Uncertainty over what should happen on construction sites is another example of the lack of clarity coming from Boris Johnson every time he blusters. Although Persimmon undoubtedly will have an eye on a collapse in demand.

When housing development eventually gets going again, Owl confidently predicts that developers will claim that EDDC has fallen behind its planned build out rate and demand more planning permissions to compensate.

Owl wonders what is happening at Hinkley – the construction that is so vital to Heart of the South West strategic plans? Have they downed tools?

Matt Oliver  www.thisismoney.co.uk 

Persimmon and Bellway down tools and halt dividend as row rages about whether construction should continue during lockdown

Persimmon and Bellway have told workers to down tools as a row rages about whether construction should continue during the coronavirus lockdown. 

The housebuilders also suspended their dividends to help conserve cash, following in the footsteps of other businesses. 

Shares in Persimmon rose 15.3 per cent, or 258.5p, to 1950p after the announcement, while Bellway’s shares fell 1.6 per cent, or 32p, to 2039p. 

Housebuilders Persimmon and Bellway have told workers to down tools as a row rages about whether construction should continue during the coronavirus lockdown

Rivals Barratt, Taylor Wimpey and Galliard Homes also announced site closures. Vistry Group, the owner of Bovis Homes and Galliford, also said it was cancelling a dividend due in May worth £60million. 

It had already halted work at its sites. However, others such as Redrow and Berkeley Homes have defied pressure to take similar steps, sparking a row about whether the Government should explicitly ban construction site work. 

Cabinet ministers including Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick have resisted an all-out ban, saying that work on infrastructure is important to the economy and should continue – so long as workers stay far enough apart under social-distancing rules. 

Despite this, major sites in London have been shut down after an outcry over the number of construction workers still using the London Underground. 

Mace, the main contractor in charge of redeveloping Battersea Power Station – one of the capital’s biggest building projects – announced a two-day shutdown on Tuesday to review whether it can continue safely. 

Work on major High Speed 2 (HS2) rail sites, including Euston Station and Old Oak Common, has also been suspended, as well as construction of Google’s new headquarters in King’s Cross. 

Persimmon said it had taken the decision to close building sites and sales offices because of the ‘exceptional’ challenges posed by the coronavirus outbreak. 

It said work would only continue at some to make them safe, but admitted the temporary shutdown would cause ‘significant delays’ in handing over homes to customers. 

In a move to free up cash and fortify its balance sheet, the company also postponed two dividend payments – worth 235p per share overall or £749.5million – that were due in April and July. 

Bellway also said it would also shut down its sites and cancelling its interim dividend. Smaller builders such as McCarthy & Stone said they were pausing work. However, Cairn Construction joined Redrow and Berkeley in continuing work on its sites.

Owl has been sent this link by a trusted source, but Owl has not tried this personally. Readers need to be aware of the cautions expressed in the BBC article.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52033210

An app that tracks the symptoms of Covid-19 in the UK has become one of the most popular downloads.

Its creators aim to deliver insights into why some people get the disease more severely than others.

They also hope to create a map showing where outbreaks are happening and help distinguish cases from those of the common cold.

It is one of many such new apps. Experts have warned people to be cautious about which they download.

At present, Covid Symptom Tracker is the third most popular app in Apple’s UK store and second in Google Play’s new releases chart for the country.

Its developers are targeting one million downloads in 24 hours.

The program has been shared thousands of times via WhatsApp and other social-media platforms.

Created in just three days by researchers at Guy’s and St Thomas’ hospitals and King’s College London university, in conjunction with the nutrition advice start-up Zoe, it has already reached 750,000 downloads and, according to its developers, is being installed at a rate of 50,000 times an hour.

Home-testing kit

The app was the brainchild of Prof Tim Spector, a genetic epidemiologist at King’s College, who has specialised in the genetics and medical histories of twins for the past 25 years.

“I was rather depressed as they were shutting down everything in the university and I thought that twins are the best studied people in the country, so how can we use that information in this crisis?” he told BBC News.

Initially, the app was made available only to the twins taking part in his studies, who were sent a home-testing kit to better understand which symptoms corresponded to the coronavirus.
But the professor realised it could be scaled up to the general public, without the testing element.

Temperature reading

“The NHS hasn’t come up with a better alternative and this app seems to be working,” he said.

“We are hoping to get to one million downloads by the end of the day and we will also be ready to release data by then for the NHS, data modellers and researchers to play with.”

The software requires users to share personal details, including their age, height and medical history.

It then asks them to describe symptoms, if they have any, on a daily basis, as well as to give a temperature reading.

Critically unwell

Prof Spector said it could potentially help the NHS:

• learn how fast the virus is spreading in a particular area, as well as highlighting high-risk parts of the country
• better understand the symptoms, including the differences between those of the virus and the common cold
• explain why some people develop a mild illness while others become critically unwell

A spokeswoman for Zoe told BBC News all shared data would be anonymised and not used for any commercial purpose. And users could delete all their records when the crisis was over.

