above R

[randomer]

so its above R where I live. In about 7 days or so the shops will open and more people will mix....what am I supposed to do please Boris?

Talking about Weston... Did anyone see the drone pictures?

News outlets carried pictures taken at about chest height, along the beach. It looked bloody scary. But a local man took pictures with a drone, he facebooked them. His pictures showed a lot of people in small groups, each group well distanced.

Same happened in Cheltenham last week. Major park had a lot of people in it. Local paper carried pictures that made lots of mums look utterly careless. But I drove past at the same time and whilst there were a lot of people they were small, well spaced groups. I was happy enough to walk the dog through. Didn't get closer than 5 or 6 metres from anyone in the hour I was there.

In some instances it is obvious we are still being fed that fear factor. And I really object to it!

That's because the increased cases in Weston were infected in the hospital, not on the beach!

We must also be cautious when looking at these stats because there are always ones that are missed. We must allow for extras that are not included.

Asymptomatic ones and also the atypical ones that are not getting a test because their symptoms do not match up to the official list of just three symptoms.

I had a headache, wheeziness, a sore throat and chest pain. None of the official symptoms to qualify for a test. My doctor was adamant it was not Covid because I didn't have a fever. And then I tested positive and I've been severely ill for 10 weeks. My husband had a runny nose and sneezing, they were the only symptoms he had but he got tested because I was positive.

According to government websites he had hayfever! How many others out there I think they're just got hayfever?!

Nope, Many people have had phones slammed down on them. I can assure you this is true

I didn't say it wasn't true did I?

I said MANY weren't even getting any to start trying to trace!

I can assure you that's true!

I know the north west is over 1 but does anyone know where I can check for county R rates?

The Zoe App shows the % rate of infection of the participants of the App in your area.

So according to the App, here in south Bucks only 0.1% of people have the virus. For some reason this is one of the lowest in the country. I think North West was 0.6-0.7 and I looked at Brighton and it was 0.5%.

I can’t find the R rate on the app though.

@OhYouBadBadKitten

If only the positive people are included in Zoe's app - then surely that's the same data that PHE are using? Those tests aren't counted seperately.

Both the numbers from the ons and zoe are modelled i.e they are both based on test results from a sample of the population which is grossed up.

The zoe data was based on data from 1.5 million app users who were asked to self report symptoms over 14 days. 63,000 swab tests tests were done of which 2600 were positive.

The ons data is based on a much smaller but more representative sample of households which is then grossed up to be reflective of the uk population.

The zoe data has a bigger sample, the ons data is more represenative. Neither one is right and they should be both considered in combination.

The modelling of the r value however reported in the news that has the sw as high is inaccurate as it is based on mortality data not infections therefore is out of date and influenced by all sorts of things.

The zoe reported data on infection numbers by region which is based on swab tests gives a is more accuate picture and makes a lot more sense as you would expect r to be higher in London where there are a lot more people on public transport etc.

The ons methodology is here in case anyone is interested
www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/5june2020

@MrsArchchancellorRidcully

Daily infections have plummeted to around 5,000

*The Cambridge study predicts that the number of people dying each day of coronavirus will start to increase again by mid-June, because of the lockdown being eased.

The study team said they estimate that there are around 17,000 new infections happening each day across England, and that the number of deaths each day is likely to fall to between 100 and 250 by mid-June*

17,000 cases a day according to Cambridge.

5,000 9, 000, 17,0000. However many it actually is, it's TOO Many to lift restrictions as they are and TOO MANY for people to be acting so irresponsibly.

A couple more weeks of STAY HOME, could have pushed it right down. A couple of WEEKS not 'forever' as people are complaining.

@ShirleyB25 I agree. They’ve made a big mistake. I hope you and your patients will all be OK.

It’s now being predicted that test and trace won’t be Effectively operational until September. I really hope they get it sorted before then!

The people flooding the beaches, the ones having families around and staying overnight, the various protests around the country after George Floyd. The virus doesn’t avoid people because of these reasons for meeting up.

@IncrediblySadToo I agree! I can't get my head around the fact that some people are ok with these figures. Some seem utterly desensitised by it all now.

I know we can't live in fear 'forever' and I know we can't stay in lockdown 'forever' but there are not enough safety measures in place at the moment. No track and trace, no compulsory masks in all public places, no widespread antibody testing, no local lockdowns and a complete lack of accurate information regarding symptoms and long-term health implications as well as a lack of support.

I worry we'll look back on this in a year or two and just despair at... sigh, I just have no words anymore!!

All I ask is that if you can work from home and you can practice the lockdown measures, please do so. It all helps.

The Zoe project is one one way to estimate the number of infections in different areas. It models the likely number of infections after making a host of different assumptions, which is normal in computational modelling, but it's why two different projects may end up with different estimates. The risk of the Zoe approach is that estimating infection rates from test results relies on testing being reliable, which does not appear to be the case with the UK tests (the false negative rate is up to 30%). It means the Zoe project - while good - is likely to be underestimating the scale of infection.

The Cambridge project estimates infection rates from deaths, which is a pretty reliable method because there is now good evidence of mortality rates from covid-19 in different categories. It also uses seroprevalence tests from blood donations to track the % of people in different areas with covid-19 antibodies, and monitors the % change over time as part of modelling infection rates. This is the project reporting R>1 in the NW, with an estimate of >4000 new infections per day in the NW alone... which is a huge problem. Their rather excellent and detailed site is here www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/now-casting/

@IncrediblySadToo

Nope, Many people have had phones slammed down on them. I can assure you this is true

I didn't say it wasn't true did I?

