https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87844
https://www.newsweek.com/hydroxychloroquine-not-key-defeating-covid-19-opinion-1521463
https://medcitynews.com/2020/07/hydroxychloroquine-flunks-phase-iii-trial-in-mild-to-moderate-covid-19/

Aug 1, 2020 at 6:22 PM Phil Clarke
All written by those that believe in Mann's Hockey Stick?

Less than two weeks before receiving his diagnosis, Cain attended Trump’s campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, which had been staged despite concerns about mass gatherings during the pandemic.

Source

Think of this, if we didn’t do testing, instead of testing over 40 million people, if we did half the testing we would have half the cases

- You know who.

Source

Sticking strictly to Trumpian thinking, Cain's big mistake was getting tested. If he had just avoided that rookie error he would still be alive.

What level of reality are we operating on now? I mean it is not like this is life or death stuff. Oh, wait....

Clarke, do some reading:

https://twitter.com/JamesTodaroMD/status/1289563464499781632

https://www.ijidonline.com/article/S1201-9712(20)30534-8/fulltext

The response to Covid 19 is all about the science, nothing to do with politics or money:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/08/01/jim-jordan-confronts-dr-anthony-fauci-on-disparate-covid-concerns/#more-197387

"What level of reality are we operating on now? I mean it is not like this is life or death stuff. Oh, wait....
Aug 1, 2020 at 11:03 PM Phil Clarke"

Correct, Climate Scientists keep killing by enforced deprivations and poverty

A new study says HCQ is ineffective against coronavirus if you spray the drug on a living porcupine and shove it up your ass while praying to the Sun God.

h/t Scott Adams

Clarke, do some reading:

https://twitter.com/JamesTodaroMD/status/1289563464499781632

Is that James Todaro, a member of the self-styled 'America's Frontline Doctors', an opthamologist whose 'educational limited' medical licence expired last year, who has not practiced in two years, and whose previous tweets on hydroxy were flagged by Twitter as 'unsafe'.

That Todaro? ;-)

We discussed the Arshad paper earlier. It has been rebutted by a later article in the same journal pointed out confounding factors that called the conclusions into doubt.

… confounding by severity or indication was likely. While there was a hospital treatment protocol in place, unmeasured clinical factors likely influenced the decision not to treat 16.1% of patients, in a center where 78% received treatment. These factors are often difficult to capture in an observational study. Were the decision to withhold treatment related to poor prognosis (e.g. palliative intent), it stands to reason that patients receiving neither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin would have the highest mortality. Indeed, the non-treated group had an overall mortality that was higher than the rate of admission to the ICU (26.4% vs 15.2%), suggesting that many patients were not considered appropriate for critical care. Such being the case, their care may have differed in other substantive ways that were also associated with death (e.g. terminal illness or advanced directives limiting invasive care). In the hydroxychloroquine treatment groups, the inverse was true, with mortality lower than the rate of admission to the ICU (16.1% vs 26.9%).

Do some reading:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/covid-19-coronavirus-hydroxychloroquine-no-evidence-treatment

I'm curious regarding the Government's "squeezing the brake" in response to rising Covid-19 numbers, and am looking for a more thoughtful and detailed analysis. It seems to me from what I've read that while numbers of infections seem to be rising, the number of deaths, hospital admissions, and patients on ventilation continue to fall. At the same time, for the last 5 weeks, we haven't seen excess deaths compared to the rolling 5-year average; rather over the last 5 weeks, deaths have been below average.

I'm not arguing that the Government's response in squeezing the brake is right or wrong - I simply don't know. However, I would like to see more from ministers, scientific advisers and the media, in the way of an informed and detailed analysis of the statistics.

Tentatively and very provisionally, it seems to me that one explanation of the statistics MIGHT be that the growing number of cases are among the young, who SEEM on average to be less scrupulous about observing the Covid-19 rules (social distancing et al) than the rest of society. That might explain why cases are going up, but deaths and hospitalisations are going down - because young people, while sadly not immune, are less likely to be symptomatic and less likely to suffer seriously adverse consequences from infection.

IF that's right, then maybe it's good news? Perhaps it's indicative of growing herd immunity and/or of the virus mutating and becoming more benign. Perhaps the reversal of the excess deaths numbers for the last 5 weeks is a sign that the oldest and most vulnerable in society have already faced the worst that Covid-19 can do, and in many cases, perhaps, their deaths were accelerated by a few weeks or months, and they would have died by now anyway? If so, by the end of the year, the excess deaths numbers for the whole of 2020 might be very small indeed.

I'm NOT arguing that we don't have a problem; I'm NOT arguing that can we be complacent; I'm NOT arguing for a return to normal. However, I AM arguing for a more detailed, informed and nuanced debate. If the statistics are evidence of a reducing mortality from increased numbers of cases, perhaps - just perhaps - squeezing the brake is exactly the wrong thing to do.

I'd be interested to know what others think, and also if anyone knows where I can obtain better and more relevant statistics than from here:

https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/healthcare

"IF that's right, then maybe it's good news?"
Aug 2, 2020 at 8:19 PM Mark Hodgson

I think you are correct,, that the under 30s do account for the rise in cases as they are more resistant to serious consequences, and are less likely to respect "social distancing" between themselves. Unfortunately, their family elders have been lulled into not socially distancing themselves from the younger generations of their communities.

