UKH

Herefordshire moved down to Tier 1 today. Unfortunately infections are up 23% on the week in the data from yesterday. How on earth can ordinary data watchers on UKC have had their concerns about this decision looking justified so soon?  Government experts agreed that it should become Tier 1, at the same time as saying they were being cautious in all such decisions. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/18/covid-cases-and-deaths-today-...

In reply to Offwidth:

A cynic might think that the government's caution is directed more at their polling numbers and maintaining control of their MPs than infection figures.

In reply to Luke90:

So much for Tier 1

Herefordshire is now at 78 cases per hundred thousand with a 75% increase on the week. 

Cornwall 63 up 243%

Isle of Wight 56 up 394%

I wonder when the two who disliked my original post will start to recognise how serious this situation is.

In reply to Offwidth:

What I don't get is why this is reviewed so slowly - clearly Herefordshire will need to go up, but it will be left for ages before it does, meaning it takes longer to come down again.

In reply to Neil Williams:

Indeed. Any change in restrictions has a week of growth before any effect occurs. The following week will also grow as the those individuals newly infected with covid will infect their households.

At the current rates of growth Isle of Wight will overtake Manchester on cases per hundred thousand on boxing day, Herefordshire will overtake in the first week of January ...  this puts the recent arguments over Manchester staying at Tier 3 in a weird and dangerous context. 

In reply to Offwidth:

And the worst thing about the IoW is that it's a bit of a retirement paradise - which means it will have a disproportionately high number of vulnerable people.

Really, I'm astonished they didn't just put the whole country to tier 4 at once.

In reply to Luke90:

After the 2019 purge and the unexpected wins the backbenches are stuffed with the zealots and idiots needed to turn blind eyes to brexit's harms. Johnson has to appease them or accept his days are numbered if he instead decides instead to act in the national interest, reach out and form a temporary alliance across the floor. It's Johnson, it'll be dangerous pandering not statesmanship.

jk

In reply to Offwidth:

As a Manchester resident, putting us in Tier 2 (pubs open) a week before Christmas with numbers flattening but no longer plunging and an NHS that is pretty stretched would have been bonkers. We had elective surgery stopped last winter solely due to flu. We don't have the capacity.

That being said, it's one of the few decisions the government has made that seems informed and rational. 

In reply to galpinos:

Vallance, Whitty and co have the data wintertree posted here 'with xmas bells on' (information on the geographical spread of the new mutation). What consistency of logic kept Manchester at Tier 3 (I agree a sensible decision) but didn't put the whole of England at Tier 3 or Tier 4 on Saturday?

In reply to Offwidth:

You have no idea who they are, or what they're thinking.  Maybe they do recognise 'how serious this situation is' and that's what they 'dislike'.

If you can't help taking the downvotes personally, let alone derailing your own post with a pathetic little whinge about them, do yourself a favour and just turn them off ffs.

In reply to Offwidth:

It’s possible that they have access to more data over the role of schools in spreading this variant, and that’s given them confidence that the infection rate is about to drop significantly.

I’m going to try and do a demographic doubling time plot for a group of the worst affected UTLAs later.  Perhaps with the weekend data fix there’ll be a leader/follower effect visible in the doubling times to pull this out of the cases data.

In reply to wintertree:

There are hints that younger people are more likely to spread the mutated virus but even best case this is looking terrible. In any case many kids will mix with their wider family at xmas. One other thing to factor in is the impact of the 'holidays' on testing (it will artificially depress data a little).

In reply to Offwidth:

I said I agreed with the Tier 3 decision, I'm not saying I agree with any of the others!

In reply to deepsoup:

I don't believe in hiding information so please take your regular complaints about my personal views elsewhere. If those people did dislike the thread because they think the increase is a bad thing they maybe need to say that rather than risking it looking like covid risk denial.

In reply to galpinos:

Sorry, I should have been clear I realised that but I do think it is important people realise when Boris says he is being cautious about the changes this last weekend he really isn't. You might even say with tongue firmly in cheek that it shows Boris loves the north

In reply to Offwidth:

Ha ha.  For a minute there I thought you weren't going to bite. 

Once you've started a thread you don't own it, I'll comment on anything I want to comment on within the rules of the forum ta.  If you open the door I'm perfectly entitled to step through it.You don't get to express your 'personal views' on views on here and demand that nobody is allowed to comment on them, that's just not how the forum works. 

The irony is that I agree completely with almost all of your 'personal views' on anything of substance, as does the majority of the UKC 'bubble'.  Crikey, just take a second to think about how ridiculously thin-skinned you're being here and pause for a moment to think about how the brexiteers and tories cope.  (Merry Christmas baron!)

For some time now it's been a sort of Godwin-esque 'law' of UKC that any thread in which you whinge about dislikes is doomed to become a thread about dislikes.  You should know that better than most after so many epic wrangles on the subject.

Of course the downvotes don't look like anything other than a couple of downvotes outside of your imagination.  People clicking the button are under no obligation to explain why but the good news is that neither are you under any obligation to guess why (and then condemn them for it). 

Are you sure it isn't necessarily a good idea to 'hide information' if you can't help yourself from reacting to that information with baseless and paranoid speculation about whatever hidden meaning might lie beneath?  I used to feel much the same, but having turned off the 'likes' a while ago don't regret it at all.  (Funny how it's only the 'dislikes' that anyone ever whinges about in the text of their posts though.)  You should try it.

In reply to Offwidth:

For crying ut loud ignore the dislikes if you don;t like them, UKC isn't a popularity contest.

