

tl;dr: Scroll down that page and look at the graph.

Why did they just let the cases per day go up for 5 weeks?

Meanwhile in Veneto, the governor Zaia is pissed off and is announcing new restrictions from Monday, because some guy came back from Serbia, where he'd had dinner with someone there who has since died of covid, and did various social things like going to a party and a funeral, but then began to develop symptoms and went to get checked out. His swab was positive for covid.

At which point not only did he refuse to be admitted to hospital, he also didn't stay isolated at home but continued to have work-related meetings until his condition worsened and he eventually got taken to hospital.

This individual who behaved in a somewhat ignorant and selfish manner has infected 5 people while 90 people are in isolation.

shpalman wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 04, 2020 6:08 pm

Brightonian wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:22 pm

Scary account of Israel's unlockdown.

tl;dr: Scroll down that page and look at the graph.

Why did they just let the cases per day go up for 5 weeks?

Ok so I note that the size of their population is similar to that of Lombardy, and here we have about 100 cases per day at the moment, having peaked at over 2000 per day (actually the highest daily number was 3251 on the 21st of March but my 7 day average peaked a couple of days later at about 2150 per day).

It might be that you get a second wave in a society in which the first wave wasn't "bad enough" to impress the seriousness of the situation on the population?

Brightonian wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:22 pm

Scary account of Israel's unlockdown.

tl;dr: Scroll down that page and look at the graph.

Shocking

jimbob wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 04, 2020 9:28 pm

Brightonian wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:22 pm

Scary account of Israel's unlockdown.

tl;dr: Scroll down that page and look at the graph.

Shocking

In other news, https://twitter.com/StephenBLowe/status ... 09344?s=19

Cold War Steve's take on it

Yup, Hieronymus Bosch is about right.

https://twitter.com/TheAshleyClem/statu ... 65313?s=09

For anyone who feels like they “wasted” quarantine because they didn’t write a novel or learn a new language or get shredded, I have good news: Quarantine ain’t over get back inside.

Later stolen by Denzel Washington.

“Crystal clear drunk people will not keep distance”

In other news, water is wet, ice is cold and the sun is hot.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53296689? ... Do38cBnv0M

Brightonian wrote: ↑

Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:22 pm

Scary account of Israel's unlockdown.

tl;dr: Scroll down that page and look at the graph.

I looked at the data from the ECDC website and Israel's figures - which are noisy, so I plotted the cumulative data - and marked the 28th of May, which is where that article says Israel relaxed its lockdown:

This is what it looks like

I usually plot a 7-day average to get rid of that sort of noise (i.e. an average of the current day and the six either side).

shpalman wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 05, 2020 12:21 pm

I usually plot a 7-day average to get rid of that sort of noise (i.e. an average of the current day and the six either side).

So do I, but thought the cumulative total was a simpler way this time

Interesting piece in Nature summing up the problems with relying on R to determine lockdown levels (if that is indeed what Johnson & Co are doing - as the article points out, the recent slew of unlockdown measures didn't seem to make much reference to R)
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02009-w

Problems they highlight include the inability to calculate it accurately without population-wide testing, the fact that it can only be calculated retroactively (it's usually calculated after the epidemic is over), that it's a population-wide metric that can easily mask local outbreaks, etc.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 06, 2020 10:23 am

Interesting piece in Nature summing up the problems with relying on R to determine lockdown levels (if that is indeed what Johnson & Co are doing - as the article points out, the recent slew of unlockdown measures didn't seem to make much reference to R)
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02009-w

Problems they highlight include the inability to calculate it accurately without population-wide testing, the fact that it can only be calculated retroactively (it's usually calculated after the epidemic is over), that it's a population-wide metric that can easily mask local outbreaks, etc.

It has seemed weird that there didn't seem to be much of an increase once the lockdown really started to ease off in England. I wasn't sure if I dared to be cautiously optimistic but maybe not

I appreciate that the public have learnt what R is but what's wrong with just looking at cases per day* in a particular area, and if they go up, implement some local lockdown measures.

Ideally the definition of "area" should be so fine-grained that we're actually talking about outbreaks caused by individual cases who can be isolated and whose contacts can be traced, the UK still has too many cases for that.

