SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

Pexbo said:
So on Sunday, my Girlfriend’s manager’s son was at the house of a boy who has since tested positive. My girlfriend was in the (COVID ”safe”) office with her on Monday. Now according to government rules, we don’t need to isolate unless we have symptoms but what’s everyone’s thoughts here on the ethical decision for us?
Click to expand...

In Ireland you wouldn’t be expected to isolate either. I wouldn’t judge you if you cracked on as normal.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
In Ireland you wouldn’t be expected to isolate either. I wouldn’t judge you if you cracked on as normal.
Click to expand...

Yeah that’s the government advice designed to keep the country moving, but what do you think the actual risk is? How effective really is dividing screens, social distancing and hand sanitiser and how quickly can people become spreaders?
 
Sweet Square said:
It might be worth another thread as it will derail this one but just quickly imo the covid response from Britain is the end result of decades of thatcherism.

Had Labour won the last election(They basically wanted to update Britain to a similar level of the Germans)we would have maybe seen a slightly less shit result because the reality is the British state simply doesn't have the required tools no matter who's in charge to deal with a pandemic like covid.

Decades of stripping back the social contract, destroying collective power, building an economy based on assets prices and cheap service labour all to be managed by coked up inbred eton cartoons is going to produce some awful results.
Click to expand...

I think you're over thinking it somewhat. It can be easily linked to exercise Cygnus back in 2016, if they had implemented the recommendations then we wouldn't be in the situation we find ourselves now.
 
Last edited:
Pexbo said:
So on Sunday, my Girlfriend’s manager’s son was at the house of a boy who has since tested positive. My girlfriend was in the (COVID ”safe”) office with her on Monday. Now according to government rules, we don’t need to isolate unless we have symptoms but what’s everyone’s thoughts here on the ethical decision for us?
Click to expand...
Carry on as normal. Your girlfriend hasn't been in contact with anyone who has tested positive.

Also if the boy got sick on Sunday it is virtually impossible that manager got sick by Monday and infected someone on Monday, it takes more time, one doesn't become infectious immediately.
 
When talking about this virus some people love to play the role of grim reaper. I don't know why, but they seem to revel in putting as negative spin possible on every bit of news relating to it.

See some news that's a cause for optimism? Don't worry, they soon pop up to tell you why that news is wrong and actually we're all going to die.
 
Dr. Chris Martenson criticizing British govt for claiming that the chance of a false positive is very small. The current test used in England has a claimed specificity of 99% (though one study suggests 95% real world specificity), but with 18.9 million tested that's 189,000 false positives. Out of 230,000 daily tests you would get 2,300 daily false positives.

 
Beans said:
Dr. Chris Martenson criticizing British govt for claiming that the chance of a false positive is very small. The current test used in England has a claimed specificity of 99% (though one study suggests 95% real world specificity), but with 18.9 million tested that's 189,000 false positives. Out of 230,000 daily tests you would get 2,300 daily false positives.

Click to expand...


All the pissing and moaning about false positives is infuriating. Yes, there will be false positives. But that doesn’t make a steady increase in total cases any less important. And the people starting to fill up hospitals and ICUs sure as shit aren’t false positives.

The other thing these gimps never bring up are false negatives. And false negatives are liable to be just as big an issue, as its really important to time the test right if you want to be confident a negative result is reliable. As the testing delays build up we’re going to get more and more false negatives.
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
All the pissing and moaning about false positives is infuriating. Yes, there will be false positives. But that doesn’t make a steady increase in total cases any less important. And the people starting to fill up hospitals and ICUs sure as shit aren’t false positives.

The other thing these gimps never bring up are false negatives. And false negatives are liable to be just as big an issue, as its really important to time the test right if you want to be confident a negative result is reliable. As the testing delays build up we’re going to get more and more false negatives.
Click to expand...
He brings up false negatives. But he's done dozens of hours of coverage, he's especially looking for misconceptions. He's been saying it's very serious from the beginning. But if up to half your daily positives are false I think that's worth knowing.
 