But as spam and malware skyrocket on the back of the pandemic, one expert said people would be wise to be cautious about downloading other apps purporting to help tackle coronavirus.

“I am concerned by the rash of websites and apps intended to allow people to report of their Covid-19 symptoms,” said privacy expert Pat Walshe.

‘Dubious ethics’

“I’ve found it difficult or impossible to determine who is behind a number of them.

“They do not adopt appropriate standards of compliance with data protection law and I see dubious ethics.

“Could an app help? Yes, possibly. But I think we need the NHS to coordinate it in order to provide confidence, trust and protection.”

Prof Spector agrees people need to be careful.

“There are lots of scams out there and bogus things trying to get your details,” he said.

People wishing to download the Covid-19 tracker can do so from Apple and Google’s app stores.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/

Owl understands that, in any epidemic,  it’s important to try to find “patient zero”, the first person to become infected. This is because it helps epidemiologists determine how and when the outbreak started and to gain insight into how it spreads.

Evidence seems to point to a much earlier start in the UK, possibly a month earlier than currently assumed, with the patient infected in Austria, the source of most or all European cases.

[Warning – this article describes certain practices involving ping-pong balls – please do not try this for yourselves anywhere, anytime – Owl.] 

By Paul Nuki, Global Health Security Editor, London and Sarah Newey www.telegraph.co.uk 

A family from East Sussex may have been Britain’s first coronavirus victims, catching the virus in mid-January after visiting an Austrian ski resort which is now under investigation for allegedly covering up the early outbreak.

If confirmed with official tests, it would mean the outbreak in Britain started more than a month earlier than currently thought.

As things stand, the first recorded UK case was January 31 and the earliest documented incidence of transmission within the UK occurred on February 28.

IT consultant Daren Bland, 50, was skiing in Ischgl, Austria from January 15 to 19 with three friends, two from Denmark and one from Minnesota in America. 

All three men fell ill on their return with classic coronavirus symptoms and Mr Bland passed on the infection to his wife and children in Maresfield, east Sussex.

A virus which caused a dry cough then spread rapidly through the locality in the weeks running up to the February half term, with many local children taking time off school with illness.

Austrian prosecutors on Tuesday opened an criminal investigation into allegations a suspected infection in the resort of Ischgl was covered up allowing Covid-19 to spread across Europe undetected.

Hundreds of infections in Germany, Iceland, Norway and Denmark have been traced back to the resort in the Tyrolean Alps by European investigators but Mr Bland and his family are the first in the UK known to be associated with the resort.

Like many of the European victims, Mr Bland visited the Kitzloch bar, which is famed for its apres ski parties. The bar is tightly packed and known for “beer pong” – a drinking game in which revellers take turns to spit the same ping-pong ball into a beer glass. 

“We visited the Kitzloch and it was rammed, with people singing and dancing on the tables”, recalled Mr Bland on Wednesday. “People were hot and sweaty from skiing and waiters were delivering shots to tables in their hundreds. You couldn’t have a better home for a virus”.

The Telegraph has obtained an exclusive video shot inside Ischgl’s Kitzloch apres ski bar, below, which clearly shows conditions inside the venue.

Mr Bland returned home to Maresfield on Sunday, January 19 and fell ill the following morning. “I was ill for 10 days, it was like wading through treacle. I couldn’t get up, I couldn’t work, it knocked me for six. I was breathless.”

Sarah Bland, 49, told the Telegraph: “I was then ill and so was my youngest daughter. My symptoms were a temperature and strange flushes, exhaustion which lasted for nearly three weeks intermittently and total brain fog.

“My daughter had a temperature and persistent cough and was off school for two weeks. My eldest daughter felt wiped out for a day but it passed quickly.”

The family have not been officially confirmed to have had the coronavirus but have been in contact with the Telegraph seeking help for several weeks.

Their suspicions were raised after confirmed coronavirus cases across Europe were traced back to the Austrian resort. Although their illness was relatively mild, one of Mr Bland’s two Danish friends, a man in his 50s, was more seriously ill. 

“I think it’s important we are tested to see if we have had the virus”, said Mrs Bland on Wednesday. “It is partly out of curiosity but also because it may help the authorities better understand the spread in the UK. They are meticulous in their testing in Europe”.

Mr Bland added: “A test for people like us would enable us to get out and help make deliveries and run errands for others”.

Mark Woolhouse, professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh, said cases  like this demonstrates the need for widespread antibody and viral genome sequencing testing.

These tests can show who has and who has not been exposed to the virus and therefore help epidemiologists trace the history and spread of the disease.

“A really significant unknown in this epidemic is whether or not the cases that are symptomatic are simply the tip of the iceberg,” he said. “If there are hidden cases in large numbers then it tells us that the infection is more difficult to control than we thought… but also suggests that there is a possibility herd immunity may have built up.”

Epidemiologists are still unclear about when the virus arrived in the UK, although modelling from Oxford University has suggested it could have arrived in mid January and have been spreading undetected since then.