I said MANY weren't even getting any to start trying to trace!

I can assure you that's true!

Maybe that's because there just isn't that many positive cases anymore. Surely that's a good thing or are you just itching to blame Boris for something

Remember its not just about the R, its about how many people have it right now. Estimates are that less than 1 in 1,000 of us do. So not only would you have to meet that 1/1000, you would have to be in sufficient proximity to them for a sufficient period of time to catch it

Also, when you are prescribed medication or buy over the counter do you worry about being that 1 in a 1000 person to suffer the severe and potentially life changing side effects listed on the box that have obviously happened to someone otherwise you wouldn't be warned about them. Or do you just pop your tablet and get on with life.

Shut the beaches. Enforce masks in public and social distancing

@geekaMaxima

The Zoe project is one one way to estimate the number of infections in different areas. It models the likely number of infections after making a host of different assumptions, which is normal in computational modelling, but it's why two different projects may end up with different estimates. The risk of the Zoe approach is that estimating infection rates from test results relies on testing being reliable, which does not appear to be the case with the UK tests (the false negative rate is up to 30%). It means the Zoe project - while good - is likely to be underestimating the scale of infection.

The Cambridge project estimates infection rates from deaths, which is a pretty reliable method because there is now good evidence of mortality rates from covid-19 in different categories. It also uses seroprevalence tests from blood donations to track the % of people in different areas with covid-19 antibodies, and monitors the % change over time as part of modelling infection rates. This is the project reporting R>1 in the NW, with an estimate of >4000 new infections per day in the NW alone... which is a huge problem. Their rather excellent and detailed site is here www.mrc-bsu.cam.ac.uk/now-casting/

Although the Cambridge data is likely to be more accurate becuase it is based on deaths it is also 3 weeks out of date on current infection levels so is not that helpful when informing current policy as regional infection levels are likely to have changed over that period.

@AdalindMeisner
The peak in infection in Blackpool is actually very easy to see if you look at the data. It was on the 18th April. There have been 7 new cases here in the past week.
The issue with Blackpool isnt high cases or spikes, it's a disproportionately high number of hospitalizations.
This isnt because of people crowding beaches, its because some parts of Blackpool have high levels of health deprivation and multiple or complex health conditions (as most deprived boroughs do). Which are all proven to lead to hospitalization or death from covid.

@randomer you are absolutely right to be cautious.

It's tough when you have stuck to the "lockdown instruction" and yet it's not helped your area one bit.

Sadly calling on boris Johnson is pointless, they have made such a negligible mess of this pandemic due to their incompetence.

The U.K didn't go into to full lockdown, it's extremely frustrating to have lived as we have for the last 12 weeks and still see the figure creeping up.

People have , rightly so, lost any faith in the government with their lies, hypocrisy and incompetence. I think the only thing that can be done at the moment is make your own informed decisions on what's best for your family. Stay safe and stay home is what we are doing.

Why shut the beaches? There's no current evidence to suggest beaches are leading to a increase in infections?

Agree, we know this virus mainly spreads indoors with close contact for 15 minutes with an infected person.

The beaches aren’t the problem. Stop all this anger about the beaches and parks and let’s focus on the infection control methods that are scientifically proven to make a difference.

BLM protests today in Manchester alone have currently attracted around 15,000 and counting.

I support the cause genuinely I do but don’t all our lives matter in this crisis? If this carries on not only will the death rate from COVID continue to climb but also indirect deaths for a whole variety of reasons.

Although the Cambridge data is likely to be more accurate becuase it is based on deaths it is also 3 weeks out of date on current infection levels so is not that helpful when informing current policy as regional infection levels are likely to have changed over that period.

Well no, it's not more inaccurate for that reason: modelling the likely situation now on the basis of past data is precisely what the project is designed to do. They provide a range (credible interval) around the estimate that gets larger as it moves away from the last measures data point and closed to the present day, to accurately reflect the increasing uncertainty of estimates as the delay increases - you can see it pretty clearly in the graphs, as the shaded interval around the R number gets wider between the rightmost blue and red lines.

Right now in the NW, the estimated R is 1.01 but the range around this estimate 0.83 to 1.18. The true R is extremely likely to be somewhere in this range. However, they also calculate that there is a 56% chance of the R being above 1... which means on the balance of probabilities it is indeed R>1.

This is what good data modelling for risk management looks like - there is lots of nuance, and you need a good understanding of probability to interpret the data. It's not meant for the general public (or at least those without a statistical background) but that means it can't be dismissed because it differs from the Zoe project (whose methods are designed to model how symptoms relate to infection over the timecourse of the disease; not to accurately estimate the prevalence and trajectory of infection in the population).

@Bourbonbiccy Thank you for your civilised response. As regards itching to have a go at Boris, no I have no energy or fight left in me for this farce.

I would possibly be willing to summon up my debating skills if posters would like to tell me what they think the government have handled well, what they admire and respect?

@geekaMaxima Thank you for the explanation however the problem with modelling on the basis of past data means there are a lot of assumptions that need to be made about whether past trends will continue and the influence of new variables such as the easing of various lockdown measures.

It seems to make much more sense to use the most up-to-date data available on infection rates to inform decision making. This shows an r of around 1 in London and dropping in the NW and SW. This also makes much more sense given the greater population density in London and the greater level of social mixing.