SiRed said:
I have been tossing ideas around regarding conspiracies in my moments of madness and what i conclude is that if I were a world leader, looking to assert control around the world or looking at having 80% of the globe microchipped. Then i would probably make a virus. A virus that nobody has ever known. That is super contagious. A virus that infects immediately but doesn't give any clues for 2 weeks, giving you plenty of time to pass it around.

I would then strike fear into every single living person by exaggerating its effects. Forcing everyone to stay inside. I would massage the stats to cause more devastation and demand for a vaccine.

Whilst all this goes on i have my best scientists inventing a LIQUID microchip that we can disguise within a vaccine.

After 15 months of hell on earth, these clowns (me included) are so fed up and just want a return to the norm, they all queue up for what they believe is just a simple vaccine..... Little do they know, that as a world leader, i now have everyone microchipped. Everyone under surveillance and nobody is aware.
Click to expand...

Weren't you the poster who suggested that schools are plotting to turn kids gay/trans to control population?
 
I read somewhere yesterday a stat that if true might help explain a few things. It was that just 18% of those in the UK who had tested postive or were awaiting a test result had self isolated. I might have the details slightly wrong here but interested to hear if anyone else read this.
 
Stack said:
I read somewhere yesterday a stat that if true might help explain a few things. It was that just 18% of those in the UK who had tested postive or were awaiting a test result had self isolated. I might have the details slightly wrong here but interested to hear if anyone else read this.
Click to expand...
It’s at the top of the page in a tweet.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Herd immunity is a much abused phrase and a red herring when it comes to Sweden (an appropriate fish for Sweden, right?) Where they are likely to have an advantage over a lot of other countries in the next couple of years is in having a refined approach to getting on with as normal a life as possible while living with the virus. Plus the higher the % of people exposed the easier it is to put a lid on each outbreak. This isn’t about getting to 70-80% exposure and your problems suddenly go away. It’s a gradual process with each person that recovers acting as a fire break and the more fire breaks the better.

Now obviously if reinfection happens quickly or frequently that torpedoes this strategy. But it also puts a huge hole below the waterline of any strategy reliant on eradication.
Click to expand...

HIT is the aim if you want to return to normal and live with the virus because the alternative is that the old, immune compromised and others who can't be vaccinated for whatever reason will continue to suffer. Of course any natural immunity helps keep the Re down on top of other things like social distancing but you have to get at the very least close to HIT to even return t a new normal IMO. Eradication probably isn't going to happen as many people aren't rational when it comes to vaccination as shown by the return of previously almost eradicated diseases like measles. I'm also hoping that the seemingly stronger immune reaction to the vaccines as compared to the actual infection will help us get to HIT in most countries. It will be interesting to see what happens. Australia is providing everyone with a free vaccine if/when it arrives and originally said it would be compulsory but then backed away from that quickly. Who knows with our bunch of evil Federal clowns (think of Boris only with an evangelical talking in tongues addition) but I could see heavy encouragement to vaccinate including potentially restricting access to childcare, school or social security/tax benefits as a stick.

The US will be a shit show and I'd guess that they will be lucky to get 30% take-up. What do you think about the take-up in UK and Ireland and/or their governments attitude to how they will encourage people to get it?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
All the pissing and moaning about false positives is infuriating. Yes, there will be false positives. But that doesn’t make a steady increase in total cases any less important. And the people starting to fill up hospitals and ICUs sure as shit aren’t false positives.

The other thing these gimps never bring up are false negatives. And false negatives are liable to be just as big an issue, as its really important to time the test right if you want to be confident a negative result is reliable. As the testing delays build up we’re going to get more and more false negatives.
Click to expand...