Skiers from Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Germany and Austria all began testing positive for coronavirus after returning home from Ischgl in March. The Austrian authorities are now probing earlier cases amid allegations that the resort tried to cover them up.

European governments started listing the town as an at-risk area in February, although local authorities played down the concerns initially.

The Kitzloch bar was eventually closed on March 10, and the resort closed on March 13.

Werner Kurz, the mayor of Ischgl, told German newspaper Der Spiegel the shut down was “a catastrophe” for the town, saying: “We implemented all regulations in a timely manner”.

​

Owl, on the basis of discussions with trusted and knowledgeable friends, has consistently questioned whether Boris Johnson and his advisers have really been “guided by the science” in a way that could be described as “scientific”. This short article describes the glaring limitations of their approach in a more eloquent way.

The troubling assumptions and use of the modelling from Im­pe­rial Col­lege that un­der­pinned the govern­ment’s be­lief that the na­tion could ride out the epi­demic by let­ting the in­fec­tion sweep through, cre­at­ing “herd im­mu­nity” on the way, is discussed in particular.

Scientific modelling is valuable – but remember the limitations

Ian Sample, Analysis, Guardian 26 March www.pressreader.com 

The lessons to be learned from the coro­n­avirus pan­demic are so nu­mer­ous they will keep schol­ars busy for decades to come. Chief among them is the value of modelling and the fact that an un­crit­i­cal re­liance on their find­ings can lead you badly astray.

A re­cent model from Ox­ford Univer­sity assessed how well dif­fer­ent out­break sce­nar­ios fit­ted the rise in Covid-19 deaths in the UK and Italy. The most ex­treme UK sce­nario as­sumed only a frac­tion of peo­ple were at risk of se­ri­ous ill­ness and es­ti­mated that, as of last week, 68% of the pop­u­la­tion had been ex­posed to the virus. The study, which has not been pub­lished or peer re­viewed, un­leashed a flurry of head­lines declar­ing that coro­n­avirus may have in­fected half the peo­ple in Bri­tain. That’s 34 mil­lion peo­ple.

A re­cent model from Ox­ford Univer­sity assessed how well dif­fer­ent out­break sce­nar­ios fit­ted the rise in Covid-19 deaths in the UK and Italy. The most ex­treme UK sce­nario as­sumed only a frac­tion of peo­ple were at risk of se­ri­ous ill­ness and es­ti­mated that, as of last week, 68% of the pop­u­la­tion had been ex­posed to the virus. The study, which has not been pub­lished or peer re­viewed, un­leashed a flurry of head­lines declar­ing that coro­n­avirus may have in­fected half the peo­ple in Bri­tain. That’s 34 mil­lion peo­ple.

But as infectious dis­ease mod­ellers and pub­lic health ex­perts, in­clud­ing the Ox­ford team them­selves, have pointed out, the model used as­sump­tions be­cause there is no hard data. No one knows what frac­tion of the pub­lic is at risk of se­ri­ous ill­ness. The study merely demon­strates how wildly dif­fer­ent sce­nar­ios can pro­duce the same tragic pat­tern of deaths – and em­pha­sises that we ur­gently need sero­log­i­cal test­ing for an­ti­bod­ies against the virus, to dis­cover which world we are in.

But as infectious dis­ease mod­ellers and pub­lic health ex­perts, in­clud­ing the Ox­ford team them­selves, have pointed out, the model used as­sump­tions be­cause there is no hard data. No one knows what frac­tion of the pub­lic is at risk of se­ri­ous ill­ness. The study merely demon­strates how wildly dif­fer­ent sce­nar­ios can pro­duce the same tragic pat­tern of deaths – and em­pha­sises that we ur­gently need sero­log­i­cal test­ing for an­ti­bod­ies against the virus, to dis­cover which world we are in.

Paul Klen­er­man, one of the Ox­ford re­searchers, called the 68% fig­ure “the most ex­treme” re­sult and ex­plained that “there is an­other ex­treme which is that only a tiny pro­por­tion have been ex­posed”. He added that the true fig­ure – which is un­known – was “likely some­where in be­tween”. In other words, the num­ber of peo­ple in­fected in Bri­tain is ei­ther very large, very small, or mid­dling. This may sound un­help­ful, but it is pre­cisely the point. “We need much more data about who has been ex­posed to in­form pol­icy,” Klen­er­man said.

Paul Klen­er­man, one of the Ox­ford re­searchers, called the 68% fig­ure “the most ex­treme” re­sult and ex­plained that “there is an­other ex­treme which is that only a tiny pro­por­tion have been ex­posed”. He added that the true fig­ure – which is un­known – was “likely some­where in be­tween”. In other words, the num­ber of peo­ple in­fected in Bri­tain is ei­ther very large, very small, or mid­dling. This may sound un­help­ful, but it is pre­cisely the point. “We need much more data about who has been ex­posed to in­form pol­icy,” Klen­er­man said.