* probably need to work with cases per week or a 7-day average to avoid panicking every Monday. Another issue is the Pillar 1 data tends to be backdated to when the test was done, which always makes it look like cases have dropped to zero over the last few days.

The UK' government's obsession with R and cod graphs and equations etc. seems to be more about theatrically projecting an air of scienceyness than doing/communicating/basing decisions on actual science.

It's like those sequences in CSI where they play some dance music and show people using luminol and blacklights and running PCRs and stuff - you're not supposed to actually take in the scientific details of what hypothesis is being tested and how, it's just there to give an oh-gosh-aren't-they-clever impressions of boffins doing stuff that's way over your head, so don't worry about it and just relax in the knowledge that the super-smart grownups have definitely got the right answer.

Johnson might as well turn up to briefings in a white coat wearing safety goggles and a stethoscope.

shpalman wrote: ↑

Mon Jul 06, 2020 11:42 am

I appreciate that the public have learnt what R is but what's wrong with just looking at cases per day* in a particular area, and if they go up, implement some local lockdown measures.

Ideally the definition of "area" should be so fine-grained that we're actually talking about outbreaks caused by individual cases who can be isolated and whose contacts can be traced, the UK still has too many cases for that.

* probably need to work with cases per week or a 7-day average to avoid panicking every Monday. Another issue is the Pillar 1 data tends to be backdated to when the test was done, which always makes it look like cases have dropped to zero over the last few days.

Exactly.

I can see why epidemiologists need to know spreads in individual infectivities, and Monte-Carlo modelling for such things. But at the moment, when we're miles away from herd immunity with 85% to 95% of the population still susceptible, growth rate, either absolute or percentage is not only easier to access, but also what we actually want to control. If everyone with COVID-19 infected 20 people, but over the next 40 years, we wouldn't have a problem for ages, and could probably come up with a decent treatment.

Australia seemed to have covid under control and was even talking about opening up the borders between states, then covid snuck into some dense suburbs and public housing estates in Melbourne and it's game on again. We're up to almost 200 new cases a day in Victoria, so the whole of Melbourne is going into lockdown again for six weeks - you can leave your home for work, food, exercise, and healthcare - and all the other states are firmly closing their borders. 3000 people in the housing commission estates have been locked in their buildings under police guard for a few days while they test everyone but that will soon be relaxed to "only" the same lockdown rules as the rest of Melbourne. And it's taken all weekend to get reliable food deliveries in to the poor sods inside.

I realise how incredibly lucky we are that Australia still has the resources to lock down a city for "only" 200 cases a day, but it's a sobering lesson.

And in news no-one will be surprised to hear, several pubs have already had to close because people who were in there over the weekend have since tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Given pubs didn't open till late morning on Saturday, it takes time to get tested and a result to be obtained, and it is now only Tuesday morning so presumably for these to have hit the news already, at least some of them must have come to light yesterday (ie Monday), surely some of these people must already have had symptoms when they went to the pub? Or is testing happening more quickly than I thought? Is it possible that people didn't experience symptoms till Saturday night/Sunday and have received a positive test result by Monday night?

bagpuss wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:25 am

And in news no-one will be surprised to hear, several pubs have already had to close because people who were in there over the weekend have since tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Given pubs didn't open till late morning on Saturday, it takes time to get tested and a result to be obtained, and it is now only Tuesday morning so presumably for these to have hit the news already, at least some of them must have come to light yesterday (ie Monday), surely some of these people must already have had symptoms when they went to the pub? Or is testing happening more quickly than I thought? Is it possible that people didn't experience symptoms till Saturday night/Sunday and have received a positive test result by Monday night?

MrsG suggested it may have been someone who was asymptomatic but subject to routine testing (Do we have routine testing of any groups, healthcare workers? ).
Or someone had been tested and someone else from the household went to the pub.

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:42 am

bagpuss wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:25 am

And in news no-one will be surprised to hear, several pubs have already had to close because people who were in there over the weekend have since tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Given pubs didn't open till late morning on Saturday, it takes time to get tested and a result to be obtained, and it is now only Tuesday morning so presumably for these to have hit the news already, at least some of them must have come to light yesterday (ie Monday), surely some of these people must already have had symptoms when they went to the pub? Or is testing happening more quickly than I thought? Is it possible that people didn't experience symptoms till Saturday night/Sunday and have received a positive test result by Monday night?