I'd have thought false negatives are worse in that they can continue infecting people? And as you say the increase in hospitalisation isn't a figment of the imagination.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Herd immunity is a much abused phrase and a red herring when it comes to Sweden (an appropriate fish for Sweden, right?) Where they are likely to have an advantage over a lot of other countries in the next couple of years is in having a refined approach to getting on with as normal a life as possible while living with the virus. Plus the higher the % of people exposed the easier it is to put a lid on each outbreak. This isn’t about getting to 70-80% exposure and your problems suddenly go away. It’s a gradual process with each person that recovers acting as a fire break and the more fire breaks the better.

Now obviously if reinfection happens quickly or frequently that torpedoes this strategy. But it also puts a huge hole below the waterline of any strategy reliant on eradication.
Click to expand...

I am confused about something. Sweden has 6000 deaths with a population of 10 million. Assuming 1% IFR would imply 5% of the population have been infected which is too low to enter the herd immunity debate. Why has Sweden become synonymous with herd immunity in the public sphere? It seems to be too early for anyone to be calling their strategy the reason for low infection levels today..

My city has 3000 deaths from a population of 8 million. It is not hugely dissimilar to Sweden in Covid stats.
 
zing said:
I am confused about something. Sweden has 6000 deaths with a population of 10 million. Assuming 1% IFR would imply 5% of the population have been infected which is too low to enter the herd immunity debate. Why has Sweden become synonymous with herd immunity in the public sphere? It seems to be too early for anyone to be calling their strategy the reason for low infection levels today..

My city has 3000 deaths from a population of 8 million. It is not hugely dissimilar to Sweden in Covid stats.
Click to expand...

However many infections they have had they are nowhere near HIT. Any suggestion that they are is delusional.

I am still a bit surprised that Sweden is held out as a success story when their death rate per 100k of population is close to that of the UK and their GDP has contracted more than their neighbors and more than Australia (7% vs 8.3% GDP prop and a death rate nearly 17 times worse) who took a very different health based approach. The only way I can see that Sweden will be a "success" is if we don't get a vaccine at all and then they would be 5-10% ahead of countries like Australia, NZ and Taiwan on the very painful and rocky road to eventually/maybe getting herd immunity by natural infection.
 
Last edited:
The “success” has been managing the virus in a calm manner whilst not having to resort to methods you’d associate with an authoritarian regime. I thought that much was obvious by now.
No-one anywhere is claiming they are a “success” across the board.
A democracy like Australia acting like a communist state yet having a death toll 34 times higher than their neighbour NZ certainly aint a success, so what really constitutes “success“ in a pandemic?
 
Last edited:
@Pogue Mahone

I'm ignorant on the subject of comparative testing, for example between the UK and Germany. The figures show the UK has 337k tests per 1m people (largest of any country with a population over 10m), whereas Germany has 187k.

How can the UK be testing nearly twice the volume per capita but at the same time it seems to be hugely problematic whereas Germany seems to be doing well and is hailed?
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
The “success” has been managing the virus in a calm manner whilst not having to resort to methods you’d associate with an authoritarian regime. I thought that much was obvious by now.
A democracy like Australia acting like a communist state yet having a death toll 34 times higher than their neighbour NZ certainly aint a success, so what really constitutes “success“ in a pandemic?
Click to expand...

I think no one really knows the truth of what 'success' looks like till this whole thing fully plays out. It's just strange of you to be so dogmatic on a topic on which no one knows the quantitative truth of balancing death, lockdowns and economic impact. A lack of a lockdown does not automatically translate into economic growth as people's behaviours are still affected by the pandemic. Without a much longer term view, none of us know what the better strategy would have been.
 
finneh said:
@Pogue Mahone

I'm ignorant on the subject of comparative testing, for example between the UK and Germany. The figures show the UK has 337k tests per 1m people (largest of any country with a population over 10m), whereas Germany has 187k.

How can the UK be testing nearly twice the volume per capita but at the same time it seems to be hugely problematic whereas Germany seems to be doing well and is hailed?
Click to expand...

