Gov. Uk tables of CV 19 - not all of them are frightening!!!

JenniferEccles

I think those who seem to delight in posting negative ‘news’ items are the most prolific posters so if we are not careful it’s all too easy to think things are worse than they actually are.

Even if for instance someone were to say that, yes, cases are rising but hospital admissions and deaths aren’t, somebody would soon appear to find a negative postscript to that.

But hospital admissions are rising!

Shouldn't that be a wake up call?

I don't get the point of sticking your head in the sand and pretending everything's just fine.

Let'as just wait and see.

I think those who seem to delight in posting negative ‘news’ items are the most prolific posters so if we are not careful it’s all too easy to think things are worse than they actually are.

Even if for instance someone were to say that, yes, cases are rising but hospital admissions and deaths aren’t, somebody would soon appear to find a negative postscript to that.

Daily case numbers worldwide have been steady since late July. Which means that worldwide, the pandemic is not currently accelerating.

For every negative headline statistic, there's a positive one too. But we never hear about those.

There's been an increase in hospital admissions too.

inews.co.uk/news/politics/coronavirus-latest-wake-up-call-covid-19-hospital-admissions-england-642484

Not "frightening" but a "wake up call".

Coronavirus infections have increased in recent weeks in the UK, according to new estimates.

The government's latest R number is between 1 and 1.2 which means the epidemic is growing.

And a study of thousands of people in England found cases doubling every seven to eight days, with a marked rise in the north and among young people.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54116939

Growstuff I agree, I think ‘obfuscating’ is perhaps the word we’re looking for.
The irresponsibility of the DM seems to know no bounds. It will be hard enough for the government to maintain or increase restrictions over Christmas, should it be necessary at the time, without them stirring the pot.

My son is a consultant surgeon - until recently in London, but now he's married an Australian doctor, he's working in Sydney. He told me of a cardiologist who was a triathlete (whatever that is!) until he contracted covid19. He now has a cardiomyopathy and epilepsy and can no longer work. This disease can be very nasty indeed with long lasting damage. Not in all people and not necessarily only in older patients. How you personally react is a lottery - the prize for which I would rather avoid!

Fair point Jane10.

He's just one person. A figurehead. There's a huge government machinery behind him.
I'm always interested in looking at where we're going right. What's working and can be taken further forward etc, and looking where others are going right rather than always looking for the negatives in any situation. This would be interesting to discuss in a group situation rather than just in posts.

Jane10 every time he opens his mouth he spouts rubbish, that's why people complain. He is educated but still not very intelligent.

I have seen no evidence at all that he has done anything for the good of the country, nothing at all. What he offers is blind optimism, not leadership.

Yesterday's speech about the daily testing was a great example; "Here's this wonderful thing we've though of, now we just need the boffins to invent it!"

Ah well! I'm sick of him and his nodding dog acolytes and cronyism.

I'm sick of the persistent sniping and complaining every time he opens his mouth. Obviously he's not popular with a lot of people but he's there, he's the PM and he has to make announcements and also to aspire to better things even if they're not possible now doesn't mean they can't be in the future. It's easy to be constantly critical and nitpicking but but it's much harder to actually do something to turn theory into practice or to generate new ideas in the first place.

I agree. It's not up to him to "apologise". The trouble is that he's invested so much in getting people to vote for him on a personal level. It's always been about him, not policies or doing any good for the country. People have voted for "jolly old Boris" and he's tried to use his "magnetic" (ahem) personality to lead people by promising them everything would be world beating. When he's forced to announce something people won't like, he still has to make it personal. He and Cummings have been appalling role models, so of course people will object.

The country needs a statesman, who's prepared to act like one, even if it does mean making unpopular announcements and then enforcing them. We haven't got one.

At the briefing yesterday Johnson kept apologising and saying how hard it would be for everyone etc etc. imo this just makes people feel aggrieved about having to do things to safeguard themselves and others so it’s no wonder that they protest about it if even the law makers make it sound as if they’re being unfair.

I don't disagree with you janeainsworth and I especially agree with the last paragraph. I've based my own "risk assessment" on the estimated number of infections in my own area, although they haven't always been that easy to find.

However, here are a couple of examples of the limited data which is being made public ...

