Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[Swango1980]

the target that was set by the PM was 100,000 people tested every day from the end of April. It still hasn't been achieved - yesterday's figure was 60.410.

Can Wuhan test 11m people in a week? Seems massively ambitious, I'm guessing they are going to forcibly test everyone. I have as much faith in the stats coming out of China as I do in those coming out of the UK. We are still pretending the total number dead is 32,000 when even the FT is saying it's nearer 55k.

You get all your news from Piers Morgan then. That is a flaw in itself.

Matt Hancock repeatedly said "tests", not "people". However, it is easy to go through a months worth of footage and reported text to find opposing wording to suit your perspective. Whether you think they did 100,000 tests or not, it was an ambitious target, which was a good thing to set. Also, it is interesting that when 122,000 was reported, then the likes of Piers seemed to imply that only tests in hospital count, conducted by the NHS (yet he doesn't same same about deaths)

There is absolutely NO cover up with deaths. Not an ounce. We are continually told that many deaths are not immediately reported, or the cause of death known. So, hospital deaths were used as they were immediately up to date. As time went on, they were able to improve reporting techniques, so they could report community deaths. However, the cause is still not crystal clear in a proportion of these. The government and their advisors have constantly caveated their presentation with this point. Yet, some still just don't get it, and then try to compare us to other countries as if it is some sort of league table. Yet, when you do this, horrifically fail to realise the countries you are comparing us to have the same weaknesses in reported deaths. And that is just the outputs. Every country has it's own individual circumstances, and inputs as to why the virus hits hard or not. Yet, because people can't bully geography, or historic government decisions, or ourselves, or how our economy works, they feel they have to blame the government solely responsible.

 

[ColchesterFC]

60k? Thought it was 85k and according to this link to the slides shown it was...



https://assets.publishing.service.g...5-12_COVID-19_Press_Conference_Slides__7_.pdf

Think was 85k tests on 60k people. So for simplicity 25k people had to have a second test for some reason.

 

[rudebhoy]

Think was 85k tests on 60k people. So for simplicity 25k people had to have a second test for some reason.

nope, it includes tests posted out, see below from the daily gov.uk update

Tests sent to individual at home or to satellite testing locations
These are counted when tests are dispatched and not at the time of processing in the laboratory.

 

[AmandaJR]

Do we know if 100,000 requested a test in person and couldn't be accommodated? Serious question because you can't test if people don't request one...

 

[ColchesterFC]

nope, it includes tests posted out, see below from the daily gov.uk update

Tests sent to individual at home or to satellite testing locations
These are counted when tests are dispatched and not at the time of processing in the laboratory.

Not according to BBC News website that says that "some people required a second test". The test kits posted out are included in the 85k as a completed test.

Can't link to the story from my phone but if you Google "UK government Corona virus tests stats explained" the story will come up.

 

[SocketRocket]

85k is the so-called number of tests, which includes test kits posted out.

if you look here, you will see the actual number of people tested was 60k.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-information-for-the-public

Johnson's pledge on 5th April was to test 100k people every day from the end of the month.

So rather than keep repeating your condemnation what do you think the logistical reason is for the tests not being achieved and what could be done to increase them.

 

[Swango1980]

Do we know if 100,000 requested a test in person and couldn't be accommodated? Serious question because you can't test if people don't request one...

It's a great question. If the virus is now very rare in the community, stands to reason that many might not be requesting one. If that is the case, then perhaps they'll start testing people that feel perfectly healthy, such as care workers and NHS staff and maybe other professions that require it. But, that doesn't happen overnight. They'd need to give it some time to decide whether it is safe to do that, rather than just hitting a temporary trough, and then work out the logistics of it.

It will be interesting what happens when they finally get the reliable antibody tests. I wonder if there will be a sudden surge in tests, as they will be wanting to spread these throughout the community to get a better idea on the actual number of people that have had it.

 

[rudebhoy]

You get all your news from Piers Morgan then. That is a flaw in itself.

Matt Hancock repeatedly said "tests", not "people". However, it is easy to go through a months worth of footage and reported text to find opposing wording to suit your perspective. Whether you think they did 100,000 tests or not, it was an ambitious target, which was a good thing to set. Also, it is interesting that when 122,000 was reported, then the likes of Piers seemed to imply that only tests in hospital count, conducted by the NHS (yet he doesn't same same about deaths)

There is absolutely NO cover up with deaths. Not an ounce. We are continually told that many deaths are not immediately reported, or the cause of death known. So, hospital deaths were used as they were immediately up to date. As time went on, they were able to improve reporting techniques, so they could report community deaths. However, the cause is still not crystal clear in a proportion of these. The government and their advisors have constantly caveated their presentation with this point. Yet, some still just don't get it, and then try to compare us to other countries as if it is some sort of league table. Yet, when you do this, horrifically fail to realise the countries you are comparing us to have the same weaknesses in reported deaths. And that is just the outputs. Every country has it's own individual circumstances, and inputs as to why the virus hits hard or not. Yet, because people can't bully geography, or historic government decisions, or ourselves, or how our economy works, they feel they have to blame the government solely responsible.