I’m really confused by that too. As per a tweet higher up the page, Germany has set up walk-in testing centres at train stations where the staff encourage commuters to have a test if they can spare the time. No queues. Results on the same day, via the covid app everyone has on their phone. Meanwhile in the Uk people are being asked to drive hours from their home because the testing system is so overwhelmed.

Mind you, the UK has twice as many cases per capita than Germany. So maybe it’s doing so many more tests because it has to? And it’s possible/likely that there are more than twice as many cases per capita, as we know they could/should be testing even more than they are (6 times as many deaths/million than Germany)
 
Last edited:
Pogue Mahone said:
I’m really confused by that too. As per a tweet higher up the page, Germany has set up walk-in testing centres at train stations where the staff encourage commuters to have a test if they can spare the time. No queues. Results on the same day, via the covid app everyone has on their phone. Meanwhile in the Uk people are being asked to drive hours from their home because the testing system is so overwhelmed.

Mind you, the UK has twice as many cases per capita than Germany. So maybe it’s doing so many more tests because it has to? And it’s possible/likely that there are more than twice as many cases per capita, as we know they could/should be testing even more than they are.
Click to expand...

This is true but is only a recent development. 2-3 weeks ago for example both countries were at around 2000 cases per day with the UK having a greater number of daily tests.

I wonder whether to a degree it plays into the study that showed the UK populace as one of the most fearful of the virus? The more terrified a country is the more I could see the population wanting to be tested for the mildest of symptoms or even wanting to be tested simply because a contact is showing mild symptoms.

It would be interesting if countries monitored how many tests were being requested on a daily basis. For example whether at a similar level of community infection whether 1% of the UK population were requesting a test every day vs 0.2% of the German/Swedish etc population (the latter less than half the tests per capita).

If that were the case then it would be somewhat obvious that Germans or Swedes would be in a position to get tested on demand, whereas in the UK it would be more challenging.
 
France posted 16k cases and 52 deaths yesterday. Spain still around 10k per day with over 700 deaths in the last 7 seven days, so 100 deaths a day on average.
 
finneh said:
This is true but is only a recent development. 2-3 weeks ago for example both countries were at around 2000 cases per day with the UK having a greater number of daily tests.

I wonder whether to a degree it plays into the study that showed the UK populace as one of the most fearful of the virus? The more terrified a country is the more I could see the population wanting to be tested for the mildest of symptoms or even wanting to be tested simply because a contact is showing mild symptoms.

It would be interesting if countries monitored how many tests were being requested on a daily basis. For example whether at a similar level of community infection whether 1% of the UK population were requesting a test every day vs 0.2% of the German/Swedish etc population (the latter less than half the tests per capita).

If that were the case then it would be somewhat obvious that Germans or Swedes would be in a position to get tested on demand, whereas in the UK it would be more challenging.
Click to expand...

You could get a test same day from numerous locations where I am (Greater Manchester) until it started kicking off again a couple of weeks ago.
 
finneh said:
This is true but is only a recent development. 2-3 weeks ago for example both countries were at around 2000 cases per day with the UK having a greater number of daily tests.

I wonder whether to a degree it plays into the study that showed the UK populace as one of the most fearful of the virus? The more terrified a country is the more I could see the population wanting to be tested for the mildest of symptoms or even wanting to be tested simply because a contact is showing mild symptoms.

It would be interesting if countries monitored how many tests were being requested on a daily basis. For example whether at a similar level of community infection whether 1% of the UK population were requesting a test every day vs 0.2% of the German/Swedish etc population (the latter less than half the tests per capita).

If that were the case then it would be somewhat obvious that Germans or Swedes would be in a position to get tested on demand, whereas in the UK it would be more challenging.
Click to expand...

The stats don’t back up your fearful population theory at all. If the Uk was over-testing it would have a tiny % of positive results. Instead they’re considerably higher than Germany.