In reply to Offwidth:

As someone who lives inHerefoordhsire I would say that the opinions of "ordinary data watchers on UKC" are worth very little.

I certainly don't see any reason for government to change decisions that are purely  based on the numbers to appease anonymous data watchers on a climbing forum.

In a situation where everybody seems to have an opinion but very few are qualified to back their their reamblings up what would you have the governement do?

In reply to deepsoup:

I've put a column of black insulation tape on my monitor that lines up and covers the dislikes.  That way, I still get to see the Likes, but not the Dislikes.  Win, Win! 

In reply to deepsoup:

Merrry xmas mum. 

In reply to timjones:

When you hit 200 cases per hundred thousand (I think very likely soon in the new year), compared to the level who would die every week when Boris made your county Tier 1, its inevitable that weekly number will have increased by a factor of 6  and  the same increase for those who will suffer from long covid. If I'm completely wrong and you don't reach 200  then you can start lecturing me it's not important.

In reply to timjones:

Unfortunately that's true. If we had listened to them in Jan/Feb we might now be in a situation more similar to New Zealand

In reply to RobAJones:

The main daily updated data page for the county is not so informative:

https://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/coronavirus-3/stay-home-stay-safe/14?docum...

The more detailed historic county data downloads won't open on my tablet but they are here:

https://understanding.herefordshire.gov.uk/health/covid-19-weekly-summary/

In reply to Offwidth:

What role do you hold that gives you the authority to lecture anybody on what is or isn't important?

In reply to RobAJones:

I wonder if they would have proffered their advice so freely if they had to put their real names behind it and stake their careers on it?

In reply to timjones:

I gave my advice advice to my employer starting late February.  With evidence. Bluntly.  I had no problem doing so with my name on it.  Others did and they shut down in-person teaching for > 15,000 people 10 days before lockdown.  Other institutions did likewise.  This almost certainly directly saved lives in the following months.

I don’t attach my professional identity to my posts.  I am now my own employer, give or take, so that’s not a worry.  I prefer to bring the evidence and reasoning to the forum than to use my professional identity to infer some sort of authority.  

For what it’s worth I think it was absolute bloody madness to lower anywhere to T1 with what we now know that the government then knew.  Perhaps you’ll luck out and not suffer - either as a household or a region - as a result.  There’s not much luck left to go around right now.

In reply to timjones:

Don't you think some members of SAGE were saying the same at that time, but we're overuled? Is getting something wrong career ending? Isn't Gupta still in post?

In reply to FactorXXX:

What post was that from?

Edit; found it. You got 104 dislikes, in case you are interested....

In reply to RobAJones:

Yes if the wise and farseeing of UKC were in charge I'm sure we'de all be fine!

In reply to wintertree:

I've done the same on a far smaller scale as a self-employed farmer with a number of animal diseases over the past 20 years.  The point at which we move from indivdual responsibility and decision making to large sale governmental intervention is always going to be hard to judge. To be fair to the governments public facing advisors they have always acknowledged that there is a difference between stating what the current science indicates and the political decisions that have to be made based on that science.

For me the credibility of the source is an important element when it comes tojudging the validity of opinions or information.  If the source is anonymous I will always take it with a huge pinch of salt.

That's the line between politics and science, if the politicians don't demonstrate the will to ease restrictions where the numbers allow it they will have a had time maintaining enough public respect to keep control.

FWIW I would have no qualms if it wasn't for the numpties that have travelled quite some distance into the county to shop and/or drink because it is tier 1 but I'm not sure that I would want to see the level of controls that would be necessary to prevent it.

In reply to timjones:

Hereford has a rate of 94 and an increase in cases of 128%. Do you think tier one was the correct decision? I don’t. The government always acts far too late. 
I think (hope?) that school holidays and the insular nature of Xmas (many folk not at work and let’s face it most of us don’t go to pubs etc) could help slow the increase. 

In reply to RobAJones:

Surelly SAGE are there to advise rather than rule. It's easy to give advice within a profession where errors are accepted and largely go unpunished. It's not so easy to to stand up and tell people what to do based on that advice knowing that a grumpy electorate are just waiting for you to make a mistake.

In reply to mick taylor:

I see no ships... 🙈

In reply to mick taylor:

Feck only knows, I'm merely suggesting that it is probably impossible to make that judgement based on the numbers that are available in the pubic domain and that it might therefore be best not to pontificate about it from miles away.

In reply to timjones:

U OK hun?

In reply to timjones:

I couldn't disagree more.  Only one very narrowly chosen look at the numbers "allows it" and even that hardly seems justified with the last couple of days of updates.  The problem is that our politicians don't have enough respect from the population to tell the hard truths and make the hard choices.  It's precisely the opposite of what you suggest - they never had the public respect and they've actively undermined any chance to gain it with questionable decisions being brushed aside and repeated unbelievable defence of the indefensible amongst their ranks.

It's been very clear for about 9 days now that this new strain - or some other unidentified factor - is spreading from the Thames estuary unstopped by current control measures. Cases are growing exponentially with disturbingly short doubling times and the effect has spread out from the Thames Estuary over the last two weeks.  The new strain that evades control measures for reasons we don't yet understand is everywhere.  Cases in Herefordshire look to be rising exponentially, just like everywhere else, over the last 4 days.  This new variant spread during lockdown, and it spread in Tier 3 areas.  How do you think it's spreading in your Tier 1 area?

But feel free to take my opinions with a pinch of salt.  I have made the case for the geographic spread in my recent Friday plotting thread.  I have made my case here.  40 foreign countries have made their case quite clearly in the last few days.  