The BBC currently has a chart which shows cases broken down by age group. It starts with age 20 and clearly shows that the 20-29 age group has more infections than the older age groups. Nothing wrong with that, except that it doesn't include the 10-19 age group, which has higher infection rates than any of the older groups except 20-29. Would I be cynical if I thought that the BBC and government doesn't want to advertise the unsafe environment provided in secondary schools, full of 10-19 year olds, where social distancing isn't even possible?

Another example is the 28 day cut off date for PHE reporting Covid 19 deaths in England. I understand the argument. Obviously it's ridiculous to report somebody who was diagnosed with Covid in March and was run over by a bus in August as a Covid death. However, many of the deaths from Covid do occur more than 28 days after initial diagnosis and these aren't being reported. Until about a week ago, PHE issued three figures: 28 day cut off, 60 day cut off and no limit. Over the last few days, it's stopped issuing the 60 day and limit figures on a daily basis and it's become more difficult to track rates over time.

The death rates are actually showing a slight increase from the lowest point, but that's quite difficult to see from the new way of reporting deaths. 28 day cut off figures are, of course, lower than the previous figures and that's what is being made public. Many people think that we're already beginning to see a new spike. Am I being cynical in thinking that the government is trying to hide it because it wants the economy to return to normal for political reasons?

I feel as though the public is being treated like small children, who aren't capable of making their own decisions and, in some cases, make bad decisions because they don't know the facts. I see that today's Daily Mail has a headline about us all having Christmas stolen from us. It's an emotional headline and will, no doubt, cause outrage. Would the response be the same, if people really understood why restrictions are necessary?

All facts are correct, if they are indeed facts. The more facts one has, the more they can be put in context
I agree up to a point Growstuff but I also agree with jane10.
There are indisputable facts (eg sun is shining at this moment) and ‘facts‘ which emerge as a result of scientific research which we are asked to accept as fact, but which may be based on the results of flawed research or not very good evidence.
In the case of COVID new facts are emerging over the months, but facts which are valid in one environment may not be true in another etc and all this affects the decision-making process of those with responsibility for public health.
But as individuals we also have a response to assess the available evidence for ourselves as far as we can, and make our own risk assessments and decisions, which is what many people did when they actually reduced social contact before official lockdown began in March.

MerylStreep

I find it amusing/puzzling that some posters believe they are controlling their lives.

We control our lives all the time. We don’t step out in front of moving traffic: we wear seat belts. Have vaccinations for flu, tetanus etc. Have our cars MOT’d. Make sure the food we eat is in date and, if necessary cooked thoroughly. We’ve now had to add the risk of catching Covid to the list of things we have to make informed decisions about and that’s what I’m doing. I also have a pretty good idea who to believe now as, after several months I now know who’s advice or predictions have proved to be correct.

The latest one mentioned by Johnson today (PMQT I think) was this instant Covid test that’s in the pipeline. Although no one knows when that will be available, certainly not the PM.

Jane10

Whose facts are correct though?

All facts are correct, if they are indeed facts. The more facts one has, the more they can be put in context. What are not factual are the constant claims of having world-beating systems, vague promises that it will all be over by Christmas or that we're just one step away from a vaccine, silly "motivational" pep talks, nor are the constant avoidance of answering questions directly and denying responsibility.

MerylStreep

I find it amusing/puzzling that some posters believe they are controlling their lives.

There are always degrees of control.

Unless somebody wants to live completely off-grid and shun society, there will always be some control and even then there are laws of nature which can't be avoided, but an individual is also free to make choices within those constraints.

Why do you find it so amusing?

I find it amusing/puzzling that some posters believe they are controlling their lives.

All the more reason then to try to guard against it getting worse.

I’m sure we all understand what a difficult balancing act it is to protect both lives and livelihoods, but another lockdown would impact on younger people in particular for decades, wouldn’t it ?

JenniferEccles

To my mind the economy is an absolute priority still, despite the recent rise in cases. I am hopeful that the government will do all it can to avoid doing anything to harm the recovery.

Of course I realise they have to ensure that hospital admissions don’t rise too much, but if the vulnerable can still be protected, the rest of the country can continue with their lives to prevent us slipping into a devastating recession.

We are already in a devastating recession and about to compound it.

To my mind the economy is an absolute priority still, despite the recent rise in cases. I am hopeful that the government will do all it can to avoid doing anything to harm the recovery.

Of course I realise they have to ensure that hospital admissions don’t rise too much, but if the vulnerable can still be protected, the rest of the country can continue with their lives to prevent us slipping into a devastating recession.