Covid-19 the unlockdown
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
The thing I am most worried about at the minute is the difference in the estimated number of new cases each day in the community (8000 ?) and the number of positive tests (1500). Can only track and trace based on positive tests
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
No, that's good.
It means contact tracers are sitting around playing Candy Crush, enabling the government to boast about deploying ample resources. There will be some impressive stats soon, about how every one of the 1,500 positives have been contacted by a tracer.
If the stats were run on the 7,000 to 8,000 actual cases per day it would be a lot harder for the government to look competent, and this could lead to demoralisation of the people in the face of the Nazi enemy the invisible enemy. It is right to avoid that.
It means contact tracers are sitting around playing Candy Crush, enabling the government to boast about deploying ample resources. There will be some impressive stats soon, about how every one of the 1,500 positives have been contacted by a tracer.
If the stats were run on the 7,000 to 8,000 actual cases per day it would be a lot harder for the government to look competent, and this could lead to demoralisation of the people in the face of the Nazi enemy the invisible enemy. It is right to avoid that.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
It's obvious that air bridges between two low infection countries makes a lot of sense. There's no point in imposing 14 day quarantine for travellers between Norway and Greece, or Iceland and Croatia.
But why is the UK discussing it? Who exactly do we think we'll partner up with? Hey guys, who wants to air bridge with us, you come here and don't need to quarantine, we'll visit you and won't need to quarantine, it'll be great for our tourist and travel industries.
But why is the UK discussing it? Who exactly do we think we'll partner up with? Hey guys, who wants to air bridge with us, you come here and don't need to quarantine, we'll visit you and won't need to quarantine, it'll be great for our tourist and travel industries.
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7165
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
- Gentleman Jim
- Catbabel
- Posts: 634
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 9:38 pm
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Talking to ourselves?
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
It's whether they want our money so much that they'll risk trashing their economy for a second time.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
And won't German holidaymakers be saying they'd like to go on hols to the Balearics but they don't want to be on sunbeds next to any Brits, so can the hotel assure them everyone from the UK is strictly barred?
- Stranger Mouse
- After Pie
- Posts: 2442
- Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2019 1:23 pm
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
I am in awe of Marina Hyde
“Otto Von Jizzmark”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... em-britain
“Otto Von Jizzmark”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... em-britain
I’ve decided I should be on the pardon list if that’s still in the works
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Superb, thanks chopsWoodchopper wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:45 pmplodder wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:30 pmAnalysis of Covid-19 in sewage as a potential metric for managing the end of the lockdown, some nice graphs etc:
https://www.kwrwater.nl/en/actueel/sewa ... or-corona/
Possibly the same research as covered here: https://twitter.com/steamtraen/status/1 ... 17315?s=21
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
So when are tinder hookups going to be ok?
Asking for a friend
Asking for a friend
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Yes. But that solution only works until enough people use it. Then the scammers detect the number dialled, call it themselves and join the two calls together. The other person called *might* notice the calling ID is wrong, but that can easily be withheld and even (not so easily) spoofed.Martin Y wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:07 amYou're talking about the technique of pretending to hang up then pretending to answer as the legitimate contact point when the victim dials the number.
The solution to that is fairly straightforward, at least for people who are sufficiently on the ball to think they ought to seek confirmation: If you get a call that might be such a scam, call someone you know first, before you call the public contact tracing number. That's good advice to give any elderly parent who might get calls they're unsure about: call me first for reassurance.
I think all UK phone lines now allow called party clearing which clears the call after a timeout even if the caller stays on the line. The timeout might be 30 seconds, but if you rely on it you'd need to test it on your line.
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Assume it's a scam if:Gfamily wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 11:34 amDoes anyone know of a simple checklist that contains details like this, that could be printed off and left near the phone of friends and relatives who might be vulnerable.
Something that will remind them while they are still on a call to look out for things that should make them suspicious.
- They called you
- They're not someone you know personally whose voice you recognise
- You are about to give out any confidential personal information (credit card number, account details, birth date, relative's name, etc)
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
I hadn't thought of that. I suppose that would be possible, though it would be quite a technical escalation for them to arrange for the dialling tones and ringing tone to sound normal especially as they're presumably not in this country. It's a bit John Le Carre but If I was suspicious they might do that I guess when I call someone I know it should be to ask them to ring me straight back to check my line is clear. But of course the simpler option is to use a different phone.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 1:29 amYes. But that solution only works until enough people use it. Then the scammers detect the number dialled, call it themselves and join the two calls together. The other person called *might* notice the calling ID is wrong, but that can easily be withheld and even (not so easily) spoofed.
I think all UK phone lines now allow called party clearing which clears the call after a timeout even if the caller stays on the line. The timeout might be 30 seconds, but if you rely on it you'd need to test it on your line.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
You thought I was joking.lpm wrote: ↑Tue Jun 02, 2020 8:10 amNo, that's good.