There will likely be a lull in the numbers for your county over the next few days as a weekend period of under-sampling works through the lagged reporting pipeline.  Then the real numbers will come through on Christmas Eve and perhaps Christmas Day.  I hope for your sakes they don't set a new record for your area, but I'm not optimistic.

In reply to wintertree:

Perhaps some of Kent's MPs ( with the exception of Laura Trott) could give an alternative view of the data?

In reply to timjones:

I've said before I always respect your posts despite our political differences and I know the situation you face might be currently a bit hard to accept. I think an incautious (but not totally unreasonable) decision of Tier 1 may have left your county unusually exposed at a very unlucky time, as neighborhood rates accelerated and possibly the new mutation grows.

The public numbers are just that. If anything is wrong with them it will be missing cases. Herefordshire is now at 94 cases per hundred thousand and has grown by 102% since a week ago. At this rate you will exceed Manchester before the New Year and hit 200 around New Years day. Deaths (and long term illness) follow hospitalisations by a range around 2 weeks which in turn follow cases by about a week.  Even if they bring in tighter restrictions tomorrow it will be a few weeks before they really kick in. In January your hospitals will be struggling unless I am very wrong. However what looks absolutely like exponential growth doesn't just stop itself.

I'm a recently retired academic with most of my subject experience in EEE and Electronic Materials Science and lots of pals in biosciences (including 2 leading Profs who have been on the BBC this week on the subject of Covid).

In reply to Offwidth:

As a result of being Tier 1, we’ve sharpened the pitchforks & manned the barricades to repel our more diseased neighbours. 

Pubs & restaurants in Hereford are checking ID to make sure you’ve got an HR postcode; if not, you’re not coming in. That’s a response to some highly idiotic behaviour last weekend when (according to West Mercia Police), minibuses turned up from Tier 3 areas so their idiotic passengers could go on pub crawls, and an extended family from London tried to book a hotel up in Hereford so they could all get together over Christmas & avoid the restrictions back at home. 
 

In reply to Fozzy:

Sadly, looks like you were a few days late.

In reply to timjones:

I like pontificating, it helps me try and make sense of stuff (in this case, covid). Posted on here about how I’ve acknowledged I’ve got lots of stuff wrong: usually by erring on the side of optimism. I also look at the data (mainly Greater Manc and Wigan) in an almost obsessive way. I’ve learnt that the numbers available are accurate enough to make opinions on and that the predictions on here are, on average, better than anywhere else. 
I am confident that those areas kept/put in a lower tier will regret it. 

In reply to Fozzy:

Tough if you are in the north of the county... SY postcodes

We had similar events here when dropping to level 2. Pubs putting up marquees to cope with the influx. There was a spectacular increase in infections.

In reply to Fat Bumbly2:

If you input your postcode into the gov’s council tax check thingy, it shows which county you live in, regardless of if you’ve got an SY or WR postcode. 
 

I still have no intention of heading into town any time soon, even if we are apparently safer. I just don’t understand the desperation of some to go to pubs or have nights out despite the danger involved, it’s just weird (I am getting Beefy Boys withdrawal though). 

In reply to Fozzy:

Find a pub or brewery that does take out (that's all we have for proper beer in Tier 3). Get that nice warm feeling that it helps them through a rough time

In reply to Fozzy:

If I was still there, there is no way I would be going in either. A big deal for me would be avoiding the football on Boxing Day, but it's a no brainer this year (and yes, I know - we have had poor sides before)

In reply to Fozzy:

Yeah I heard they closed di coffee pot due to vast amounts of welsh folk drinking there.

Luckily in Bromyard we have been unwarming to outsiders for years so we have not had the influx 😆

In reply to timjones:

But the anonymous people here aren't actually the main "source" of much of what they're posting. Wintertree posts all kinds of interesting analysis but it's fundamentally based on publicly available data and he's being fairly open about the analysis he's doing on top of that. There's not much need for trust in him personally as a source because anyone who distrusts him has the option of verifying the data.

In reply to Meddins:

Wasn’t that a pre-emptive closure as they knew people would take the mick, especially at New Year? 

I couldn’t possibly comment on such matters! 

In reply to timjones:

Quite right. None of these anonymous data voyeurs have to make any decisions based on the data that actually affect the lives of real people. UKC forums nit picking and drawing up graphs are just masturbations, they don't really benefit society or anyone outside the icestuous circle. The data you're presented here is limited and politically motivated, hardly good for forming a balanced view, and no data here or even talk about the consequences of the actions recommended. 

It would be a reasonable assumption to make that many of the pro-lockdown commentators here sufficiently profit from lockdowns, if they weren't somewhat insulated from the negative consequences then they would be more sceptical and spend less time concocting graphs to support their narrow agendas. 

In reply to JohnBson:

The difference between most people and  blowhards like you is most want to avoid this pandemic killing and disabling more people than it needs to. 

I don't know why you even bother to argue about numbers since you seem to think the whole messaging on the pandemic is a massive con (very much unlike Tim). The future will show us who was right soon enough and so far in this pandemic the cautious argument proved right every time  (except for those who don't give a shit about others or rate the economy above people's lives)

In reply to Offwidth:

Nope, even for those.  Well, the latter anyway. 

That was the flaw in Johnson's 'herd immunity' guff, remember how the UK was going to step out of a phone box wearing a cape as the "Superman of capitalism"? 

As it turns out mass casualties are very bad for the economy, so the 'let it rip' approach is still an extraordinarily bad idea even if you care only for the economy and don't give a shit about people's lives.