The modelling from Im­pe­rial Col­lege that un­der­pinned the govern­ment’s be­lief that the na­tion could ride out the epi­demic by let­ting the in­fec­tion sweep through, cre­at­ing “herd im­mu­nity” on the way, was more trou­bling. The model, based on 13-year-old code for a long-feared in­fluenza pan­demic, as­sumed the demand for in­ten­sive care units would be the same for both in­fec­tions. Data from China soon showed this was dan­ger­ously wrong, but the model was only up­dated when more data poured out of Italy, where ICUs were swiftly over­whelmed and deaths shot up.

The modelling from Im­pe­rial Col­lege that un­der­pinned the govern­ment’s be­lief that the na­tion could ride out the epi­demic by let­ting the in­fec­tion sweep through, cre­at­ing “herd im­mu­nity” on the way, was more trou­bling. The model, based on 13-year-old code for a long-feared in­fluenza pan­demic, as­sumed the demand for in­ten­sive care units would be the same for both in­fec­tions. Data from China soon showed this was dan­ger­ously wrong, but the model was only up­dated when more data poured out of Italy, where ICUs were swiftly over­whelmed and deaths shot up.

It wasn’t the only short­com­ing of the Im­pe­rial model. It did not con­sider the im­pact of wide­spread, rapid test­ing; or contact trac­ing and iso­la­tion, which can be used in the early stages of an epi­demic, or in lock­down con­di­tions, to keep in­fec­tions down to such an ex­tent that when re­stric­tions are lifted the virus should not re­bound.

It wasn’t the only short­com­ing of the Im­pe­rial model. It did not con­sider the im­pact of wide­spread, rapid test­ing; or contact trac­ing and iso­la­tion, which can be used in the early stages of an epi­demic, or in lock­down con­di­tions, to keep in­fec­tions down to such an ex­tent that when re­stric­tions are lifted the virus should not re­bound.

It is not a ques­tion of whether mod­els are flawed, but in what ways are they flawed. That does not make them use­less: mod­els can be enor­mously valu­able if their short­com­ings are ap­pre­ci­ated. But, as with other sources of in­for­ma­tion, they should never be used alone.

Mixed messages – has LINO finally lost control?

East Devon parks, toilets and play areas shut to stop coronavirus spread. 

East Devon Reporter eastdevonnews.co.uk

Parks and gardens, public toilets, play areas and beach huts in East Devon have been shut in a bid to stop the spread of coronavirus. [But previous post shows LINO and Pook want to encourage parking in Towns to help business]

District council bosses have made the move to follow government guidance on social distancing.

They say the closure will also help to ‘key frontline services’ – such as rubbish collections – running in the face of staff shortages.

With restrictions on our own staffing, this will also mean we can continue to provide other key frontline services for the time being, such as litter collection and kerbside recycling and waste collections…

Green and bulky waste services have been temporarily suspended, but planning and building control remains open for business as construction continues.

An EDDC spokesperson said: “Following government guidance on social distancing, we have closed our parks and gardens, play areas, public toilets and provision of beach huts and sites to help restrict the spread of coronavirus.

“We’ve been closely following government advice and this is the responsible thing to do to help with our country’s response to coronavirus.

“With restrictions on our own staffing, this will also mean we can continue to provide other key frontline services for the time being, such as litter collection and kerbside recycling and waste collections.

“We urge people to stay local, avoid non-essential travel and observe social distancing.”

The council says that, where sites cannot be closed – such as beaches and nature reserves – it is reminding people to respect the Government’s social distancing and hygiene guidance.

Winter car parking rates extended until May across East Devon “in order to better support town centre businesses”

Owl wonders whether LINO (Leader in name only) Ben Ingham and his “Independent” sidekick Geoff Pook have completely lost their marbles.

 Is the Government message too difficult for them to understand?

 We are facing a global pandemic, the infection in the UK has yet to be brought under any semblance of control. It is touch and go as to whether our chronically underfunded NHS will be able to cope when the peak infection rate is reached. 

The government instruction right now is that people should stay at home and only leave for very restricted reasons, and then for as short a time as possible. It is not yet clear whether this instruction will be heeded. East Devon has one of the most vulnerable populations in the country. 

Spending all day wandering around Exmouth, Sidmouth, Honiton, Seaton, Axminster, Ottery and Budleigh in normal times is to be encouraged, but these are not normal times. There may be a very good case, when recovery starts, to cut car parking charges to encourage this. Doing it now sends all the wrong signals. It is totally irresponsible.

The sooner the LINO regime is replaced, the better.

Beth Sharp www.sidmouthherald.co.uk 

The all-day £2 winter car parking tariff has been extended until May.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) has decided to not bring its usual car park charging tariff back on April 1 this year, in order to better support town centre businesses.

The authority revealed its all day parking for £2 will continue, following an agreement by council leader Councillor Ben Ingham and assets portfolio holder Cllr Geoff Pook.

An EDDC spokesman said: “This decision will be kept under review and when demand begins to return to normal then we anticipate returning to our usual charging tariff.”

EDDC owns car parks in all the major East Devon towns, including Exmouth, Sidmouth, Honiton, Seaton, Axminster, Ottery and Budleigh.