Combine this with the data published yesterday, showing 18% compliance with quarantine and 11% compliance with self-isolation after positive test (might have got those figures the wrong way round) and it looks like the UK population have been behaving in a way that is literally the exact opposite of what you’re claiming. They’ve not been fearful and compliant, they’ve been blasé and reckless. And they’re paying the price.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
You could get a test same day from numerous locations where I am (Greater Manchester) until it started kicking off again a couple of weeks ago.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt that there's also an element of "postcode lottery" in fairness. There's also the disparity between tests sent out and tests processed. I was sent a random test for example which I carried out but it was never collected. I went online for the tracking info and Hermes said it was collected (it wasn't). That must have happened to thousands of tests that were completely wasted.

Still though even a couple of weeks ago cases were relatively low (c. 3000 a day) and you'd think it would be relatively easy to distribute them by regional cases level. Therefore whilst manufacturing more tests than any other nation (over 10m population) you wouldn't expect to see shortages even now. Yesterday I believe just under 300,000 tests were administered with 6000 positive cases. That means 2% of people being tested were carrying the virus; I'd expect that number to be quite a bit higher, given you assume the tests are focused to a good degree on symptomatic people.

Pogue Mahone said:
The stats don’t back up your fearful population theory at all. If the Uk was over-testing it would have a tiny % of positive results. Instead they’re considerably higher than Germany.

Combine this with the data published yesterday, showing 18% compliance with quarantine and 11% compliance with self-isolation after positive test (might have got those figures the wrong way round) and it looks like the UK population have been behaving in a way that is literally the exact opposite of what you’re claiming. They’ve not been fearful and compliant, they’ve been blasé and reckless. And they’re paying the price.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the UK is overtesting; but possibly not focusing tests on the people who should be being tested (as above 98% of tests were negative).

In terms of the self-isolation data is that not more an indication that people are exceptionally fatigued by the rules implemented over the past 6 months? Is it a contradiction to say that people are scared but they're also at mental breaking point (would also be interesting for that data to be broken down by age range)
 
Last edited:
finneh said:
I don't doubt that there's also an element of "postcode lottery" in fairness. There's also the disparity between tests sent out and tests processed. I was sent a random test for example which I carried out but it was never collected. I went online for the tracking info and Hermes said it was collected (it wasn't). That must have happened to thousands of tests that were completely wasted.

Still though even a couple of weeks ago cases were relatively low (c. 3000 a day) and you'd think it would be relatively easy to distribute them by regional cases level. Therefore whilst manufacturing more tests than any other nation (over 10m population) you wouldn't expect to see shortages even now. Yesterday I believe just under 300,000 tests were administered with 6000 positive cases. That means 2% of people being tested were carrying the virus; I'd expect that number to be quite a bit higher, given you assume the tests are focused to a good degree on symptomatic people.
Click to expand...

The tests are definitely already being redistributed secondary to need (we have less testing in London at the moment for example, as the hotspots have moved north) and this may present a problem as the increase in cases becomes more nationwide again.

But I think you're pointing out some of thr problems with taking the figures at face value yourself. You were sent a test which the government are probably counting as a 'processed test' but is either sitting somewhere in your home or in a landfill somewhere now. I wonder how

What the above means by the way in real terms in some hospitals in London is that swabs which previously came back within a few hours, at the very max 24 hours are often now taking much longer, sometimes 2-3 days. This is an unacceptable delay in the acute setting where we have to make decisions based on side rooms and isolation/cohorting etc.

I can't help but feel that the government have messed up the time window they had to get this right the second time round.
 
finneh said:
I don't doubt that there's also an element of "postcode lottery" in fairness. There's also the disparity between tests sent out and tests processed. I was sent a random test for example which I carried out but it was never collected. I went online for the tracking info and Hermes said it was collected (it wasn't). That must have happened to thousands of tests that were completely wasted.