In reply to Offwidth:

Oh right, sorry, I forgot I'm not posting on the ukmurderers forum. Don't be so bleeding stupid, there's a big recession on the way some estimates from non-governmental, non-anonynous sources put the death toll of this at over 10x that of the virus. Don't pretend there's not a balance to be struck and a cost/benefit analysis which we should be demanding from the government. 

I don't think the messaging is a con (this is something you seem to think), however I do think that actually personal responsibility is the key and that if you are to limit personal freedoms then you need to be more transparent about decision making. This is not the case currently; masks wearing by the general public, for example, is almost a religion for some, yet from what I see the evidence is inconclusive. Why would you restrict civil liberties on inconclusive evidence? It's a debate worth having. 

I personally think it's for individuals to assess the risk levels they are happy with. A 90yr old grandma might care more to see her grandchild rather than be forcibly imprisoned in a car home knowing that she could die any minute covid or not. Personally I think the way we have treated the old is cruel beyond neasure and future generations will judge it so. 

I don't doubt the disease is bad, had it myself mid training cycle and it was very unpleasant. However personally I'd rather take my chances with that than mass unemployment, which unlike covid is more likely to kill people who are under the average age of death. But that's where my risk assessment lies, based on personal experience of both.

With regards to the cautious mindset it has not been proved right, if it had then the lockdowns would have worked, in every country they have failed. What actually works is more hospital beds per capita, yet this is unrealistic within the time frame of a few years, and even more unrealistic in the long term if we continue to deprive our kids of access to education which trains them to fill these roles.

In reply to JohnBson:

How you worked out how long our NHS could cope for if we didn't control the virus? Or do you think it being overwhelmed is a risk worth taking in order to ease restrictions?

In reply to JohnBson:

Death toll from COVID-19 68k......lets assume 100k die by the end of this wave.

Please show me the sources that claim 1m will die from the recession....

In reply to JohnBson:

So  lockdown has failed in New Zealand, Australia, Taiwan and China??  Wakey wakey.

Countries like USA- no real lockdown nationally- have failed dismally.

Its pretty easy to figure this out.

In reply to JohnBson:

The primary role of lockdowns was to restrict out-of control infection growth and prevent the absolute chaos that will occur if hospitals genuinely overloaded (we saw a little of that in Lombardy and New York and sadly it may be coming to the UK soon. ).. Lockdowns worked in that basic function in the western economies every single time. It is possible to operate under lighter restrictions (the UK early summer showed that)  but we failed because too many fools didn't follow important advice.

The science of masks is well established. They prevent most virus circulating if you are infected and cough or sneeze. The mechanism is basic physics and has been demonstrated to be very important with other respiratory virus and the covid efficacy is known now.

Most lockdown economic damage happens because government action is too slow at the start and so the peak and length is larger.  The big Eastern economies have proved that with much tighter restrictions and much smaller economic damage. Lockdowns happen more regularly than they need to because individuals en masse make bad decisions. Unecessary unemployment is due to the government delay in action and cumulative foolish individual behaviour, not the lockdown.

If our society was kinder we wouldn't have huge numbers of old people in too often substandard care homes, looked after too often by poorly resourced zero hour contract minimum wage staff; or so many sitting lonely at home. We also wouldn't have people packed into substandard accomodation. We might have chosen to have hospital beds per capita at the EU average or even aspire to the best, like Germany. The pandemic didn't cause those problems, it just highlighted the disparity.

In reply to JohnBson:

I have put my name to my work and my analysis of events more than once in more than one context, going back to March.

Correcting falsehoods 

You are coming across as nothing but a vile, spiteful and unpleasant person who has nothing positive to contribute and is sore about your warped views getting so little traction on here.

I have emails from multiple people that tell me otherwise.  Beyond UKC I am a job creator and I work hard to bring in foreign cash to the UK.  I damned well want to understand this situation to protect my business and those it employs.  

Bullshit.  Absolute bullshit. My motivations started as, and remain, clarifying what the data shows in the face of vile, spiteful little people deliberately misrepresenting the data for their own sick and twisted purposes.

For me, the control measures have been a disaster and working through them to support my business and it’s employees really took its toll on me in the first few months.  I’ve never worked so hard in my life to support them, my family and the employer I’ve now stepped away from.  But I think they are the lesser of two disasters and that’s a well evidenced proposition.  As exhausted as I was, I will work like that again through whatever control measures are necessary because I want to make this better for everyone.

You, I don’t think that you do.

In reply to JohnBson:

To give you the chance to add some credibility about your 10x death prediction, how many excess deaths do you think occurred due to the last recession and ten years of austerity?  Evidence would be good!

Saying that people should make their own decisions on risk is great in theory, but fundamentally flawed if we're going to continue to operate as any sort of society.

I found Wintertree's graphs informative (and frightening). As someone who does a lot of data wrangling for a living, with higher degrees in biology, I wouldn't feel confident in getting the level of contacts right. We need sound, clear and believable Government advice based on expert analysis to make the correct decisions for society. I don't believe we're getting it at the moment, which is why looking at the data is so important.

Anyway, I'm off to deliver a mobile phone  to my 93 year old covid positive mother in hospital in Tier 4. Christmas is cancelled for her this year - and we followed all the rules.

Keep up the good work Wintertree. You'll never convince the committed "I know best" crowd, but for the rest of us it's a useful source of info.