It means contact tracers are sitting around playing Candy Crush, enabling the government to boast about deploying ample resources. There will be some impressive stats soon, about how every one of the 1,500 positives have been contacted by a tracer.
If the stats were run on the 7,000 to 8,000 actual cases per day it would be a lot harder for the government to look competent, and this could lead to demoralisation of the people in the face of the Nazi enemy the invisible enemy. It is right to avoid that.
But no. Our Prime Minister has just slammed Starmer for his demoralising talk, accusing him of "casting aspersions on the efforts of tens of thousands of people who set it up from a standing start" and eviscerating him for his "endless attacks on public confidence". Well said, Prime Minister. Well said.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
I did smile watching PMQ - at least Starmer has got to the nub of the issue, unlike the press, contact tracing isn't going to have much affect if you base it on positive tests that are a small percentage of the new cases each daylpm wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:22 amYou thought I was joking.lpm wrote: ↑Tue Jun 02, 2020 8:10 amNo, that's good.
It means contact tracers are sitting around playing Candy Crush, enabling the government to boast about deploying ample resources. There will be some impressive stats soon, about how every one of the 1,500 positives have been contacted by a tracer.
If the stats were run on the 7,000 to 8,000 actual cases per day it would be a lot harder for the government to look competent, and this could lead to demoralisation of the people in the face of the Nazi enemy the invisible enemy. It is right to avoid that.
But no. Our Prime Minister has just slammed Starmer for his demoralising talk, accusing him of "casting aspersions on the efforts of tens of thousands of people who set it up from a standing start" and eviscerating him for his "endless attacks on public confidence". Well said, Prime Minister. Well said.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Well, this is rude. Holland PM says:
Until this discrimination ends I will refuse to wear clogs.Tourists from the United Kingdom and Sweden are not welcome in the Netherlands from June 15 but people from other EU/Schengen countries are.
- Trinucleus
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1010
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:45 pm
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Especially if most of the contacts can only think of a person in a shop who was a bit close, but they don't know themPeteB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:10 pmI did smile watching PMQ - at least Starmer has got to the nub of the issue, unlike the press, contact tracing isn't going to have much affect if you base it on positive tests that are a small percentage of the new cases each daylpm wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:22 amYou thought I was joking.lpm wrote: ↑Tue Jun 02, 2020 8:10 amNo, that's good.
It means contact tracers are sitting around playing Candy Crush, enabling the government to boast about deploying ample resources. There will be some impressive stats soon, about how every one of the 1,500 positives have been contacted by a tracer.
If the stats were run on the 7,000 to 8,000 actual cases per day it would be a lot harder for the government to look competent, and this could lead to demoralisation of the people in the face of the Nazi enemy the invisible enemy. It is right to avoid that.
But no. Our Prime Minister has just slammed Starmer for his demoralising talk, accusing him of "casting aspersions on the efforts of tens of thousands of people who set it up from a standing start" and eviscerating him for his "endless attacks on public confidence". Well said, Prime Minister. Well said.
-
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1520
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:22 pm
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
And now they've had to deep clean the House of Commons after Alok Sharma reported feeling unwell even as he gave a speech from the dispatch box.
Well done to the government and Rees-Mogg in particular.
Well done to the government and Rees-Mogg in particular.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Almost as if reopening the house was a needless partisan exercise, especially as Johnson has to u turn on digital voting for vulnerable MPs.
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
You are clearly far too honest. That doesn't work for the same reason. The scammers are relaying the call, so they can listen in. If you ask your friend to call you back, the scammers pull the same trick again, this time on your friend, so your friend stays connected to them, while the scammer hangs up and redials the call to you, connecting your friend's call to the new call. When you finally clear the call to your friend, they let the call to your friend drop and keep you on the line - ready to capture your attempt to call the offical number.Martin Y wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 9:13 amI hadn't thought of that. I suppose that would be possible, though it would be quite a technical escalation for them to arrange for the dialling tones and ringing tone to sound normal especially as they're presumably not in this country. It's a bit John Le Carre but If I was suspicious they might do that I guess when I call someone I know it should be to ask them to ring me straight back to check my line is clear.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Wed Jun 03, 2020 1:29 amYes. But that solution only works until enough people use it. Then the scammers detect the number dialled, call it themselves and join the two calls together. The other person called *might* notice the calling ID is wrong, but that can easily be withheld and even (not so easily) spoofed.
I think all UK phone lines now allow called party clearing which clears the call after a timeout even if the caller stays on the line. The timeout might be 30 seconds, but if you rely on it you'd need to test it on your line.
