Cable Forum - Coronavirus

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)

- Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Coronavirus (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33709417)

Are we testing less?

If the rumoured plans go ahead, many people could well be testing daily . . or at least twice a week in some cases. Then we'll see some figures :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36087353)

Are we testing less?

If the rumoured plans go ahead, many people could well be testing daily . . or at least twice a week in some cases. Then we'll see some figures :D

The 7 day average on the gov.uk dashboard is going downwards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36087350)

According to this, the peak was 15 July, Hugh.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...oint-expected/

[EXTRACT]

Yet there are early signs that Britain has already peaked – and has done so at a far lower point than anyone expected. On July 15, the country recorded 60,676 cases, and infections have been largely falling ever since.

The difference is the Telegraph is reporting the Cases by specimen date peak on the dates the specimens were tested, and everyone else (I believe) is reporting the Cases by date reported peak date.

Anyway, another link to today's Telegraph.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-h...-cases-deaths/

Quote:

Data over the next fortnight will be crucial to identify whether the UK has turned a corner in the coronavirus pandemic - or if the last three days of falling cases are a "false peak".

Prof Adam Kucharski, an epidemiologist and mathematician at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, told BBC Radio Four that figures from the last few days represent an "early sign" that transmission rates may be falling across the UK.

Cases have dropped in Scotland, for instance, since schools closed earlier this month - while warm weather and summer holidays are likely reducing transmission in England.

But he cautioned that it is too soon to identify whether this is a lasting trend, warning that "we've seen false peaks before". The next week or so will be critical, Prof Kucharski said, and could see a post-lockdown surge.

"Of course that change on Monday, that big reopening, has not yet shown up in the data. So I think the next week or two is going to be crucial to know if this is genuinely a slowdown of a potential peak, or if we've got more transmission to come."

1) Schools are now on summer break and I assume that the children will no longer be regularly tested thus reducing positive test results from that large cohort.

2) How many people will continue testing if Free Lateral Flow tests are stopped from September reducing number of those voluntarily testing and being found to be asymptomatic. Which would mean only those who have symptomatic Covid 19 would have cause to voluntarily confirm their infection by applying to use a PCR test.

Even those who use the lateral flow tests may not be reporting their reults as ...

Quote:

A recent damning report on the NHS Test and Trace system from the National Audit Office found that just 96 million (14%) of the 691 million lateral flow device test kits distributed had been registered as used.

“If you actually take out the numbers of tests which we know are, if you’d like, in transit or in store that figure rises to 20%,” Harries said. “But surveys suggest that more than 40% of people are using the tests.”

Maybe I am missing something obvious but it seems to me that we can't place any real significance to the positive case numbers we are seeing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joglynne (Post 36087357)

Maybe I am missing something obvious but it seems to me that we can't place any real significance to the positive case numbers we are seeing.

Agreed, especially when the Govt. site has this on the 'testing' page:

Quote:

This is a count of test results and may include multiple tests for an individual person.

Still, it makes good copy ;)

It does. I have major reservations about the way transmission rates are being compiled, to be honest.

It’s the same with number of deaths. We have been very ‘generous’ with the number of deaths due to Covid. If Covid is detected on admission to hospital, if they die the record records it as a Covid death, even if they died of something else. Deaths due to Covid in care homes and in the community are recorded too, but other countries are not recording the same. Some only record hospital deaths.

Because we all calculate numbers in different ways, it is absolutely pointless to compare country by country, and yet even professional people who should know better do this.

We really are our own worst enemy sometimes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36087362)

Yawn. We did this tedious nonsense last year.

Who is trying to exaggerate the pandemic? To what end?

The Conservative Party? Honestly?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36087365)

Yawn. We did this tedious nonsense last year.

Who is trying to exaggerate the pandemic? To what end?

The Conservative Party? Honestly?

Oh, I'm not sure.

Quote:

Some UK Government ministers have privately expressed concerns that coronavirus could be spread through farting, it is claimed.

They have pointed to evidence that suggests Covid-19 could be spread when an infected person breaks wind in a confined space such as a toilet.

Tests have revealed that the virus can be present in faecal matter, though the science on whether flatulence could spread Covid is not definitive.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...AMwlmV?ocid=st

Are old farts contagious then?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36087367)

Are old farts contagious then?

Not really . . . but we are quite adept at pi$$ing people off :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36087367)

Are old farts contagious then?

mine could kill a skunk at 400 yards

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36087369)

mine could kill a skunk at 400 yards

That would take care of a thing or two. Won't even need Covid.

The government has just used the new travel RAG list

Amber

Amber +

Amber ++

Amber Ultra

I can’t believe it’s not Amber

Double secret Amber.

That should clear up any confusion.