Both BoJo and Sturgeon realised the inevitable consequences of Eid. Personally, I think it curious that pubs were allowed to reopen.

There remains extreme nervousness about allowing family groups to interact, whatever their creed or colour.

Medics ARE better at treating those with Coronavirus symptoms, but Herd Immunity is not yet working, possibly because the young are excellent Superspreaders whilst they remain infectious.

The logical conclusion (though not necessarily correct) would be to encourage the young to infect each other, at a safe distance from anybody older. Not surprisingly, teachers resisted a return to school.

Aug 3, 2020 at 10:44 AM tomo

I thought some localised second waves would be attributed to supermarkets and possibly individual cashiers on tills. I don't know if this has occurred.

Crowded and confined spaces still seem to be the high risk environments, with the irresponsible yoofs the most high risk to contain within a confined space.

There has been a drop in the campaigning for more handwashing, but an increase against meetings of groups indoors (apart from pubs/restaurants)

"Multi-Use" Buildings (Sports/Community Centres etc) are still the ones LockedOut, with activities such as drama, laughter and singing considered high risk, which of course applies to churches, mosques, synagogues etc.

It seems that inhaling someone else's expired breath is the focus of concern, if it is within a poorly ventilated confined space.

Diamond Princess had airconditioned confined spaces, mixed races, colours, creeds, foods but no (?) yoofs.

Mark,

To my eye UK cases have been rising gradually since the start of July, whilst deaths have basically flatlined.

https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/

I guess the aim is to get the cases curve going down again and avoid the rise in cases feeding into a rise in deaths, the mean time from onset to mortality being around 18 days.

Excess deaths are below the average however by less than 1%. According to Spiegelhalter

The lack of excess deaths is explained by non-COVID deaths being eight percent below the five-year average

… which is a bit of a puzzler. (People not travelling? People not working?), but whatever the cause it is clear the epidemic is far from over and may actually be getting worse.

Aug 3, 2020 at 1:00 PM Phil Clarke
Which substitute "Phil Clarke" have we got today?

It is not the normal Climate Science failure Phil Clarke, nor Economics failure Phil Clarke, not even Economics failure Phil Clarke. The normal Medical failure Phil Clarke has also been temporarily put back on the reserve bench.

The puzzle is why non-COVID excess deaths are down, at least according to Spiegelhalter. I would have expected with all the medical resources being diverted to the virus, mental health issues due to the lockdown etc, the opposite to be the case.

Increased testing probably explains at least some of the recent rise in cases. However the ONS surveillance study uses a fixed sample in the community (that is outside hospitals and care homes) and so is unaffected by testing rates and for the most recent week available, July 26, shows an increase in new infections.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/31july2020

In my view, by now anything other than a rapidly falling number of infections must be counted as a failure.

The puzzle is why non-COVID excess deaths are down, at least according to Spiegelhalter. I would have expected with all the medical resources being diverted to the virus, mental health issues due to the lockdown etc, the opposite to be the case.

Aug 3, 2020 at 2:23 PM Phil Clarke

Will they find a cure for the mental and honesty issues of Climate Scientists?

"I presume the virus is unaware of human administrative zones.
Aug 3, 2020 at 3:49 PM tomo"

Climate Science can provide fake proxies and references whenever required.

There are clearly problems with the attributionists blaming every death on Coronavirus. Some of the decline in Coronavirus deaths may simply represent improved accuracy and honesty.

I have done 3 "routine" blood tests in the last 4weeks. I have not been told whether Coronavirus was tested for, but i have not been told that i have/hadn't had it.

"In my view, by now anything other than a rapidly falling number of infections must be counted as a failure.
Aug 3, 2020 at 2:45 PM Phil Clarke"

In my view, children and adults have now got a better understanding of the consequences of a Green Blob Lockdown and what permanent mass unemployment will look like.

Thank you to everyone who responded and attempted to assist me to cease to be perplexed.

I think that Phil's comment that Covid-19 deaths are broadly flat-lining isn't quite true - certainly there is proving to be an alarmingly long tail, but if you look at every date and compare it to the same date in the week before and in previous weeks, I think it's fair to say that it shows continuing modest declining numbers. I think it's important to check each date against the same day in the previous week(s) because of the way reporting is taking place (with numbers being much lower at weekends). I suspect the rate of decline would be greater still were not some earlier deaths being belatedly reported and included in more recent statistics.

Despite that, the tail is worrying, if not yet a cause for alarm, IMO, though I do agree with Phil that we'll have a clearer picture in two or three weeks' time, when we might expect rising numbers of infections to be showing themselves in terms of numbers of patients/deaths. IF by the end of August, deaths, hospitalisations and ICU admissions are not rising, or - better still - are continuing to decline, despite rising infection rates, then we might - just might - at that stage have grounds for some cautious optimism.

Mark,

but if you look at every date and compare it to the same date in the week before and in previous weeks, I think it's fair to say that it shows continuing modest declining numbers. 

I've done that analysis and my eyeball was wrong and you are right, there is a modest negative trend if you remove the weekly cycle. Which is good news.

R-Squared is 0.92 so It's probably real, but there's a lot of variance, for example the trend for Fridays is actually positive. Go figure.