I don't watch GMB, but just because Morgan is saying it doesn't make it wrong.

Johnson said on Twitter on 5th April that the target was to test 100k people every day. It wasn't an off the cuff remark. The wording started to change subtly in the middle of the month when it was clear we were struggling to get close to that figure.

But putting semantics aside, be honest - if I said to you that I was going to carry out 100k tests, then when it got to target day, I claimed to have reached the target by counting 37k tests I had put in the post that day, would you really believe i had delivered on my word?


On the number of deaths, I didn't compare us with anyone else, and have said on here previously that comparisons are useless.

However, just looking at this country, The Office for National Statistics said on Tuesday that 35,044 deaths involving Covid-19 were registered in England and Wales up to 9 May. Adding the latest figures for Scotland and Northern Ireland and more up to date fatalities from the four nations , the total official UK death toll now stands at 40,496.

The FT estimates it is nearer 55k, but if even the ONS are saying it's now over 40k, why is the govt persisting with the figure of 32k?

 

[rudebhoy]

Not according to BBC News website that says that "some people required a second test". The test kits posted out are included in the 85k as a completed test.

Can't link to the story from my phone but if you Google "UK government Corona virus tests stats explained" the story will come up.

I'm sure there are some 2nd tests, but given the majority are sent to a lab, how many of them are done on the same day as the 1st test?

It would be useful if they gave us a figure for the number of 2nd tests carried out on the same day as the 1st test, and also a figure for the number posted out every day.

 

[AmandaJR]

I don't watch GMB, but just because Morgan is saying it doesn't make it wrong.

Johnson said on Twitter on 5th April that the target was to test 100k people every day. It wasn't an off the cuff remark. The wording started to change subtly in the middle of the month when it was clear we were struggling to get close to that figure.

But putting semantics aside, be honest - if I said to you that I was going to carry out 100k tests, then when it got to target day, I claimed to have reached the target by counting 37k tests I had put in the post that day, would you really believe i had delivered on my word?


On the number of deaths, I didn't compare us with anyone else, and have said on here previously that comparisons are useless.

However, just looking at this country, The Office for National Statistics said on Tuesday that 35,044 deaths involving Covid-19 were registered in England and Wales up to 9 May. Adding the latest figures for Scotland and Northern Ireland and more up to date fatalities from the four nations , the total official UK death toll now stands at 40,496.

The FT estimates it is nearer 55k, but if even the ONS are saying it's now over 40k, why is the govt persisting with the figure of 32k?

Are you not implying it's unacceptable to be less than 100% accurate on testing numbers but would be acceptable to be less than 100% accurate on number of deaths?

The 32000 is confirmed deaths with Covid rather than suspected?

 

[rudebhoy]

So rather than keep repeating your condemnation what do you think the logistical reason is for the tests not being achieved and what could be done to increase them.

test front line workers far more frequently and make the tests more widely available for those in care homes.

 

[rudebhoy]

Are you not implying it's unacceptable to be less than 100% accurate on testing numbers but would be acceptable to be less than 100% accurate on number of deaths?

The 32000 is confirmed deaths with Covid rather than suspected?

The term the ONS use is "deaths involving coronavirus"

 

[Swango1980]

I don't watch GMB, but just because Morgan is saying it doesn't make it wrong.

Johnson said on Twitter on 5th April that the target was to test 100k people every day. It wasn't an off the cuff remark. The wording started to change subtly in the middle of the month when it was clear we were struggling to get close to that figure.

But putting semantics aside, be honest - if I said to you that I was going to carry out 100k tests, then when it got to target day, I claimed to have reached the target by counting 37k tests I had put in the post that day, would you really believe i had delivered on my word?


On the number of deaths, I didn't compare us with anyone else, and have said on here previously that comparisons are useless.

However, just looking at this country, The Office for National Statistics said on Tuesday that 35,044 deaths involving Covid-19 were registered in England and Wales up to 9 May. Adding the latest figures for Scotland and Northern Ireland and more up to date fatalities from the four nations , the total official UK death toll now stands at 40,496.

The FT estimates it is nearer 55k, but if even the ONS are saying it's now over 40k, why is the govt persisting with the figure of 32k?

Johnson also said they'd do 250,000 tests a day, but as he didn't set a time limit, he hasn't been nearly as pressed.

