The problem is that if you introduce and implement NPIs too little too late it will take longer for them to work.
As we have seen repeatedly in the U.K.
So if a country first introduces them - but too little - “wash you hands to happy birthday/ rule Britannia” - and cases still go up it is quite wrong to say “they” don’t work when more, sooner does (see NZ/ Vietnam/ Taiwan)
Don’t then be surprised if the NPIs you need to slow the accelerating truck are harder and longer.
It isn’t that they don’t work because cases go up at the beginning.
They clearly do, as they then go down if strong enough.
The dashboard indicates the use of LFT in England (but not elsewhere) has shot up recently.
So is positivity going down because these tests are included in the denominator (albeit not in the numerator which I think is just PCR positives).
What happens re unclear LFT? QA?
Then there is this - same helpful thread from @_johnbye
IF they are including LFT in their positivity calculations (if only in the denominator) that is going to make it very difficult to decide if it is really going down or just diluted by LFT asymptomatic screening -ves.
The report specifically warned of violence from thousands or enraged protestors egged on by Trump & flanked by white supremacists and extreme militia armed for battle :- Congress the target.
Who was briefed. Which key roles were not and why?
The day before the attack the FBI office in Virginia issued an explicit warning that extremists were preparing to travel to Washington to commit violence & “war”
Who was told this? Which key rôles with responsibility were not? Why?
If they voted for remain then they did not seek this in any way.
If they voted leave then were they willing to watch other industries suffer to gain an advantage for themselves?
If so they have some soul searching to do.
@pmdfoster@sff_uk@BorisJohnson If they voted leave but realise now that what the campaign promised is quite literally undeliverable then I can understand how that happened.
What is NOT Ok is again to seek a solution that benefits them but harms others who account for more jobs and GDP.
🦠🦠🦠55,761 new cases. Increase in recent days but this may be due to weekend home test kits picked up on Monday only just being processed. (55,242 by specimen date on Monday 11th)
So there’s several days lag in processing
ONS has had to defer its infection survey report too
⚰️⚰️⚰️1280 deaths (28 day cut off by date reported).
7 day Average 1066 per day.
But looking at dates by date of deaths (and this week and likely last will still have several hundreds of deaths added to a spread of days) we can see that on Monday 11th there were 998 deaths
More will likely be added to all these days over the coming weeks as notifications come in gradually from hospitals, care homes, institutions & private home death registrations.
If you want to look at ONS deaths by date of occurrence you can see it here
Today you will see that 11/1/21 shows 937 deaths...but there will be more because MOST deaths are not reported within a day or three. They get topped up.
So this was 28 cut off deaths by date of death yesterday
I wonder if a journalist @PaulBrandITV@C4Ciaran@lewis_goodall is going to tell the story of the first recorded (albeit very belatedly) COVID death that, from ONS records fell in the week ending 31/1/20.
Maybe also how so many Covid deaths were missed and likely mis-recorded?
See deaths by weekly occurrence (by date of death) here.
It also seems appropriate given both Telegraph and Spectator journalists seem to have got the wrong end of the stick re consequence of “normal” death notification lag & some v long (eg inquests).
Interviews with people who are behind the data such as @NickStripe_ONS and maybe a coroner’s office with details about how deaths are notified and why some are so delayed.
Maybe a section on deaths by date of death in 2020, and why so very very sparse in the early months.