Still though even a couple of weeks ago cases were relatively low (c. 3000 a day) and you'd think it would be relatively easy to distribute them by regional cases level. Therefore whilst manufacturing more tests than any other nation (over 10m population) you wouldn't expect to see shortages even now. Yesterday I believe just under 300,000 tests were administered with 6000 positive cases. That means 2% of people being tested were carrying the virus; I'd expect that number to be quite a bit higher, given you assume the tests are focused to a good degree on symptomatic people.
Click to expand...

In my opinion and it's the same opinion as Andy Burnham (mayor of GM) the big problem with testing is how centralised many aspects of it are. Burnham has been calling for autonomy for GM through track and trace etc. Too many aspects of the system have to be signed off by Westminster (Cummings himself people speculate) and it's causing massive inefficiency because the scale required is too big. Germany is divided into 16 federal states with lots of devolved power so each state can run it's own testing system catering to the specific needs of their populations.
 
finneh said:
I don't doubt that there's also an element of "postcode lottery" in fairness. There's also the disparity between tests sent out and tests processed. I was sent a random test for example which I carried out but it was never collected. I went online for the tracking info and Hermes said it was collected (it wasn't). That must have happened to thousands of tests that were completely wasted.

Still though even a couple of weeks ago cases were relatively low (c. 3000 a day) and you'd think it would be relatively easy to distribute them by regional cases level. Therefore whilst manufacturing more tests than any other nation (over 10m population) you wouldn't expect to see shortages even now. Yesterday I believe just under 300,000 tests were administered with 6000 positive cases. That means 2% of people being tested were carrying the virus; I'd expect that number to be quite a bit higher, given you assume the tests are focused to a good degree on symptomatic people.



I'm not saying the UK is overtesting; but possibly not focusing tests on the people who should be being tested (as above 98% of tests were negative).

In terms of the self-isolation data is that not more an indication that people are exceptionally fatigued by the rules implemented over the past 6 months? Is it a contradiction to say that people are scared but they're also at mental breaking point (would also be interesting for that data to be broken down by age range)
Click to expand...

Positivity rate in UK is currently 2.5%. It should ideally be less than half that. Currently <1% in Germany. So we can categorically say that the UK population is not getting too many tests.

You’re moving the goal posts re compliance. You were initially implying that the UK population was/is uniquely over-compliant. Now you’re saying they were over-compliant during lockdown and this has caused a uniquely dramatic rebound phenomenon of under-compliance. This makes no sense. Almost every European country went through a lockdown. Many of them considerably more strict than in the UK. Almost of these countries are experiencing a second wave. If there is a rebound happening it’s not unique to the UK. I do think the second wave is being driven by people being too hasty to return to normality but this is clearly a global phenomenon and the degree of compliance will vary from country to country - due to cultural differences and varying clarity of messaging from their government - but will be consistent throughout the pandemic.

I do think that the Dominic Cumming factor might be behind a mass throwing up of hands and subsequent lack of compliance in the Uk. Which would be unique. But that’s just a theory. Very difficult to find any evidence.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
In my opinion and it's the same opinion as Andy Burnham (mayor of GM) the big problem with testing is how centralised many aspects of it are. Burnham has been calling for autonomy for GM through track and trace etc. Too many aspects of the system have to be signed off by Westminster (Cummings himself people speculate) and it's causing massive inefficiency because the scale required is too big. Germany is divided into 16 federal states with lots of devolved power so each state can run it's own testing system catering to the specific needs of their populations.
Click to expand...

I dare say it's about channelling the money in certain directions. Usually the government love to pass the buck onto local authorities but for some reason they're really resistant this time despite it being a topic they're (rightly) taking flak on.
 
africanspur said:
The tests are definitely already being redistributed secondary to need (we have less testing in London at the moment for example, as the hotspots have moved north) and this may present a problem as the increase in cases becomes more nationwide again.

But I think you're pointing out some of thr problems with taking the figures at face value yourself. You were sent a test which the government are probably counting as a 'processed test' but is either sitting somewhere in your home or in a landfill somewhere now. I wonder how

What the above means by the way in real terms in some hospitals in London is that swabs which previously came back within a few hours, at the very max 24 hours are often now taking much longer, sometimes 2-3 days. This is an unacceptable delay in the acute setting where we have to make decisions based on side rooms and isolation/cohorting etc.

