One year on from the first national lockdown I look at the lessons we *should* have learned and the failings that left us with one of the worst death told in the world.
“England did not lock down until November 5, by which point average daily cases had already exceeded 20,000. It has been estimated that more than one million extra infections and 20,000 deaths resulted from this six-week delay.”
2/8
2. Act decisively
“As of mid-March, passengers from only 11 of the 64 countries where arguably the most concerning variant – the South Africa variant – has been detected were being asked to undergo ten days of managed isolation.”
3/8
3. Trust people to follow the rules
“Fears of “behavioural fatigue” were unfounded. During the first lockdown, R fell well below one. Even during the country’s current lockdown, in the face of the more transmissible variant, R has been calculated to be as low as 0.7.”
4/8
4. Communicate clearly
“The UK government has been guilty of a range of public messaging mistakes, from the now-infamous trip by senior government adviser Dominic Cummings to the government’s updated “stay alert, control the virus, save lives” messaging.”
5/8
5. Tackle inequality
“People with the lowest-paid jobs are significantly more likely than those with better-paid jobs to die from COVID-19. It is becoming apparent that the same disadvantaged sections of society have the lowest rates of vaccine uptake.”
6/8
6. Be prepared
“Dame Sally Davies specifically drew attention to a shortage of medical ventilators. This deficiency had clearly not been addressed, with Hancock telling British manufacturers on March 14 2020, “If you produce a ventilator, we will buy it. No number is too high.””
Perhaps the most worrying thing is that we are a year on and that there is no evidence to suggest this government has admitted culpability or shown the capacity to learn from their mistakes.
I worry that we will have to suffer through them again.
/ENDS
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A short 🧵 on case data and positivity rates.
Cases per 100K per week for each of the home nations are still falling, but less steeply than before.
With fewer cases we would expect falls to be less steep.
Results include lateral flow tests that have not been confirmed with PCR.
Positivity rates show the same picture.
This time we use only PCR tests because lateral flow testing is often used for mass testing where we expect to pick up a smaller proportion of positives.
Positivity rates are falling in all UK nations with England and Scotland now below 5%
The REACT survey (for England) also shows positivity continuing to fall albeit at a slower rate.
This is a prevalence study, not an incidence study, but the story of falling cases is broadly the same. 3/8
Adult critical care bed occupancy in all English regions is down this week (orange dots) compared to last week (grey dots).
This has been a consistent trend for a few weeks, but the decrease has slowed somewhat.
London is still particularly high with occupancy at over 80%. 2/5
Despite decreasing occupancy, its important to emphasise that all regions of England are seeing occupancy levels (orange dots) higher than the corresponding level this time last year (green diamonds). 3/5
A short good news 🧵on trends inhospitalisation and deaths ahead of this afternoon's @IndependentSage briefing.
First up - hospital admissions continue to fall by the day. We are down to around 600-700 a day in England - rates not seen since mid-October. 1/6
The English regional picture looks good too, with hospital admissions falling in all regions.
These will continue to fall for at least a few more weeks irrespective of the impact of school returns as admissions are lagged by a couple of weeks from infections. 2/6
Hospital occupancy also continues to fall. We are now well below first wave peak levels. We're now down to levels we haven't seen since the end of October.
As with admissions, occupancy will continue to fall for some time yet, further releasing pressure on the NHS. 3/6
A short🧵on inequality.
We're often told by politicians that "we are all in this together". As the pandemic progresses it is becoming increasingly obvious that this is not the case.
COVID-19 looks set to become a disease of poverty, and that inequality is already in plain sight.
Breaking the population down into five equal parts (quintiles) by deprivation (red for most deprived green for least), if there were no inequality due to deprivation we would expect disease related outcomes to be the same for each quintile.
*Spolier Alert* - They're not. 2/8
These are the English regions ranked by the highest proportion of deprivation.
The regions with the highest proportion of deprivation also currently have the highest case and positivity rates in the country. 3/8
The fact we are seeing cases of the new Brazilian variant in the community indicates that border controls have not been tough enough to prevent the entry of new variants.
1/7
That people can travel from Brazil taking a connecting flight in France, for example, and avoid the mandatory managed isolation that has recently been brought in makes a mockery of the 'tougher' border restrictions.
We know that people don't always take the most direct route.2/7
At the moment we are fortunate that we are in a situation in which the reproduction number is below 1.
Even with slightly more transmissible strains we would expect each newly infected person to infect fewer than one other individuals on average.3/7
If it's a semi-circle then I think the technical answer is true.
You can define the angle between two non-straight line curves at a point can be defined as the angle between their tangents at that point. If this is a semicircle then these two angles would indeed by 90 degrees.
Some people have pointed out that it might be a different sector of a circle which would make the answer false.
For many students first learning about angles the definition uses the idea of two straight lines meeting at a point in which case the answer would also be false.