Thread by @gameoldgirl

Brace, brace! Long #covid19 #journalism thread afoot.

(1)
@paulconnew1 @BrianCathcart @peterjukes @zelo_street @pguk10 @stevenjbarnett @Byline_Media

After yesterday’s plain wrong #covid19 headline, the Telegraph seems to be doubling down on the idea that flu remains more dangerous. This time it cites research from @lshtm to produce the headline below.
(2)

We are learning to become familiar with the R factor – the number of people a sufferer of any disease is likely to infect. The consensus seems to be that unchecked, #covid19 has an R factor of around 2.6.
(3)

The @LSHTM research, which has not been peer reviewed and comes with heavy caveats, suggests that the lockdown may have reduced that to 0.62.
lshtm.ac.uk/newsevents/new…
(4)

This was because the 1300 people it studied had had about 70% fewer contacts over the previous day compared with a similar group questioned 15 years ago.
(5)

@LSHTM did not, unless I’ve missed a huge chunk of its full report, apply its research to flu.
Yet the Telegraph has chosen to compare the *estimated* contagion rate for #covid-19 in lockdown conditions with the average R factor (1.2) for a seasonal flu in normal times.

I’m no scientist, but my guess would be that had the @LSHTM applied the results of its latest survey to flu rather than Covid, it would have found that the R factor was also much lower in today’s circumstances.
A scientist friend says this is a fair assumption

The common sense behind the entire lockdown strategy is that the fewer people you encounter, the less likely you are to spread or contract disease.
(7)

In similar circumstances, you might just as easily say that small pox, TB, ebola or any other nasty is “less contagious than flu”. It doesn’t make them less dangerous.
(8)

#Covid19 is a lethal and largely unknown disease. In the past week 1,889 people infected with it have died.
Note, that is just the number among those admitted to hospital who had tested positive for the virus.
(9)

It doesn’t include those undiagnosed or those who died in care homes or at home.
If the Telegraph’s “10 times more die of flu” headline yesterday were accurate, that would mean that nearly 20k people would have died of flu over the past seven days. They haven’t.
(10)

[Quick deviation for those who didn’t see or misunderstood the intention of yesterday’s thread:

https://twitter.com/gameoldgirl/status/1245308094906802178?s=20

]
(11)

The story compared official #covid19 death figures for week up to March 20 with ONS figs for deaths from “flu and pneumonia”. There were 160 or so of the former and, it said, 1800 of the latter.
(12)

In fact, the ONS figures showed about 1500 – and that was for all respiratory disease, including flu, pneumonia, pleurisy, asthma, bronchitis, lung cancer complications, the common cold and dozens more conditions.
(13)

The report also claimed that the “flu” deaths were lower than average, while failing to note that the covid deaths that week had only just started to register and were now growing exponentially.]

(diversion over)

(14)

Today’s “less contagious” report appears on a spread where the main story is predicting a “quarantine rebellion”. The Telegraph, in common with other papers, is itching for the lockdown to be relaxed or lifted so that Britain can return to business as usual.

It appears to be playing down the relative risks of #covid19 to further that end.
(16)

Which is a bit rich, given that the @LSHTM report concludes that it has found the “first evidence” that restrictions have led to a decrease in transmission, but also says that ongoing study could provide “early warning” of changes if restrictions are relaxed or disobeyed.
(17)

It says in so many words: “Our estimates are not to be read as ‘job done’. Rather, they should be used as motivation for us all to keep following UK government instructions. It’s imperative we don’t take our foot off the pedal.”
(18)

We all want to get back to normal. But it’s going to be a long haul. That “review” after three weeks is more likely to bring tougher rather than laxer rules. We’ve been told we might need to be restricted for 3, 6, 12 months.
(19)

It’s time to listen and face the reality. Not produce misleading “scientific” evidence to support a business argument that could cost thousands of lives.

#journalism not #propaganda please

Time for lunch. Have a nice day

PS: for those who prefer to hear stuff from the horse's mouth, here is what Professor John Edmunds had to say and the link to the @LSHTM report in full

cmmid.github.io/topics/covid19…