Are the Government massaging the death rate.

RandySavage

Well-known member
97% of all mass superspreaders (at least 5 infections) were indoors.
So crowds outside are ok now then as only 3% of superspreaders (whatever they are) are outside?

Might explain why there was zero arrests at the first round of protests for breaking coronavirus bill rules.
 

Billy Horner

Well-known member
No further deaths announced by South Tees NHS Trust, total remaining at 253.

No further deaths announced by North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust, total remaining at 139.

South Tees NHS Trust are 5th highest (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region (out of 30 NHS Trusts) and the 37th highest (same as yesterday) in the country (out of 220 NHS Trusts in England).

North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust are 16th (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region and the 90th (same as yesterday) in the country.
 

Billy Horner

Well-known member
One further death announced by South Tees NHS Trust, taking total to 254.

No further deaths announced by North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust, total remaining at 139.

South Tees NHS Trust are 5th highest (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region (out of 30 NHS Trusts) and the 37th highest (same as yesterday) in the country (out of 220 NHS Trusts in England).

North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust are 16th (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region and the 90th (same as yesterday) in the country.
 

bear66

Well-known member
2134 positive tests in Teesside and 338 in North Yorkshire in South Tees hospital district.

0.4% increase in Teesside positive tests; slightly more than the national average, which has been rare over the last month.
 

Billy Horner

Well-known member
No further deaths announced by South Tees NHS Trust, total remaining 254.

No further deaths announced by North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust, total remaining at 139.

South Tees NHS Trust are 5th highest (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region (out of 30 NHS Trusts) and the 37th highest (same as yesterday) in the country (out of 220 NHS Trusts in England).

North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust are 16th (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region and the joint 90th (from outright 90th yesterday) in the country.
 

Billy Horner

Well-known member
No further deaths announced by South Tees NHS Trust, total remaining 254.

One further death announced by North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust, taking total to 140.

South Tees NHS Trust are 5th highest (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region (out of 30 NHS Trusts) and the 37th highest (same as yesterday) in the country (out of 220 NHS Trusts in England).

North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust are 16th (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region and the joint 90th (same as yesterday) in the country.
 

bear66

Well-known member
2135 positive tests in Teesside and 338 in North Yorkshire in South Tees hospital district.

0.05% increase in Teesside or North Yorkshire positive tests today. Just one new case in R&C.
 
Billy H, as someone who obviously has knowledge of this issue, where do you see the civic deaths/infections in 6 weeks , the height of summer, with the current known social restrictions in place ?
 

Billy Horner

Well-known member
No further deaths announced by South Tees NHS Trust, total remaining at 254.

No further deaths announced by North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust, total remaining at 140.

South Tees NHS Trust are 5th highest (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region (out of 30 NHS Trusts) and the 37th highest (same as yesterday) in the country (out of 220 NHS Trusts in England).

North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Trust are 16th (same as yesterday) in terms of number of deaths in the North East & Yorkshire region and the joint 90th (same as yesterday) in the country.
 

Billy Horner

Well-known member
Billy H, as someone who obviously has knowledge of this issue, where do you see the civic deaths/infections in 6 weeks , the height of summer, with the current known social restrictions in place ?
As I was saying on the other thread yesterday, forecasting isn't really my bag. I could do it to an extent in the early days of the UK epidemic, as I could use Italy as a reference point for our trajectory, but we overtook them nearly two months ago.

From a purely mathematical perspective, the numbers of infections (especially hospital reported infections) and deaths have continued to fall, albeit at a gradually slower rate. If you were projecting (rather than forecasting), you would simply roll those trends forward, which would project an eventual eradication of the virus.

However, we know that is highly unlikely. We also know several of the variables are about to change, thus changing the mathematics dependent upon them.

On the positive side, we still have two months of summer left with sunshine, relatively warm temperatures and people spending more time outdoors. We also have significantly fewer infected people in the general population than at the height of the epidemic three months ago. On the negative side, however, we appear to have higher levels of infection than other European countries, we've seen increases in infection in some places that relaxed too soon (such as the US), the ONS surveys suggest that infection levels have plateaued, and we are about to see a significantly higher level of human interaction from this coming weekend.