Visit eastdevon.gov.uk/parking/parking-information/car-park-locations-and-information to find all the EDDC car parks affected.

The boundary review is no more. After a decade of to-ing and fro-ing, the government has now formally abandoned David Cameron’s plans to cut the number of MPs to 600 from 650. It looks like a boost for Labour — which would have been hit proportionally hardest — but also means the government now doesn’t have to have all those tricky conversations with Tory MPs who were poised to see their seats disappear-Owl.

Lizzy Buchan Political Correspondent @LizzyBuchan  www.independent.co.uk 

The government will abandon coalition-era plans to radically redraw parliamentary boundaries to cut the number of MPs in the House of Commons from 650 to 600.

Cabinet office minister Chloe Smith revealed that minister were planning to ditch the shake-up of UK constituencies as the UK parliament faces a “greater workload” after Brexit.

Parliament approved plans to slash the number of constituencies to 600 in 2011 but moves to implement the changes has been repeatedly delayed.

Proposals published in 2018 by the independent Boundary Commission recommended scrapping 32 seats in England, six in Scotland, 11 in Wales and one in Northern Ireland.

Jeremy Corbyn’s constituency could have been axed and Boris Johnson would have faced challenge to hold onto his seat under the changes.

Setting out the plans in a written statement, Ms Smith said: “Legislation currently provides that, on implementation of the 2018 Boundary Review recommendations, the number of constituencies in the UK shall be 600.

“The government is minded to instead make provision for the number of parliamentary constituencies to remain at 650.

“In doing so, we would also remove the statutory obligation to implement the 2018 Boundary Review recommendations and the statutory obligation on the government to make arrangements to review the reduction in constituencies to 600 by 30 November 2020.”

She added: “The UK parliament will have a greater workload now we are taking back control and regaining our political and economic independence.

“It is therefore sensible for the number of parliamentary constituencies to remain at 650.”

The latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox

The move was welcomed by electoral reform campaigners, who described the original plans as an “executive power grab” rather than a bid to improve the function of the Commons.

Darren Hughes, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society said: “Without shrinking the size of the government, cutting MPs would have done little more than enhance the already disproportionate power of ministers.

“Now that the government have accepted the need for proper representation in the Commons, they must focus on reducing the number of unelected peers in the bloated House of Lords.

“At 800 members, it’s the biggest second chamber in the world and needs a genuine overhaul.”

Joe Sousek, co-chief executive of Make Votes Matter, said overhauling the UK’s first past the post voting system was a more important issue than constituency boundaries.

He said: “It doesn’t matter how many MPs there are in the House of Commons, they simply cannot reflect the British voters while we use FPTP to elect our representatives.

“Regardless of which party you might support, a voting system which delivered a government with a huge majority on less than 44 per cent of the vote share at the last general election is just wrong.

“Until we join the vast majority of developed democracies using some form of proportional representation, parliament will remain unrepresentative of how people voted.”

Emergencies bring out the best in people and organisations and, unfortunately, the worst – Owl. 

Owen Paterson, the Conservative MP and former Cabinet minister, is a paid adviser to a company that is selling coronavirus tests online to British consumers and private clinics.

by Alberto NardelliBuzzFeed News Europe Editor,  www.buzzfeed.com

According to the register of MPs’ financial interests, Paterson has been a consultant to Randox Laboratories since August 2015. The MP for North Shropshire has regularly declared that he expects to receive £8,333 a month from the company, from April 2017 until further notice. The register was last updated on March 16 this year.

Randox has been selling a rapid “COVID-19 home testing kit” for £120. The company, which is registered in Crumlin, Northern Ireland, said on its website that it “has developed a revolutionary test for Coronavirus (COVID-19), the new strain of coronavirus. The only test in the world that can identify the lethal strain and differentiate between other non-lethal variants with the same symptoms.”

Consumers order and register the kit online and then take the test at home, following instructions provided, before mailing it back to the lab, which processes and provides results within days.

The kit is temporarily out of stock and the company will not be taking new orders until the end of the month “due to unprecedented pressure on healthcare supply chains”, its website said.

It comes as the British government is scrambling to ramp up the number of coronavirus tests it carries out. The UK is currently mostly testing people in hospitals and has faced criticism for not routinely testing NHS staff despite data from other countries showing that health workers are among those most at risk from the virus.

Although Britain has tested more than many countries around the world, it still lags way behind countries such as Germany, South Korea, and Italy, which are conducting more than 20,000 tests a day. Britain currently runs between 5,000 and 6,000 tests a day but plans to increase this figure to 25,000 within four weeks.

Other companies have been buying Randox’s kits and using its analysis service — and these companies have been selling the same test at a substantially marked-up price.

Summerfield Healthcare — which runs private clinics in the West Midlands — is selling the mail-order test for £249. Another company, Qured, a service that usually allows people to book face-to-face GP appointments, provides the kit for £295. Both companies told the Guardian last week that they use Randox for their testing.

The Sunday Times published a story at the weekend about another company, Private Harley Street Clinic, that has been using Randox.