In reply to Bacon Butty:

Problem is the evidence that does exist of knock- on deaths that arise from lockdowns face the same simple logic that applies to economic damage. The countries that reacted fastest had the least covid impact, the least predicted knock on deaths and the least economic damage.  Predicted additional deaths from disruption of things like cancer services are as high as they are  because the UK's handling of the covid crisis has been so poor. That these predictions of cancer deaths and economic damage are being weaponised by some on the right to oppose lockdowns is pure Orwellian doublethink.

The same applies to mask propaganda. Those wanting to know how and why masks work are best direceted to the CDC resources on the subject in the US (in the least regulated economy in the western world and under the leadership of Trump).

In reply to Meddins:

I went to do the Christmas supermarket shop in Leominster at 9pm last night and took a quick drive round the town to gauge how lively it was in light of all the worries expressed here.  I think it is best summed up by the phrase "as dead as a doornail".

In reply to hang_about:

Yes.  Most of us on here pose a greater risk to others than to ourselves due to the way this virus transmits when free of symptoms.  It doesn’t even have to be those we meet directly, we could be several transmissive links upstream from the eventual consequences.

This poster provides no evidence that this isn’t so, they just continue talking about personal responsibility and personal risk whilst ignoring the societal implications.  Perhaps they’re not very bright, perhaps they’re being deliberately misleading, perhaps they’re just blinded to the reality by their political agenda.  I don’t care, but when they resort to attacking people through juvenile language and not providing evidenced counterpoints or identifying flaws in what others have presented, it seems abundantly clear that their viewpoint is a tower of cards, little more than a figment in their imaginations.

In reply to Offwidth:

Having been in education, you should be used to some people not understanding, no matter how simple or well explained a concept is, although it is still frustrating.

On that note a friend whom you referred to as a headmaster the other day (she thinks you might need some unconscious bias training) spent yesterday informing nearly 200 families that one of their children should self isolate, because she wasn't allowed  to close early.

In reply to deepsoup:

You're right. Maybe I should have been more explicit about the garbled logic of these political idiots. They absolutely see themselves as defending the economy and it's a fact there is as yet no direct test case proving otherwise as no western economy has been murderous enough to follow through such ideas to test the hypothesis (albeit plenty of other evidence to indicate they are wrong). So of course I agree with you that they are completely deluded and worse than that, highly dangerous in the UK given their influence under our first ever popularist tory government and in the US under Trump and the broken mess that is GOP.

In reply to RobAJones:

Please pass on my apologies.... (holds head in shame)

The vast majority of my teaching was stuff that was either true or not. I was pretty successful in teaching some people whom the system said were a waste of space in such subjects. The main exception to obviously true stuff was visual psychology where most undergraduates were absolutely convinced they knew how they see and when I proved that most were wrong with simple experiments, a minority often reacted with denial.

 I even spotted a teaching example I'd not seem anywhere before. Illuminate a classroom projection screen with a 100%  red primary (or better still the red part of RGB primary colour bars) in a room in daytime with no curtains. Ask students what colour they see (red, duh!) and then get them to measure the screen on a colour meter (low saturation red...ie light pink) and then look at the screen through a narrow tube (smarties packet maybe best for kids?!) and ask again what colour they see and it's nearly always a light salmon pink.

In reply to Andy Hardy

I'm fine thanks sugar

Well as fine as can possibly be for a man that has effectively lost the sales of sheep  that should have gone exported through Dover by our buyer in the final run up to the end of the transition period.

In reply to timjones:

Sorry to hear that Tim.

In reply to Offwidth:

Didn't last very long!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55428017

In reply to robhorton:

Well I do hope that Herefordshire remembers this next summer, and treats any Brummies who want a beer with contempt - as it seems HUNDREDS of them have been on pub trips to the county.

(I'm a neighbour from just over the hill in Worcestershire, who hasn't given in to the temptation).

And don't worry the rest of you - all those people from London who jumped on the train "to go home to the parents" (?) the moment London was put into tier 4 will infect everywhere else as well, and turn the entire country into tier 4.

I'm getting more than a little exasperated with the antics of some people. Maybe it's time to treat people the way the Chinese did, and prevent people wandering around the country willy-nilly without let or hindrance.

In reply to robhorton:

I don't think the new Tier 2 for Herefordshire will dent this growth much...it didn't in the home counties. 106% growth on the week up to 108 cases per 100,000 today.

In reply to Offwidth:

I'd be happier if Cumbria was in Tier 4. The new strain is definitely responsible for the rise in cases in  Eden (x3 in 10 days and the new strain has been identified), so probably Carlisle as well (and possible Allerdale and South Lakeland). If Tier 4 and schools being closed contained it over the next couple of weeks, primary schools and possibly secondary could open in Jan. As it is, it will almost certainly spread to Copeland and Barrow.

In reply to hang_about:

Sorry!  Clipboard mistake and I replied to you but pasted text from another poster so it seems mis attributed to you.  I’ll ask for my post to be pulled.

In reply to fred99:

We already disliked them, don’t you worry. 
 

In reply to Offwidth:

In the grand scheme of things for small businesses this year we are more fortunate than an awful lot. The worst that can happen for me is an earlier than anticipated retirement in which I wouldn't be rich but would probably have slightly more disposable income and more time to spend it than I am accustomed too

When I came back indoors at 9pm on Sunday evening after preparing lambs for delivery at dawn on Monday to be greeted by the news that Dover was closed it felt pretty catastrophic but hopefully this morning's news might mean that we have a farming future beyond the inevitable disruption early next year.

In reply to fred99:

Don't worry i think we are probably a bit more mellow than that and hopefully wise enough to appreciate that the vast majority of Brummies didn't take the piss.