I can't help but feel that the government have messed up the time window they had to get this right the second time round.
Click to expand...

The question was with no other country manufacturing or processing as many tests per capita as the UK; how are we getting it so wrong?

Classical Mechanic said:
In my opinion and it's the same opinion as Andy Burnham (mayor of GM) the big problem with testing is how centralised many aspects of it are. Burnham has been calling for autonomy for GM through track and trace etc. Too many aspects of the system have to be signed off by Westminster (Cummings himself people speculate) and it's causing massive inefficiency because the scale required is too big. Germany is divided into 16 federal states with lots of devolved power so each state can run it's own testing system catering to the specific needs of their populations.
Click to expand...

I agree fully that we're far too centralised as a country; in fact I think that is true in general and not just in relation to Covid. We have far to many decisions being made in London and far too few being delegated to the regions.
Pogue Mahone said:
Positivity rate in UK is currently 2.5%. It should ideally be less than half that. Currently <1% in Germany. So we can categorically say that the UK population is not getting too many tests.

You’re moving the goal posts re compliance. You were initially implying that the UK population was/is uniquely over-compliant. Now you’re saying they were over-compliant during lockdown and this has caused a uniquely dramatic rebound phenomenon of under-compliance. This makes no sense. Almost every European country went through a lockdown. Many of them considerably more strict than in the UK. Almost of these countries are experiencing a second wave. If there is a rebound happening it’s not unique to the UK. I do think the second wave is being driven by people being too hasty to return to normality but this is clearly a global phenomenon and the degree of compliance will vary from country to country - due to cultural differences and varying clarity of messaging from their government - but will be consistent throughout the pandemic.

I do think that the Dominic Cumming factor might be behind a mass throwing up of hands and subsequent lack of compliance in the Uk. Which would be unique. But that’s just a theory. Very difficult to find any evidence.
Click to expand...

That's interesting in the positivity rate; I'm assuming that's over the last fortnight and not the 3-4 weeks beforehand? Given that we were testing 50% more but showing a similar caseload at that point?

To clarify I wasn't saying that the population of the UK were uniquely compliant and have transformed into being uniquely non-compliant. What we're seeing across the UK is matched in several other EU countries with similar strategies (hard, lengthy lockdown) as you state.

The point I was making was that if testing in the UK is as shambolic as it's being made out to be; how does that correlate with the UK manufacturing/distributing more tests than anyone else?

Surely the only way that testing could be shambolic in that environment is either a) if we're testing the wrong people (somewhat disproven by your 2.5% stat being greater than others); or b) if the tests aren't being distributed equitably according to need?

Either that or UK testing is actually doing well comparatively to similar countries such as France and Spain (not Germany).
 
finneh said:
The question was with no other country manufacturing or processing as many tests per capita as the UK; how are we getting it so wrong?



I agree fully that we're far too centralised as a country; in fact I think that is true in general and not just in relation to Covid. We have far to many decisions being made in London and far too few being delegated to the regions.


That's interesting in the positivity rate; I'm assuming that's over the last fortnight and not the 3-4 weeks beforehand? Given that we were testing 50% more but showing a similar caseload at that point?

To clarify I wasn't saying that the population of the UK were uniquely compliant and have transformed into being uniquely non-compliant. What we're seeing across the UK is matched in several other EU countries with similar strategies (hard, lengthy lockdown) as you state.

The point I was making was that if testing in the UK is as shambolic as it's being made out to be; how does that correlate with the UK manufacturing/distributing more tests than anyone else?

Surely the only way that testing could be shambolic in that environment is either a) if we're testing the wrong people (somewhat disproven by your 2.5% stat being greater than others); or b) if the tests aren't being distributed equitably according to need?