The clinic has sold over 6,600 coronavirus test kits for £375 each to people who fear they have the illness, raking in millions, the newspaper claimed. The clinic is based at the north London flat of its owner, Dr Mark Ali.

The company uses kits sold by Randox, and analysis work on the results is also done by Randox, the Sunday Times said. The clinic denied that it was profiteering and defended its decision to charge £375.

According to a statement published on its website, Private Harley Street Clinic is no longer offering the test as it works to fulfil a backlog of orders, and it is also donating free testing to NHS staff, a statement said.

Randox told BuzzFeed News it didn’t have a direct customer relationship with Private Harley Street Clinic so had no control over the amount it charged. Amy Millar, its spokesperson, said: “As a private company with over 40 years investment in and commitment to the diagnostics industry, Randox quickly developed a COVID-19 test and were able to provide that test, with a home sample collection capability, at a very competitive price. That price is a matter of public record.”

Millar added: “Randox do not have a direct customer relationship with this clinic, we have not supplied them and have no control over what they charge if they have accessed our kits. Likewise, we also have no control over what their customers are prepared to pay.”

According to the Irish Times, Randox is in talks with the NHS about using its COVID-19 test.

Private clinics are not banned from selling coronavirus tests, but the government advises people against testing at home. A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson told BuzzFeed News: “Public Health England does not advise rapid tests for use in the community nor self-testing but we keep all advice under constant review.”

Paterson, who is reportedly self-isolating with COVID-19 symptoms, declined to comment.

But you have to contact them first – about as easy as fixing a delivery from Waitrose – Owl

Millions of people are about to discover something they didn’t know about British life. There is no longer a safety net. People who have paid tax and national insurance for years and never been near the social security system will be turning to it in their hour of need; yet far too late, like trapeze artists falling through the air, they will find that the net beneath them has been lowered dangerously close to the ground and is badly torn.

Polly Toynbee www.theguardian.com

If these people once believed relentlessly misleading tabloid tales of benefit scroungers, they will have a rude awakening. They will find that when Iain Duncan Smith turned the screw on social security in 2012, he was right to warn claimants: “This is not an easy life any more, chum.” As if it ever was.

The chancellor, Rishi Sunak, has done well to honour 80% of wages for those “furloughed” from shut-down businesses – up to £2,500 a month. No one knows how many that covers and at what cost, but it was a macroeconomic necessity. One worry is the incapacity of the HMRC workforce, with 15,600 staff cut and 157 local offices with local knowledge closed: can they pay the wage subsidy to companies in time to save them? Many firms could still close, sending millions into unemployment.

The 15% self-employed are urgently seeking a matching plan, with the Treasury under intense pressure for a rapid response. Most of the self-employed are low-paid: their median income is just £10,000, according to Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Some won’t qualify, if they have earning partners. But many will have been forced into sham “self-employment” by tax-cheating companies. They will be desperate – and angry. The Resolution Foundation wants them paid 80% of average earnings over the past three years – or they will work through illness, rather than starve on £94 a week sickness benefit, says the RSA Populus poll.

Let’s hope that injustice is fixed. But even then, watch the shock as millions fall on the untender mercies of the Department for Work and Pensions, to discover what happened to benefits in the past decade. While never over-generous, by 2010 Labour had greatly lifted living standards for low earners, especially for children: Gordon Brown’s tax credits raised a million children and a million pensioners out of poverty. Since 2010, according to new research by Kerris Cooper and John Hills, a professor at the London School of Economics, children have lost a quarter of the support they had; chancellor George Osborne and his successors took out a staggering nearly £40bn from benefits. Never “all in this together”, Osborne justified it by raining down abuse on low-paid families. The hypocrisy: as the current editor of the London Evening Standard, he ran Christmas collections for poor families! The Resolution Foundation predicts a third of children falling into poverty by 2023.

Some cuts were secretive, uprating benefits by a meaner CPI not RPI inflation rate, a four-year freeze, and axing council tax support. Some made a noise – such as the bedroom tax, costing some families £14 week for a spare room. An early case was a Hartlepool family whose empty room belonged to their recently deceased 10-year-old. Housing benefit for renters was cut brutally. Introducing the two-child limit was exceptionally unjust.

New claimants confronting universal credit’s obstacles may join the half who find themselves propelled to food banks. Many new arrivals will join the 60% of claimants falling into debt and rent arrears while waiting at least five weeks for first payments. As with HMRC, a stripped-down DWP workforce is at risk of being overwhelmed. Some talking to the Treasury are shocked to find its staff clueless about the meanness of a benefits system they have cut and cut again. That explains Sunak’s sudden extra £20 a week and slight easing of housing benefit: they had no idea.

Torsten Bell, head of the Resolution Foundation, says people on £50,000 salaries have been anxiously asking him about benefits rates. They’re in for a shock, he says. Unlike the previous tax credit system, universal credit only allows savings of £6,000 (it takes steep deductions from savings up to £16,000). People hoping this is only temporary will be distraught at having to use up their rainy-day funds, often saved for years for a deposit on a home. The foundation is lobbying urgently to have this savings means-test dropped.