The problem is that no restrictions will stop that, AFAIK there never was a set of rules that allowed people to get on trains out of London to stay with family at the weekend.

In reply to Offwidth:

I suspect that Christmas was always going to be the major driver for case numbers going into nest year regardless of the rules and restrictions.

It's hard to explain why I value the freedom of a few days in tier 1. Somehow the knowledge that I could enjoy a quiet pint in a local pub without eating a Scotch Egg was an important source of hope even though my workload prevented me from doing so.

In reply to timjones:

I wish people would just follow the advice. Most of England could have been in Tier 1 if they did, new mutation aside. As an island of Tier 1 you were always going to be a magnet for covidiots.

Add the mutation and I think Tier3 is sadly too lax for any English area. So enjoy your beer and scotch egg while you can and remember its not to compulsory to finish the latter. 

In reply to deepsoup:

 

Ha ha ha it's funny how people STILL complain about this bollocks, done to death a thousand times a method to switch them off if you can't simply accept some people are dickheads or taking the mickey, or better still you can't simply ignore them. You might have hit a nail on it's top part in your observation regarding the like button.

In reply to Offwidth:

Remember the good old days, when we had to isolate if we returned from a country with infection rates greater than 20 per 100,000

In reply to Cobra_Head:

If only everyone had isolated ....

In reply to fred99:

Probably didn't need to, if only we had a proper test and trace.

In reply to Cobra_Head:

But if they'd all isolated then there wouldn't have been many people to trace ...

Of course, actually HAVING a Test and Trace system would have helped (and would have reduced workload on the NHS and Funeral Directors).

In reply to fred99:

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map

A fault in the Guardian page exposed this as the linked data source.  Its a bit unstable but has a slider to change the date (would have been nice if a date entry was possible).  

In reply to Offwidth:

I see they’ve doubled the maximum number on the colour bar...

In reply to wintertree:

They did that a few days ago, it's quite an annoying colour choice as it's difficult to make out the black boundary lines in the dark purple Not that I'm demanding.

In reply to Offwidth:

I assume you are aware you can get cases data for any date from the dashboard if you go to the case tab and then look up via location (region or local authority.) I find the dashboard map very useful to spot trends and hotspots (the guardian on the rise map is a useful addition for spotting trends) but it's also helpful to look at the various bar charts for a specific location through time.

Looking at the map every day provides more insight than just using the slider bar because you can see whether the weekly increases are getting better or worse on a daily basis, but requires more time than is probably sensible for an individual to spend...

Edit to add, not sure what machine you are on, but if you have a choice and can be bothered, it seems to run better on Windows than Android.

In reply to Si dH:

A quick and dirty way of improving some bad colour maps is to use the inversion option in your device’s accessibility options.   It works wonders for me improving the boundary visibility between the two  darkest colours and unlike contrast editing a screenshot it works on live interactive things...

In reply to wintertree:

Works a treat, thanks!

In reply to Offwidth:

Anyone know what is happening in Rutland? Very odd little island of T2

In reply to Si dH:

Cheers.. yes I'm aware.... also a bit unstable on my Android tablet

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=ltla&areaName=He...

In reply to GrahamD:

Yes. A bit of a mixed story but again looking like an incautious choice.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases?areaType=ltla&areaName=Ru...

From boxing day it's an island of Tier 2 in a sea of higher restrictions, so another covidiot magnet.

In reply to GrahamD:

Fairly low population density, far enough away from major centres of outbreaks nearby, not yet (quite) been caught by the variant in significant numbers, so rates have held ok so far in tier 2. From that perspective it benefits from being its own UTLA - eg Melton just next door has a marginally higher infection rate at the moment but because it's part of the Leicestershire UTLA, restrictions are set commonly with the rest of the wider county. Rutland is dealt with separately. To be honest given proximity to Peterborough I don't think it'll last long as the variant spreads north in greater numbers.

In reply to Si dH:

Eden especially and also the Liverpool areas seem even more of an odd choice for staying Tier 2. Anyone have any idea why?

In reply to Offwidth:

Liverpool: because the government emphasised how well they had done in tackling the infection and the big positive impact their community testing so they wanted to reward them with tier two. I know folk who think it was the gov’t playing Liverpool and Manchester off each other but hope they haven’t  sunk so low. I also reckon the gov’t is praying like mad that schools and Xmas closures will keep infections down enough to get away with it. But cases have increased by 80 and 100% in week to 25th and a back log of people going for test after Boxing Day could make the figure worse. 
 

In reply to Offwidth:

The new variant has been identified as contributing to the increase in Eden (and Carlisle now)I don't think we'll be in tier 2 for long.

In reply to mick taylor:

It's worth noting that Liverpool has been running with about a third of cases coming from asymptomatic LFT in the last fully recorded week. On Christmas Eve (for obvious reasons) the Echo was reporting there were over 10000 LFT tests undertaken, 5 times the usual daily figure, with most testing cases very busy and some having to turn people away. The effect of that on testing figures will be interesting to see.

When the latest tiering updates were done I was disappointed we didn't get out in Tier 3 but it was true that while our rates were increasing, they were a weak behind Cheshire and Warrington along the exponential curve and the lower numbers probably have ministers more justification in their kinds to not put us back up. They are keen to portray Liverpool as a success story still so I wouldn't be surprised if we are held where senate until there is a further national lockdown.

Eden is a completely different case as it's only a single part of one UTLA (Cumbria) whereas Liverpool region is six UTLAs. In practice the policy has been made for Cumbria as a whole and some areas still have very low rates showing that Tier 2 is adequate for those areas pre variant.