I agree that we can't stay locked down forever and I wouldn't want to make an outright prediction on what will happen. However, my concern would be that, instead of bringing numbers down to extremely low levels in the summer, we might end up 'seeding' the population with higher levels of background infection, just in time for the arrival of the cold and flu season in the autumn.
 

bear66

Well-known member
As I was saying on the other thread yesterday, forecasting isn't really my bag. I could do it to an extent in the early days of the UK epidemic, as I could use Italy as a reference point for our trajectory, but we overtook them nearly two months ago.

From a purely mathematical perspective, the numbers of infections (especially hospital reported infections) and deaths have continued to fall, albeit at a gradually slower rate. If you were projecting (rather than forecasting), you would simply roll those trends forward, which would project an eventual eradication of the virus.

However, we know that is highly unlikely. We also know several of the variables are about to change, thus changing the mathematics dependent upon them.

On the positive side, we still have two months of summer left with sunshine, relatively warm temperatures and people spending more time outdoors. We also have significantly fewer infected people in the general population than at the height of the epidemic three months ago. On the negative side, however, we appear to have higher levels of infection than other European countries, we've seen increases in infection in some places that relaxed too soon (such as the US), the ONS surveys suggest that infection levels have plateaued, and we are about to see a significantly higher level of human interaction from this coming weekend.

I agree that we can't stay locked down forever and I wouldn't want to make an outright prediction on what will happen. However, my concern would be that, instead of bringing numbers down to extremely low levels in the summer, we might end up 'seeding' the population with higher levels of background infection, just in time for the arrival of the cold and flu season in the autumn.
Could Scotland have a totally different outcome by extending aspects of lockdown?
 

Billy Horner

Well-known member
Could Scotland have a totally different outcome by extending aspects of lockdown?
It’s certainly possible. Even allowing for differences in the size of population, Scotland has been reporting numbers significantly lower than England for a few weeks now.

It may be reasonable to suggest that, given England and Scotland locked down at the same time, the epidemic was at an earlier stage in Scotland and therefore did not reach the same levels as in England. Scotland also appears to have had a slightly stricter lockdown, which may have suppressed levels more effectively.

Then there are the differences in relaxation of measures. England has encouraged people to return to work, allowed unrestricted travel and opened non-essential retail much earlier than in Scotland. The advice on face coverings was also issued in Scotland two weeks earlier than in England.

Unfortunately, the ONS infection survey only covers England and there is no equivalent in Scotland. Therefore, it’s impossible to estimate infection levels in the Scottish population. However, all of the other indicators are lower in Scotland than in England, so you might assume that they’ve been much more effective in suppressing the disease.

So a different outcome is certainly possible. That said, I do wonder how easy it would be for Scotland to protect itself from higher infection levels in England, given the UK single market, open borders and inter-dependancy of our economies.
 

bear66

Well-known member
It’s certainly possible. Even allowing for differences in the size of population, Scotland has been reporting numbers significantly lower than England for a few weeks now.

It may be reasonable to suggest that, given England and Scotland locked down at the same time, the epidemic was at an earlier stage in Scotland and therefore did not reach the same levels as in England. Scotland also appears to have had a slightly stricter lockdown, which may have suppressed levels more effectively.

Then there are the differences in relaxation of measures. England has encouraged people to return to work, allowed unrestricted travel and opened non-essential retail much earlier than in Scotland. The advice on face coverings was also issued in Scotland two weeks earlier than in England.

Unfortunately, the ONS infection survey only covers England and there is no equivalent in Scotland. Therefore, it’s impossible to estimate infection levels in the Scottish population. However, all of the other indicators are lower in Scotland than in England, so you might assume that they’ve been much more effective in suppressing the disease.

So a different outcome is certainly possible. That said, I do wonder how easy it would be for Scotland to protect itself from higher infection levels in England, given the UK single market, open borders and inter-dependancy of our economies.
Sturgeon just announced four consecutive days without a hospital Covid-19 death.

Would be interesting if they put up some travel been from England to Scotland or quarantine requirements.
 
Top