Hills says a couple with two children will get £266 a week. And take from that £115 – the average amount that housing benefit falls short of rental payments. Many new claimants will run up rent arrears. Expect them to plunge immediately into poverty, miles below the £384 minimum income standard for a family of four, says Hills.

Some singles will get a shock too. Under-35s will be living on £73, and only funded for a room in a shared flat, in the cheapest third of rentals in the area.

Many who see themselves as middle class will confront the reality of Britain’s nonexistent safety net. It is, says the IFS’s Paul Johnson, “extraordinarily low”. One piece of advice from all these experts I’ve talked to: apply immediately, to limit these delays and debts. “Too many will wait, borrow from family, deny it’s happening to them, feeling the stigma. Apply at once,” says Torsten Bell.

These millions discovering DWP brutality at first hand will no longer be deceived by the old poison shaming those on benefits as loafers, frauds and “not people like us”. Benefits offer penury, not a life of Riley. Rishi Sunak has been lavishly praised, not least for his empathic language: “We will be judged by our capacity for compassion”. But his compassion will be judged by how far he keeps benefit rates below the most basic poverty line.

The NHS is likely to cope with coronavirus now that Britain has gone into lockdown, according to the scientist behind tougher government measures.

Owl would dearly love to believe this – except Britain is not in “lockdown”. We are under a much softer  form of restriction because of Boris Johnson’s libertarian beliefs. There are still horrific pictures in the press of overcrowding on the London tubes, uncertainty over who should be working and who shouldn’t etc.

Yesterday, Owl reported on Jeremy Hunt’s demand that the government ramp up the rate of testing that remains at 5,000 day. Yesterday the new daily count of positive cases was 1,500 odd. In other words we are only really testing the seriously sick. As the author says only “large-scale testing and contact tracing” will allow normal life to start to resume…….”

Chris Smyth, Whitehall Editor  www.thetimes.co.uk 

The NHS is likely to cope with coronavirus now that Britain has gone into lockdown, according to the scientist behind tougher government measures.

Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London said that after a scramble to set up thousands more intensive care beds and enforcement of social distancing he was confident that the health service would remain “within capacity”.

The worst of the first wave is likely to pass within three weeks and deaths could be “substantially lower” than 20,000, Professor Ferguson told MPs on the science and technology select committee.

However, only “large-scale testing and contact tracing” will allow normal life to start to resume without a resurgence of the virus, he said.

Professor Ferguson’s modelling prompted Boris Johnson to make an abrupt change of tack ten days ago after it concluded that a policy based on hand-washing and self-isolation of those with symptoms was likely to result in 250,000 deaths.

He is a key member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), which is providing the evidence guiding Mr Johnson’s response to coronavirus.

Initially, the judgment was that there were “clear advantages economically to having it over by the summer” if NHS intensive care beds could cope, Professor Ferguson said.

However, the strategy was “slightly reluctantly” changed after updated information on NHS intensive care capacity and illness in China and Italy suggested that hospitals would be overwhelmed. It also became clearer that each unchecked infectious person passed the disease to three people on average, higher than the 2.5 previously estimated.

After adjusting models to take account of new rules requiring people to stay at home unless absolutely necessary, Professor Ferguson told MPs: “There will be some areas that are extremely stressed but we are reasonably confident — which is all we can be at the current time — that at the national level we will be within capacity.”

He added: “If the current measures work as we would expect them then we will see intensive care demand peak in approximately two to three weeks and then decline.”

Deaths are “unlikely to exceed 20,000” and “could be substantially lower than that”, he projected. However, he said some hospitals were already overwhelmed and that parts of the country would be very badly hit, with the outbreak much more advanced in London.

There is widespread concern about whether the virus will rebound once restrictions on daily life are restricted and Professor Ferguson acknowledged: “We clearly cannot lock down the country for a year. The challenge that many countries in the world are dealing with is how we move from an initial intensive lockdown . . . to something that will have societal effects but will allow the economy to re-start.

Caravans ‘clog up’ Cornwall’s streets after holiday park closures

CARAVANS and motor homes which have been turfed out of holiday parks are now clogging up residential streets – and there’s little Cornwall Council can do about it, writes Richard Whitehouse, local democracy reporter.

[Owl doesn’t think they would like this in Sidmouth or Otterton or Littleham or …….]

www.bude-today.co.uk

After holiday parks shut their gates over the weekend – following a backlash against people who had decided to come to Cornwall during the coronavirus crisis – there have been reports of people setting up camp in residential streets.

Cllr Geoff Brown, Cornwall Council Cabinet member for transport, said the council’s powers were limited in what it could do to tackle the problem.

He said: “This was mentioned briefly in a meeting that we had with officers this morning and we are looking at what we can do.

“However we don’t have any powers to move people on unless they are parked illegally and there are yellow lines.

“If the Government were to change the legislation then we might be able to do more.

“But, at the moment, there is very little that we can do if a vehicle is legal, unless they are dropping waste on the highway, but most of these motorhomes are self-contained and there is no need for that.”