In reply to Si dH:

Good explanation. Or perhaps there are loads of Liverpool, Everton and Carlisle footie fans sitting on the decision making panel fancying a live game

In reply to mick taylor:

My spelling and grammar isn't really that bad by the way, it's just my tablet! Damn autocorrect.

In reply to neilh:

No lockdowns in Taiwan, and you trust Chinese data? Are you only interested in pedalling untruths today Neil? https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanwpc/article/PIIS2666-6065(20)30044-4/...

I agree Taiwan is interesting, it has a working health data system of the centralised type which the NHS has utterly failed to implement due to internal incompetence and resistance to change. 

Isolation in Taiwan is also enforced by a surveillance regime which would be illegal in the UK and I don't think anyone sensible would be happy with their medical data being sent to their mobile network provider...

They have also implemented a top down, rapid fact checking service. Some might wonder if we would actually accept this in the UK given that similar systems implemented by companies have been used to suppress scientific debate and they are open to government interference to toe the party line.

What's most interesting is that they closed the borders and implemented screening early meaning they had very few initial cases. We successfully proved early on in the pandemic that we did not have testing capacity to do this, so it wasn't implemented. So we had many times the initial seed cases, many via other European countries. This similarity is shared by New Zealand. 

If anything your main point should be that early closure of borders is the key. I would like to see the political backlash if we had chosen to unilaterally do so when the WHO was still telling us that this disease was not transmissible between humans. I suspect that accusations of reactionary racism would have been justified. 

In reply to JohnBson:

Closing borders is totally insufficient if one single case escapes detection.  This is why NZ had a much earlier (exponentially speaking) and harder lockdown than the UK.  They emerged months sooner with a surging economy and without managing to breed or spread a more transmissible version of the virus.

The economic damage caused by the failure to close borders and lock down early in the UK is likely to get worse yet as we head for perhaps 1,000 deaths a day and healthcare overload by early January.  Who knows, perhaps this new variant will prove to be much less lethal and we’ll have lucked our way out of the predictable negative consequences of failing to contain the virus to a “safe” level.  

In reply to Offwidth:

It’s amazing how often The Guardian is quoted or linked to on this forum. It explains a lot of people’s views on here. 

In reply to rgd1977:

alternate view -  it allows linking to their site to read the content, whereas most other papers do not without a subscription.

In reply to Snyggapa:

More pertinent on this thread is that it has the publicly available clickable map, to look at local area covid stats,  that no other national newspaper has as far as I am aware. 

Worryingly the right wing of the mainstream press seem to be selling the tory backbench horse shit that lockdowns are evil (when in fact they are scientifically neccesary unless we want to switch to eugenics and leave a hundred thousand people to die at home) and happy to trumpet selective government leaks that we will be out of this covid mess by February (Boris and co seem to me the most incompetent government we have ever had and can barely tie their political shoe laces let alone perform scientific miracles).

Covid doesn't care about individual political opinions, it will kill and disable with full political equality. However it thrives on political stupidity.

From a very low base, 2 weeks back, Herefordshire (and even more so The Isle of Wight) is a victim of such dumb political optimism: cases per hundred thousand are due to overtake Manchester today on data from xmas eve (as for IoW). Cases are still more than doubling each week.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/27/coronavirus-uk-covid-cases-an...

In reply to Offwidth:

You appear to be working on a dodgy definition of eugenics.

In reply to timjones:

We had this discussion with Lord Ash. The only way a 'let it rip' strategy can happen without hopitals being overwhelmed is to leave everyone severely ill with covid to fight it at home with horrible suffering, and way higher death and disability rates. That's absolutely a eugenics approach (the diseased must be sacrificed for the good of the healthy). Leaving a large number of people at home to suffer with a much higher chance of death is also inevitable if hospitals become overwhelmed.

I said at the start of this thread Herefordshire would be lucky to avoid 200 cases per hundred thousand in the new year. Its almost certain the data today will show you hit that on xmas eve with over 100% growth in the preceding week. Data from 23rd is 198.

In reply to Offwidth:

You are reading too much into what I said.

You do you argument no favours when you twist language,. letting nature run its course is not eugenics.  Eugenics requires an active intervention.

Keeping the vulnerable alive at the expense of an entire population may even be closer on eugenics than allowing natural selection to run its course.

In reply to timjones:

Yes science, hospitals and medical ethics distort natural selection.

Eugenicists would argue let covid patients not be admitted to hospital to protect the wider population; it is better they die at home than wreck the hospital system functionality. Hundreds of thousands would die. Just how badly the population and infrastructure would respond under such circumstances are hard to predict (it would be very bad as a minimum). Such a view is incompatible with our science, medical system and our democracy.

Michael Hood copied this onto the Friday covid plotting 5 thread, on the situation in N London. Herefordshire health services will be two more weeks growth at over 100% from such a lethal disaster.

From a Frontline Junior Doctor:

PAY ATTENTION.

I'm writing this from the middle of one of the most ridiculous night shifts. I'm really trying to not be hyperbolic when I say this, but the health service, specifically north London hospitals, is past breaking point. I cannot fully explain how much trouble we are in.

All of our intensive care units are full. Barnet, Royal Free, UCLH, North Middlesex. All of our hospital beds are full. We have patients on the verge of death in A&E department because there's simply nowhere to put them if they need a ventilator. I'm not talking about the elderly and frail. I mean people in their 40s, 50s, 60s. We do not have the space in our hospitals nor the staff to look after any more patients. Not only covid patients, I mean anything.

