1. When there is a surge in infections, cases eventually come down whether or not there is a lockdown/significant restrictions. 2. Lockdowns/many restrictions have little (not necessarily no) impact on hospitalisations & deaths.
Some find this hard to accept, as it seems so obvious:
Transmission comes from contact, restrictions reduce contact, so surely restrictions must reduce transmission & hence admissions & deaths?
But there are lots of reasons why restrictions may have less benefit than expected:
1. People change their behaviour voluntarily in response to changes in infections.
You choose to take less risk when infections surge, more risk when infections low, but just as importantly ...
... voluntary change has a bigger effect on riskier interactions
e.g. a student living with their vulnerable granny chooses to avoid gatherings & pub meet-ups when infections are high. People at lower risk continue to meet up.
That means ...
... shutting pubs to everyone mainly hits lower risk people, e.g. young people in flat share &/or who have already had Covid.
Voluntary behaviour change means it should be no surprise that the marginal effect of imposing (or lifting) restrictions is fairly low.
2. Restrictions change the mix of social interactions in ways which increase risk:
• Children get looked after by different family members when schools shut & parents out at work.
• When pubs with Covid-19 precautions in place shut, young people mix in (higher risk) homes ...
• Hospitality curfews lead to mass crowds on street & public transport.
• Lockdown limits low risk outdoor activity, forcing people to spend more time indoors where transmission risk is highest.
3. Lockdowns/restrictions are based on preventing lot of transmission from those who are asymptomatic, which Govt claims is 1 in 3 of those infected.
@profnfenton shows the proportion is actually much lower, so less scope for lockdowns to have an effect.
4. A sizeable proportion of serious cases & deaths come from care home and hospital outbreaks.
Local infection control measures are likely to be more important than lockdowns in affecting numbers in these settings.
In summary, it should be no surprise that lockdowns/legal restrictions have little independent impact on deaths & hospitalisations. Some restrictions may have some impact, others none at all, whilst others may even be counterproductive.
The other reason people find the data hard to accept is the implication: our policy of rolling lockdowns imposed unimaginable economic & social costs but may have been close to useless in alleviating pressure on the NHS.
For some that possibility is just too much to contemplate.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Many MPs who supported the assisted suicide bill at 2nd reading were motivated by people dying in pain but also worried about pressure being put on vulnerable people. In response the Bill Committee has decided:
1. Not to include pain as a criteria for assisted suicide.
...
... 2. Not to protect homeless people or prisoners from assisted suicide, despite evidence both groups are particularly vulnerable to suicide.
3. Not to protect people requesting suicide because they feel they are a burden on others.
...
4. Not to protect people requesting suicide due to being “unduly influenced” by others.
5. Not to protect people requesting suicide because they are worried about financial cost of care.
...
🧵
Just because @KimLeadbeater asserts the slippery slope can’t happen does not make it true.
Let’s spell out how the slippery slope may operate in principle & practice:
...
...
If the #assistedsuicide bill passes, MPs will have accepted the *principle* that it is okay to help some groups of people commit suicide.
With that principle established, the question becomes which group of people should be included.
...
...
The current bill specifies those judged to have 6 months to live are eligible (whether or not in pain).
There is little logic in arguing that someone not in pain but with 3 months to live should be eligible but not someone in pain & with, say, 7 months to live.
...
Let’s talk about Oregon: a good model to follow according to Leadbeater assisted suicide bill supporters.
After legalisation, the numbers of assisted suicides skyrocketed from 16 in 1998 to 367 in 2023.
If Eng & Wales end up at same rate that's over 5,000 people each year.
...
…
The huge increase in assisted suicides has not led to a reduction in other suicides (this is one of the issues @kimleadbeater claims her Bill will address):
the rate of unassisted suicide in Oregon has increased by more than 20% since 1998.
…
…
43% of those who are helped to commit suicide in Oregon, say they were concerned about being a burden on friends, family or carers.
The percentage worried about being a burden has increased significantly over time – it was just 13% in 1998.
…
The @Channel4 @reformparty_uk racism row is developing into an astonishing story. Whether or not Ch 4 paid Andrew Parker, hard to see how they can come out unscathed.
As I see it, there are 4 possibilities:
1. @Channel4 set up & paid Parker. They are explicit they did not.
...
... 2. Someone else (production company or a 3rd party) paid Parker.
If @Channel4 knew, this is as bad as Option 1.
If Ch 4 didn't know, it means they did no due diligence.
For such a consequential story, that would be grossly irresponsible & must lead to consequences.
...
... 3. Parker was acting unpaid deliberately to smear @reformparty_uk .
Again, either @Channel4 knew, in which case their piece was deliberately deceptive, or they did not, which would again mean no due diligence & grossly irresponsible journalism.
...
An objective examination of the data and evidence suggests that delaying the March 25 lockdown decision by a week or so would have saved lives.
Here’s why …
…
We know from deaths data, NHS Triage and React that infections were almost certainly decreasing well before 25 March (and the rise in infections was levelling off even earlier). But those data were not available by the 25th.
...
...
It remains possible lockdown caused an even faster reduction in infections, preventing some Covid-related deaths in the short run but …