To want to tear my hair out when people talk about the ‘R number’ increasing - IT DOESN’T MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS!

[GinFling]

I am SO sick of everyone having a hot take on this virus - from friends and colleagues, and especially the media. Article after article about how the R value is increasing, nearly over 1, etc etc, and how this means we are heading for a second wave/disaster/the sky falling in. No, it is more complex and nuanced than that, and in fact it’s harder and harder to have a low R as the virus gets less prevalent. It is also hugely skewed by local outbreaks - such as in care homes and hospitals.

These two articles are quite helpful in understanding it:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52944037
unherd.com/2020/05/what-the-headline-covid-figures-dont-tell-you/

I wish everyone would just STOP using R to pretend to know what they’re talking about. We’re not all statisticians or virologists, for good reason.

So R rate is only one part of the picture and is potentially very misleading once the number of cases becomes very low,

Well. It provides an important warning of what we'll be looking at in an incredibly short space of time if we don't act appropriately.

Well as the quote says it is one part of the picture

@0v9c99f9g9d939d9f9g9h8h what do you consider to be ‘acting appropriately’? Because the whole issue is that the misrepresentation of what R means is causing people to act in a manner that is inappropriate to the level of risk.

OP I agree with you. Or maybe I'm just too optimistic.

gin

IMO, this isn't a virus where you have the time to reassure yourself that the infection rate is low because it's so good at finding new hosts. If we'd been a bit less complacent we could have reacted faster. But you have a context for this where the virus isn't much worse then a cold anyway. Presumably it doesn't matter much if it has the potential to multiply quickly. Others disagree. They see two cases and know how many that could be by next week. The R number gives some indication of what direction we're going in. I find that helpful but no, that doesn't mean I think the R number is the same as a high infection rate.

By the way, what is a hot take??

Similar, but I'm irrationally annoyed every time I hear or read "r number", I was always under the impression that the name of it was "r naught"

Well, it's not R naught anymore....

R naught is the basic reproduction rate, the number each infected person will infect in a population which has not encountered the disease before - in which no one has been infected, and the community is entirely and completely susceptible.

We are no longer there, so we should now talk about Re, (Can't work out on the iPad how to make that a very little e, sorry) reproduction rate, the rate we are at now at this point in the disease progression.

Just talking about R rate appears to be confusing enough though 😁

I completely agree, OP.
So many armchair experts.

The Dunning-Kruger effect comes to mind - having enough intelligence to be aware of your own limitations is very useful.

Well yes. Children were in school when infections were at the peak.

Plus people were crammed in public transport, in pubs, theatres and cinemas. At large mass events. In swimming pools and gyms, playing group sports regularly, 30% more were working out of the home. No one was social distancing.

It's not one thing. Life will return to normal. It'll take time. And there is hope track and trace will make this possible.

@Beatingthisthing haha yes 0.95 not 9.5! I'm not sure if I'm proving my own point or undermining it by getting that wrong

Never mind R values and prevalence, if everyone agrees Germany handled this so much better surely all we need to know is that Germany still won’t open the border to us whether R

G value sounds sensible. I'd love to achieve NZ value.

There are approximately 1500 new cases per day in the uk. I can't easily find how many regions the UK is broken down into, so for simplicity's sake, let's say 15. That leaves 100 cases per region per day. I cannot see how one outbreak could affect Rt noticeably. Several outbreaks, perhaps. Or an outbreak involving several people per day. But if you have several outbreaks or one involving large amounts of people per day, surely that IS significant?

If cases were down close to single figures, I could definitely see the argument. There is clearly a relationship between cases and the significance of R. However, we do not have a particularly low amount of new cases and I imagine that R is still fairly significant at this point of time.

I sense spin doctoring.

But it's not evenly spread at all. Look at these figures for Devon & Cornwall - clearly with numbers this low a single outbreak in a nursing home can have a big impact on the R number:

"The number of new coronavirus cases recorded across Devon and Cornwall has fallen in the past week as maps show the region continues to have among the fewest number of new infections.

There were 17 new positive coronavirus cases recorded between June 6 and June 12, down from 20, 13, 44 and 71 in previous weeks.

Of the new cases, nine occurred in Cornwall, with five in Plymouth, and one each in Torbay, Exeter and the South Hams. No new cases were recorded in the previous seven days in East Devon, Teignbridge, Mid Devon, North Devon, Torridge and West Devon."

I didn't know the figures for Cornwall were that low. You're right, if there were only 17 in a week, one outbreak would make a difference. Is this true of all the regions with higher R, though?

I'm not sure nellodee, just using that to illustrate the fact that R rate alone can be misleading. The South West as a whole has the highest R rate but has also got a very low level of cases compared with the rest of the country.

@GinFling - YANBU - completely agree with you OP!
R is completely not and shouldn’t be the priority!

We should be focusing on the 3 T’s
Testing
Track and trace ( not the current shamble!)
Treatment

We need the R rate to be up to develop herd immunity! More people should be focusing on boosting their immune system rather than getting brainwashed with this propaganda.
It is an airborne, very nasty flu-like virus, it is beyond ridiculous to believe that anyone can stop it (hence above 3 T)

I wish more people would pause and think, unfortunately loads of them are still in reactive panic mode 😔

@HowToHelp

Great idea. But we have all had too many bad experiences with those Germans and their penalties....
Plus if we mention the Germans we might all be accused of racism .......

What do YOU think I think it means?

PS: Don’t mention the war…

I did once, but I think I got away with it.

I know what you mean op and what you're trying to say.

Name change fail? I think it means something you take when you're very hot. Or

Something you say when you're trying to be hot, in a fifth form chemistry teacher sort of way? But really, no firm concept.

@Noextremes2017

The point i made is that Germany very much values the R rate, & that they have looked at all the science, inc infection and the reproductive rates, they have come to different conclusions than the UK.

The (unintentional) danger in the OP's post is that by trying to lessening the importance of R, we do a Johnson and stop taking CV serious, we could easily have another far worse 2nd wave, as we go into the Autumn & that will do untold damage to our economy, schools and health.

The (unintentional) danger in the OP's post is that by trying to lessening the importance of R, we do a Johnson and stop taking CV serious, we could easily have another far worse 2nd wave, as we go into the Autumn & that will do untold damage to our economy, schools and health.

The British public being fed nonsense propaganda that they aren’t allowed to question is hardly going to solve covid.