Please don't mix with other households. Not even your families. Not your friends. Not your mum or your dad. Not even if "I only see them" or "they don't see anyone else". You may think people are being careful but the reality is there's no such thing. Any human contact will spread this virus, especially the new mutant strain.

People are complaining that cancer services and routine operations are being put on hold because of lockdown and covid. This is so patently ridiculous a complaint but I need to address it. Hospitals are so overwhelmed dealing with emergency care right now that it is impossible to deal with anything else. It's not only covid emergency care, it's everything. This is the direct result and the logical conclusion of allowing the virus to rampantly spread through out communities as we have done.

I'm sorry if this sounds preachy, but it needs to be said. We need to take more responsibility for our own health and that of the rest of our local communities. We need to do the right thing. That's all this comes down to - doing the right thing. Not seeing other people. Not going into other people's houses. Don't invite people over. Not even to the garden. If you must see people, do it two metres away with masks. Forget whatever rules the government has made for us - it's clear they have largely not been based on what needs to be done to drive down infections. Just act as if everyone you know has just tested positive and you need to avoid them like - quite literally - the plague.

In reply to Offwidth:

How can you believe that eugenics is only what you perceive as bad and doesn't include the "science, hospitals and medical ethics" that you acknowledge as means of distorting natural selection?

The further we distort that selection the greater the fallout will be when we finally encounter something that science can find no answer for.

In reply to Offwidth:

Getting into an argument over the precise definition for eugenics seems a bit pointless as they can't agree amongst themselves.  

"Disputes over these issues produced very different competing concepts of eugenics and its relationship to public health."

but at least some agree with your interpretation of how they would respond to the virus.

Many eugenicists regarded disease as nature's way of weeding out the unfit. Charles Davenport, America's foremost eugenic scientist, warned in 1915, "The artificial preservation of those whom the operation of natural agencies tends to eliminate ... may conceivably destroy the race." He considered it "anti-social" to "unduly restrict the operation of what is one of Nature's greatest racial blessings-death."

Leading eugenics popularizer Michael Guyer summarized the argument: "[O]ur improved methods of sanitation and care of the sick . . . so eased the rigors of ... natural selection that decadent stocks . . . are increasing relatively faster than normal stocks.

In reply to timjones:

Science has the answer for the current scenario where people won't behave well enough unconstrained, it's called a lockdown.

I wish you luck explaining to those who would have died young without medical science that they are nature distorting freaks. Personally I wouldn't have made my first day and my mum would have lost nearly 60 years of her life (and my siblings would never have existed).

In reply to rgd1977:

It might also explain why there is often informed, reasoned debate on here as opposed to, say, the comments section of Daily Mail articles which are frankly poisonous.

Yes, I read the Guardian because we both hold liberal viewpoints but also because I trust the journalism and it’s independently owned.

In reply to Offwidth:

Hold on a minute you are the only one that is calling anyone a freak!

You need to stop trying to put words into the mouths of people who are prepared to consider some difficult questions.

In reply to GrahamD:

It doesn't even have a MacDonalds, the barometer of urbanisation.

In reply to timjones:

I think fighting against dangerous philosophies like eugenics and 'nature being allowed to take its course' in human medicine is a lot more important than getting caught up on  the semantics of what people who support such ideas use to hide the inhumanity of them. Being told politely 'it's unfortunate but I don't think you should be alive because we shouldn't allow modern medicine to intervene' is a lot more seriously wrong than my self labelling as a freak (as I'm alive through modern medical intervention at my birth). Such arguments have been rare in my lifetime, mainly associated with religious cultists and the occasional highly marginalised philosophy. However they were mainsteam prior to WW2.

One of the most recent infamous scientific studies was Tuskegee which still influences black suspicion of US state medical intervention to this day. The lid blew in the 197Os when an individual scientist had enough and went to the press.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study

In reply to Offwidth:

Here's a plot from one of those anonymous data voyers - https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/off_belay/friday_night_covid_plotting_5-7...

Looks to me like Herefordshire has had one of the worst exponential growth rates over the last two weeks of data.  At times cases have doubled every 4 days which is quite an achievement for the whole-demographic.  

In reply to Luke90:

Exactly. By and large I'm trying to find ways to make aspects of the public data more visible - it can all be checked by the government dashboard, which has become a lot more full featured and granular since I started doing plots.  Someone can read off the 7-day rolling averages and see how many days it takes those to double to find a doubling time etc.  I'm all for encouraging others to look in to the data themselves if they're interested.

If there's anything you think I'm doing that's opaque and of interest, just ask and I'll explain; I tend not to explain every last bit as I already bang on enough.  I tend to do more than I show to convince myself that filtering or measurement methods aren't introducing biases due to the 7-day periodicity in some data etc.

In reply to wintertree:

I'd be interested to know what happened in Herefordshire around xmas... strong exponential growth just suddenly stopped and case levels hit a plateau in the high 180s per hundred thousand. Up a bit now at Manchester levels and over 200 (for data from Dec 28th). Zooming in on the gov map the main problem area is NE Hereford with cases over 500.

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map

In reply to Offwidth:

The cases data is pretty hard to interpret in any detail right now and 7-day averages (or sums) all all over the place.  A 5-day low in sampling over the christmass long weekend and the mother of all spikes developing on the 29th.  I’m working on a “shunt” to redistribute the spike to better reveal the underlying time series and not bias analyses so badly; the prototype should be posted in plotting thread #6 tomorrow.  I don’t think however that it will be reasonable to apply it below a regional level.