Either that or UK testing is actually doing well comparatively to similar countries such as France and Spain (not Germany).
Click to expand...

I already answered that question. You’re testing much more than countries like Germany because you need to!

With covid deaths per capita six times higher than Germany it’s clear that the virus is considerably more prevalent in the UK than Germany. Hence even doing twice as many tests per capita is not enough and the system is under capacity for your needs. Throw in your own experience (test posted out, never used, yet still included in daily tally) and its not hard to see why there’s this big disconnect between objectively high testing numbers and a system that is barely fit for purpose.

To be fair, loads of countries are struggling with this. Testing capacity can only be increased at a linear rate. So there’s inevitably going to be a point where it can’t keep pace with a disease prevalence that is increasing exponentially. I’m sure Germany will be in the weeds soon as well, if their cases keep increasing at the current rate.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I already answered that question. You’re testing much more than countries like Germany because you need to!
Click to expand...

Of course - my point was is the UK testing shambolic in comparison to similar countries? Germany was a similar country a few weeks ago; but for example now Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Ireland and to a lesser extent (as they're further ahead) Spain and France.

Is the UK testing situation poor when compared to countries with a similar per capita infection rate (whether that be Germany a few weeks ago or the aforementioned countries now)? If it is then I'm curious as to why given our comparatively large volume of tests.
 
finneh said:
Of course - my point was is the UK testing shambolic in comparison to similar countries? Germany was a similar country a few weeks ago; but for example now Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Ireland and to a lesser extent (as they're further ahead) Spain and France.

Is the UK testing situation poor when compared to countries with a similar per capita infection rate (whether that be Germany a few weeks ago or the aforementioned countries now)? If it is then I'm curious as to why given our comparatively large volume of tests.
Click to expand...

I’ve no idea. The general theme coming out of most countries seems to be unhappiness with testing. I just don’t think it’s possible to get the testing piece right when cases are spreading as rapidly as they are in most European countries. What does seem unique to the Uk (as far as I know?) are these home testing kits getting posted out and your own experience of same.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I’ve no idea. The general theme coming out of most countries seems to be unhappiness with testing. I just don’t think it’s possible to get the testing piece right when cases are spreading as rapidly as they are in most European countries. What does seem unique to the Uk (as far as I know?) are these home testing kits getting posted out and your own experience of same.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. It does seem weird though that even a few weeks ago when the UK was similar to Germany in terms of daily cases but with much greater volumes of tests that their system was being lauded whilst the UK's was being trashed. Like you say I do wonder of the stats in relation to tests manufactured vs tests actually processed; although it would be absurd to think the % is higher than low single digits (if not then surely a simple "easy win" would be to tackle this rather than constantly talking about capacity).
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I’m really confused by that too. As per a tweet higher up the page, Germany has set up walk-in testing centres at train stations where the staff encourage commuters to have a test if they can spare the time. No queues. Results on the same day, via the covid app everyone has on their phone. Meanwhile in the Uk people are being asked to drive hours from their home because the testing system is so overwhelmed.
Click to expand...

Not sure how true that is in reality. I don't have the app granted, but I didn't get my result on the same day (got it roughly 30 hours after the test) . Also I had to go to the airport to have my test done. One day after I had come back into the country as they're only open from 4 to 8. And there was no test centre at the train station where my ride dropped me off. Although I think it would been possible to get tested directly at the border along the motorway. And there was a very long queue indeed.
 
Pagh Wraith said:
Not sure how true that is in reality. I don't have the app granted, but I didn't get my result on the same day (got it roughly 30 hours after the test) . Also I had to go to the airport to have my test done. One day after I had come back into the country as they're only open from 4 to 8. And there was no test centre at the train station where my ride dropped me off. Although I think it would been possible to get tested directly at the border along the motorway. And there was a very long queue indeed.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I was basing that on a tweet from someone visiting Nuremberg (see below) I know Germany has a lot of regional variation in how the pandemic is being handled, so this could be an example of that.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.