Coronavirus update - NO MORE RESTRICTIONS

[BlueToujours]

Re: Coronavirus update

i guess they feel the general public like a bit of positivity in these times, most knew it was a brave target, it was a hell of a " ramp up " in tests in such a short time frame

Did you see the Briefing tho. Matt Hancock said that the number of tests yesterday was 122K. This is obviously not true. He was clearly lying to the people that he is supposed to be serve. Politician lying... no surprise there. He would get more respect by admitting an heroic failure but stressing the increase in capacity.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Coronavirus update

The problem with this subject is that I can't help thinking that the arguments would be reversed by some people on both sides if exactly the same thing happened and it was a Labour Government. I tend to agree with Matt, the method by which the 100,000 figure was arrived may be a bit dubious, but it's obvious that there are far more tests being carried out than there were and that was what many, myself included, wanted a month ago. There are plenty of things the Government can be criticised for in this crisis, but I'm not going to get too worked up about this.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: Coronavirus update

The problem with this subject is that I can't help thinking that the arguments would be reversed by some people on both sides if exactly the same thing happened and it was a Labour Government. I tend to agree with Matt, the method by which the 100,000 figure was arrived may be a bit dubious, but it's obvious that there are far more tests being carried out than there were and that was what many, myself included, wanted a month ago. There are plenty of things the Government can be criticised for in this crisis, but I'm not going to get too worked up about this.

Bob,

I sort of agree. Targets, particularly ones that politicians associate themselves with can be galvanising and purposeful in pushing and mobilising effort. Where they are dangerous is when they become more important than the outcome. I think there is a bit of the latter here.

If the aim is to manage the best outcome for the UK from where we are then in the absence of a vaccine testing and tracing is the best way out. Increasing targeted testing at those most at risk or most vulnerable aligned to a tracing capability for those who have come in contact with them with all those elements in place or being put in place seems to be the right way forward with the capacity to manage what the results are telling you.

I don't get the sense that was the driver here, More once the target was set how can we engineer an outcome that meets it. If it means a bit of smoke and mirrors on the numbers then there should be a bit of shame on shoulders rather than laurel leaves but is less important to me than if what was done diverted resources away from the test/trace/test strategy.

[Hilts]

Re: Coronavirus update

i guess they feel the general public like a bit of positivity in these times, most knew it was a brave target, it was a hell of a " ramp up " in tests in such a short time frame

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[Eric Cartman]

Re: Coronavirus update

i guess they feel the general public like a bit of positivity in these times, most knew it was a brave target, it was a hell of a " ramp up " in tests in such a short time frame

No politician thinks in these terms these days, they can't afford to.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Coronavirus update

Bob,

I sort of agree. Targets, particularly ones that politicians associate themselves with can be galvanising and purposeful in pushing and mobilising effort. Where they are dangerous is when they become more important than the outcome. I think there is a bit of the latter here.

If the aim is to manage the best outcome for the UK from where we are then in the absence of a vaccine testing and tracing is the best way out. Increasing targeted testing at those most at risk or most vulnerable aligned to a tracing capability for those who have come in contact with them with all those elements in place or being put in place seems to be the right way forward with the capacity to manage what the results are telling you.

I don't get the sense that was the driver here, More once the target was set how can we engineer an outcome that meets it. If it means a bit of smoke and mirrors on the numbers then there should be a bit of shame on shoulders rather than laurel leaves but is less important to me than if what was done diverted resources away from the test/trace/test strategy.

I'm with you when you talk about the target becoming over important - gimmick is too strong a word, but it has felt a little like that to me at times when it comes to 100,000 cases a day. However, I do feel that the important thing is that we appear to be better placed now to use the methods practiced by countries that have made a much better fist of tackling the virus now - I'll give the Government some credit for this, but the fact that we are, finally, beginning to do what we should have been able to do ages ago still leaves them a long way in debit as far as I'm concerned.

[surge]

Re: Coronavirus update

I don't know if 100,000 tests a day is sufficient* but ensuring those who need testing are able to access it quickly, easily and accurately is an important part of getting out of lockdown, in my opinion, so this another small step in right direction. The next questions being are we reaching all who need it, how easy are they to admister and and how quickly and accurately do results come back. Has there been any information on this for me to read?

*I'm sure "the science" says it is now whereas one month ago "the science" said it wasn't. We still seem to be doing second worst in the world despite more notice than most so would be interesting to see how "the science" explains that.

[surge]

Re: Coronavirus update

Andrew Neil, BBC/The Spectator, is not impressed:

Let’s now disaggregate this. The 122,000 total includes almost 40,000 tests posted to homes and patients in hospital. There are no figures for how many of the 40,000 we’re actually tested/processed. Also only 73,000 people were checked as some had multiple tests.

The original target was 100,000 people tested by end-April. That target has been missed, despite the headline figure. Indeed the more you looked at the 122,000 stat, the more it looks a propaganda figure rather than a reliable guide.

https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1256274734465134592

[life on mars]

Re: Coronavirus update

I don't know if 100,000 tests a day is sufficient* but ensuring those who need testing are able to access it quickly, easily and accurately is an important part of getting out of lockdown, in my opinion, so this another small step in right direction. The next questions being are we reaching all who need it, how easy are they to admister and and how quickly and accurately do results come back. Has there been any information on this for me to read?

*I'm sure "the science" says it is now whereas one month ago "the science" said it wasn't. We still seem to be doing second worst in the world despite more notice than most so would be interesting to see how "the science" explains that.

There is the crux of th matter , like most set targets they actually lead to a media frenzy , one decent media man admitted today using this target as a storyline was wrong, testing is fine ,results are the key ,and testing the right people at the right time, I'd rather no target and quality testing , testing to reach some target is worrying .

[Eric Cartman]

Re: Coronavirus update

There is the crux of th matter , like most set targets they actually lead to a media frenzy , one decent media man admitted today using this target as a storyline was wrong, testing is fine ,results are the key ,and testing the right people at the right time, I'd rather no target and quality testing , testing to reach some target is worrying .

Agree with all of that. The media definitely played their part in pushing this as a make or break for the government.

[life on mars]

Re: Coronavirus update

Agree with all of that. The media definitely played their part in pushing this as a make or break for the government.

👍 We saw the same on Immigration controls .

[delmbox]

Re: Coronavirus update

Is that 122,000 completed tests?

If so it’s a step in the right direction.

He hasn't been seen since this post, it's bizarre how often his internet cuts out when he's getting proven wrong

[Gofer Blue]

Re: Coronavirus update

What was the significance of 100,000 tests per day anyway?

[blue matt]

Re: Coronavirus update

What was the significance of 100,000 tests per day anyway?

It was just a target the government set themselves

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Coronavirus update

�� We saw the same on Immigration controls .

Rubbish, the media would not have been going on about the testing or immigration targets if the Government hadn't set them would they?

That said, I agree that the media in general have an increasing tendency to go for "obvious" questions like the 100,000 target when, if the object of the questioning is to be critical of the Government, there is so much else they could concentrate on.