MrsG suggested it may have been someone who was asymptomatic but subject to routine testing (Do we have routine testing of any groups, healthcare workers? ).
Or someone had been tested and someone else from the household went to the pub.

If someone in the household has symptoms and been tested (if that's what you meant by the 2nd one?), then it would seem reckless in the extreme for a fellow household member to go to the pub and I thought it was against the rules for them to leave the house but I admit that I have not kept up with the latest rules (we're still living by full lockdown rules bar our one visit to my mum, because we can).

Healthcare and other essential workers can get a test without showing symptoms so that does seem like a possibility. Not sure if anyone is yet undergoing regular routine testing - I know it was being talked about but I've lost track of whether it's actually happening. ETA: I did try to check but not found a definitive answer yet

bagpuss wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:25 am

And in news no-one will be surprised to hear, several pubs have already had to close because people who were in there over the weekend have since tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Given pubs didn't open till late morning on Saturday, it takes time to get tested and a result to be obtained, and it is now only Tuesday morning so presumably for these to have hit the news already, at least some of them must have come to light yesterday (ie Monday), surely some of these people must already have had symptoms when they went to the pub? Or is testing happening more quickly than I thought? Is it possible that people didn't experience symptoms till Saturday night/Sunday and have received a positive test result by Monday night?

My suspicion is the "Super Saturday" effect will take about 2 weeks to become obvious.

"Super Saturday" pubgoers were mostly young - and it may take a couple of generations of onward transmission before the virus hits family and friends likely to need medical care and perhaps hospitalisation.

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:42 am

bagpuss wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:25 am

And in news no-one will be surprised to hear, several pubs have already had to close because people who were in there over the weekend have since tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Given pubs didn't open till late morning on Saturday, it takes time to get tested and a result to be obtained, and it is now only Tuesday morning so presumably for these to have hit the news already, at least some of them must have come to light yesterday (ie Monday), surely some of these people must already have had symptoms when they went to the pub? Or is testing happening more quickly than I thought? Is it possible that people didn't experience symptoms till Saturday night/Sunday and have received a positive test result by Monday night?

MrsG suggested it may have been someone who was asymptomatic but subject to routine testing (Do we have routine testing of any groups, healthcare workers? ).
Or someone had been tested and someone else from the household went to the pub.

According to a message on the Burnham on Sea pub's Facebook page, the customer had tested positive on Thursday and had gone out anyway. I have no way of confirming this.
On the other hand someone else is saying this is all about control and that there's an 80% false positive result from the test.

bagpuss wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:50 am

Gfamily wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:42 am

bagpuss wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 07, 2020 9:25 am

And in news no-one will be surprised to hear, several pubs have already had to close because people who were in there over the weekend have since tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

Given pubs didn't open till late morning on Saturday, it takes time to get tested and a result to be obtained, and it is now only Tuesday morning so presumably for these to have hit the news already, at least some of them must have come to light yesterday (ie Monday), surely some of these people must already have had symptoms when they went to the pub? Or is testing happening more quickly than I thought? Is it possible that people didn't experience symptoms till Saturday night/Sunday and have received a positive test result by Monday night?

MrsG suggested it may have been someone who was asymptomatic but subject to routine testing (Do we have routine testing of any groups, healthcare workers? ).
Or someone had been tested and someone else from the household went to the pub.

If someone in the household has symptoms and been tested (if that's what you meant by the 2nd one?), then it would seem reckless in the extreme for a fellow household member to go to the pub and I thought it was against the rules for them to leave the house but I admit that I have not kept up with the latest rules (we're still living by full lockdown rules bar our one visit to my mum, because we can).

Healthcare and other essential workers can get a test without showing symptoms so that does seem like a possibility. Not sure if anyone is yet undergoing regular routine testing - I know it was being talked about but I've lost track of whether it's actually happening. ETA: I did try to check but not found a definitive answer yet

A friend who works in a care home is being tested weekly. Whether this is all care homes or because hers had an outbreak, I don't know. But there are certainly some places that are.