Does it surprise me the tests suddenly ramped up? No. Because ramping up to a certain value is often not linear. The initial stages in the process are getting the facilities and and logistics ready, before they turn them on closer to the final date. If I told you I was going to increase the capacity of my local tesco from 1000 people a day to 20,000 a day in a month, it is likely it will stay at 1,000 a day until that final day, when I open the doors.

In terms of comparing certain death figures, I do not have an exact answer. But, I'm guessing it is likely to do with how up to date these figures are when reporting on a daily basis, or to do with working out whether Covid was a primary reason for death, or it was only very much a background issue in someone that was already incredibly ill. Either way, I absolutely do not accept the government are hiding anything. The fact that you can even debate alternative figures proves that. I'd imagine the UK is one of the most open countries in the world in terms of the information the public can get.

 

[SocketRocket]

I don't watch GMB, but just because Morgan is saying it doesn't make it wrong.

Johnson said on Twitter on 5th April that the target was to test 100k people every day. It wasn't an off the cuff remark. The wording started to change subtly in the middle of the month when it was clear we were struggling to get close to that figure.

But putting semantics aside, be honest - if I said to you that I was going to carry out 100k tests, then when it got to target day, I claimed to have reached the target by counting 37k tests I had put in the post that day, would you really believe i had delivered on my word?


On the number of deaths, I didn't compare us with anyone else, and have said on here previously that comparisons are useless.

However, just looking at this country, The Office for National Statistics said on Tuesday that 35,044 deaths involving Covid-19 were registered in England and Wales up to 9 May. Adding the latest figures for Scotland and Northern Ireland and more up to date fatalities from the four nations , the total official UK death toll now stands at 40,496.

The FT estimates it is nearer 55k, but if even the ONS are saying it's now over 40k, why is the govt persisting with the figure of 32k?

You are making yourself sound unhinged and rabid in your anti Tory rhetoric. It's ok to question why the government's target wasn't met but you're like a dog shaking a rag doll. The Government set a target but it's the technicians, labs, suppliers etc that have to set it all up and things can go wrong. Please try and get a little balance as it's now become boring.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Do we know if 100,000 requested a test in person and couldn't be accommodated? Serious question because you can't test if people don't request one...

It's a great question. If the virus is now very rare in the community, stands to reason that many might not be requesting one. If that is the case, then perhaps they'll start testing people that feel perfectly healthy, such as care workers and NHS staff and maybe other professions that require it. But, that doesn't happen overnight. They'd need to give it some time to decide whether it is safe to do that, rather than just hitting a temporary trough, and then work out the logistics of it.

It will be interesting what happens when they finally get the reliable antibody tests. I wonder if there will be a sudden surge in tests, as they will be wanting to spread these throughout the community to get a better idea on the actual number of people that have had it.

I've had this discussion with my wife. It is a very logical question and more relevant than the straight up how many were tested today question.

Swango, massively agree about the antibody test. I'd be all over that, would definitely request one. When that gets rolled out we will get a much better picture of where we stand.

 

[rudebhoy]

You are making yourself sound unhinged and rabid in your anti Tory rhetoric. It's ok to question why the government's target wasn't met but you're like a dog shaking a rag doll. The Government set a target but it's the technicians, labs, suppliers etc that have to set it all up and things can go wrong. Please try and get a little balance as it's now become boring.

'Unhinged"? That's a good one!

I'm not questioning why the target wasn't met, I'm raising the issue of why they are massaging the figures on a daily basis to make it look like they are doing more tests than they actually are.

I haven't mentioned the subject for a while, and wouldn't have if someone hadn't quoted the massaged 85k figure from yesterday.

Sorry if it's boring you, feel free to put me on ignore.

 

[drdel]

Strange that because ICU capacity now exceeds demand that's a good thing.

But having test capacity above current demand is bad.

The test capacity has to be planned in anticipation of the track and trace initiative raising demand.

 

[rudebhoy]

Strange that because ICU capacity now exceeds demand that's a good thing.

But having test capacity above current demand is bad.

The test capacity has to be planned in anticipation of the track and trace initiative raising demand.

who said having a test capacity that exceeds demand is bad? I haven't seen anyone saying that.

 

[drdel]

who said having a test capacity that exceeds demand is bad? I haven't seen anyone saying that.

Except for the moans that we've only tested 85,000 and 'should' be testing 100,000+.

 

[Old Skier]

Nah - the ones who phone in and almost ’to a man’ tell him that they are a great fan of his; how fabulous he is; how grateful they are for all he did towards getting us out of the EU; and often how disgraceful it is he hadn’t been honoured and that they wish he was PM. They are actually fans.

Not a fan but still listen, there's a word for that but as I don't fancy teach picking up my spelling I won't use it. Or is it something else you listen to and then spend the next hour moaning about it on a forum that on many occasions have shown the dislike of the man.