Yes, that's much simpler and does work.But of course the simpler option is to use a different phone.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
My point was how long records are usually kept for health purposes. The NHS was just convenient example. To my mind, the other bodies that might hold onto the data on Covid cases -- PHE or the contact tracing service, for instance -- are all part of the same state-run health care system, just different branches of it. So it's not much different to the NHS really.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 1:23 amWell then I expect you'll object to the contact tracing records as they are not held by the NHS.raven wrote: I rather expect the NHS to keep my records -- including name, dob, address, symptoms etc etc -- for as long as I'm alive and might need them so keeping health data for 20 years does not seem excessive to me. (I'd be happy to see those back Xrays I had 25 years ago turn up again, actually....)
As I said somewhere up thread, what is more problematic is data finding its way into the private sector. Like, say, Deep Mind being let loose on NHS records. That sort of thing needs watching.
I don't know what the rules are, but it wouldn't surprise me if some types of study don't require explicit consent. Things like, perhaps, pulling anonymised data on diagnosis rates from records, or looking at how many inhalers typical asthma patients get through in a year.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 1:23 amDo they include patients without (or even contrary to) their consent?raven wrote: There are longitudinal studies that follow patients for decades
It is one thing for the NHS (or any medical organisation) to hold my health records for my benefit: it is a completely different thing for those health records to be held and used for the benefit of others.
Personally, if there's one use for my medical records I wouldn't object to at all it's using them for the benefit of other patients. Using them to line the pockets of insurers though....
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
You are correct. Studies on anonymised healthcare records like the ones the MHRA do on GPRD (General Practice Research Database) all the time don't need any patient consent. Patients can opt out of their records being sent (in anonymised form) from their GP's surgery (which is also anonymised & only the region of the country included) to the central database, but if they don't opt out, then they have, de facto, consented to them being used for research purposes.raven wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 4:50 pmMy point was how long records are usually kept for health purposes. The NHS was just convenient example. To my mind, the other bodies that might hold onto the data on Covid cases -- PHE or the contact tracing service, for instance -- are all part of the same state-run health care system, just different branches of it. So it's not much different to the NHS really.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 1:23 amWell then I expect you'll object to the contact tracing records as they are not held by the NHS.raven wrote: I rather expect the NHS to keep my records -- including name, dob, address, symptoms etc etc -- for as long as I'm alive and might need them so keeping health data for 20 years does not seem excessive to me. (I'd be happy to see those back Xrays I had 25 years ago turn up again, actually....)
As I said somewhere up thread, what is more problematic is data finding its way into the private sector. Like, say, Deep Mind being let loose on NHS records. That sort of thing needs watching.
I don't know what the rules are, but it wouldn't surprise me if some types of study don't require explicit consent. Things like, perhaps, pulling anonymised data on diagnosis rates from records, or looking at how many inhalers typical asthma patients get through in a year.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Mon Jun 01, 2020 1:23 amDo they include patients without (or even contrary to) their consent?raven wrote: There are longitudinal studies that follow patients for decades
It is one thing for the NHS (or any medical organisation) to hold my health records for my benefit: it is a completely different thing for those health records to be held and used for the benefit of others.
Personally, if there's one use for my medical records I wouldn't object to at all it's using them for the benefit of other patients. Using them to line the pockets of insurers though....
You're also right that apart from helping oneself, helping others is a thoroughly morally and legally legitimate use of medical records. We medicines regulators use patient records, to investigate whether our suspicions that a drug causes a certain side effect are founded, all the time.
Without them accurate assessments of the risk-benefit profile of a medicine would be far harder to make. We would have data on fewer patients, they would take longer and cost a lot more, plus they would be subject to CoIs as we would have to instruct the drugs companies to pay for the studies, rather than just doing them ourselves.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Thanks, always nice to get confirmation of that the vague idea you had of how something works is right!
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Oh yeah. We got letters to that effect maybe 10? years ago. Kids were still at home, I think. Do parents opt out for minors, I wonder. Can't remember. Then they get asked at 16, I suppose.tom p said: Patients can opt out of their records being sent (in anonymised form) from their GP's surgery (which is also anonymised & only the region of the country included) to the central database, but if they don't opt out, then they have, de facto, consented to them being used for research purposes.
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Ooh, I don't know about if kids get asked again when they are no longer kids, but yeah, parents decide for kids.raven wrote: ↑Sat Jun 06, 2020 1:16 pmThanks, always nice to get confirmation of that the vague idea you had of how something works is right!![]()
Oh yeah. We got letters to that effect maybe 10? years ago. Kids were still at home, I think. Do parents opt out for minors, I wonder. Can't remember. Then they get asked at 16, I suppose.tom p said: Patients can opt out of their records being sent (in anonymised form) from their GP's surgery (which is also anonymised & only the region of the country included) to the central database, but if they don't opt out, then they have, de facto, consented to them being used for research purposes.
-
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1520
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:22 pm
Re: Covid-19 the unlockdown
Well the government has given up on the idea of getting all primary school kids back into school before the end of the current school year.