Cllr Brown said there had been incidents reported to the council and that officers would continue working to see if there was anything that could be done to help.

He added: “It is something we are definitely looking at.

“The ideal thing would be for the government to say ‘if you are on holiday, go home’ – that is the message that we need to get out there right now.”

At the weekend a new campaign was launched with MPs, tourism leaders and emergency services urging people not to visit Cornwall [and Devon] during the coronavirus pandemic and instead #comebacklater…………

New York is the epicenter of infection in the USA, London is the epicenter in the UK. London, as the rest of the country, is not in lock-down but the more relaxed “stay at home” order. Owl believes that this is interpreted by many in London as meaning they can travel across the country to second homes. Easter is coming up, infection rates have yet to slow, moving out of London may seen as an attractive option.  

Owl believes that in the absence of an enforced travel ban, Londoners, as New Yorkers, should self isolate for 14 days if they insist on moving out of the capital.  

Jennifer Calfas, Wenxin Fan and Rebecca Ballhaus www.wsj.com

Trump administration officials on Tuesday urged anyone leaving the New York metro area to self-isolate for 14 days to avoid spreading the virus to other parts of the country, as novel coronavirus cases in the region continued to sharply rise.

“We have to deal with the New York City metropolitan area as a high-risk area, and for that reason we’re taking these steps and asking for the cooperation of the American people,” Vice President Mike Pence said during an afternoon briefing.

…

East Devon District Council (EDDC) has closed its offices to the public at Exmouth and Honiton and reassured residents of key services.

Beth Sharp  www.exmouthjournal.co.uk

An EDDC spokesman said while its offices are closed to the public to help prevent the spread of COVID-19, they are still open and residents can call 01404 515616 to talk to officers as well as arrange face-to-face appointments.

Anyone who is homeless or threatened with homelessness and require advice or assistance can call 01395 571660.

EDDC’s StreetScene depots at Manstone and Camperdown remain operational although closed to the public.

And, StreetScene teams are continuing with core operational services, although over the coming days it may be necessary to cease some service provision.

The authority’s five Housing Area Offices are open for mobile support staff, many of whom are maintaining contact with older council tenants by telephone, particularly those tenants who should be social-distancing because of their age or medical conditions.

Access has been limited at EDDC’s Home Safeguard Call Centre, in an attempt to limit the potential for infection spread.

Only the relevant manager and the operators are allowed access to provide a vital lifeline to older and vulnerable customers needing the comfort of knowing there is someone there if needed.

EDDC has not closed its nature reserves and open spaces, as these provide much needed and relatively safe outdoor spaces that contribute towards our health and wellbeing.

Its ten nature reserves will remain open 24/7, free of charge, to encourage everyone to enjoy green, open spaces while observing recommended social distancing measures.

All visitors have been asked to take extra care when making contact with surfaces, such as gates, leaflet racks and bird hides.

As a result of this week’s government advice EDDC will not be running any volunteering sessions, schools’ visits or public events. This decision will be in place until Friday, May 1 and will be kept under regular review.

It is expected the vast majority of council meetings will not need to go ahead because they are not dealing with essential matters during this time of crisis.

EDDC are looking at ways of conducting urgent and important meetings remotely using Skype and/or conference calling.

A quarter of a million people are being recruited for an NHS volunteer army as retired doctors and medical students are called up to help to run a 4,000-bed hospital in a London conference centre.

Chris Smyth, Whitehall Editor | Rhys Blakely, Science Correspondent www.thetimes.co.uk

Matt Hancock, the health secretary, has issued a “your NHS needs you” appeal to those willing to look after 1.5 million vulnerable people being “shielded” from coronavirus.

He is under pressure, however, to spell out when tests for the virus will be available for NHS staff, despite promising to “ramp up” existing labs and order 3.5 million commercial kits.

Oxford University researchers said yesterday that half of Britain might have already contracted coronavirus since January and that testing was urgently needed to discover how many people had acquired immunity to it.

Professor Sunetra Gupta, whose conclusions have not yet been peer- reviewed, said: “It is possible that this ends with a whimper not a bang — we need to know.”

Jack Blanchard- Politico Newsletter

“… So just why are construction workers not told to down tools by the UK government, as Sturgeon has demanded (a point Wales’ Mark Drakeford today echoed)? As I put it to Hancock today, some will cynically suspect the reason is not unconnected with the Tories pulling in £1m in pre-election donations from housing developers. Even Conservatives in rural areas have long muttered that the party’s cosy relations with the housebuilding industry threatens to tear up their green and pleasant land.

Yet the failure to ban construction work in this lockdown may be simpler. First, the complex nature of the chancellor’s self-employed wage support plan means it could be days if not weeks away. Second, many builders (like White Van Man and Woman) voted Tory in last year’s election. Third, there’s a wider worry that cancelling such a big part of economic activity would plunge the nation into an even deeper crisis. Only today, the latest Markit data pointed to a collapse that would spark a serious recession.

There’s also no small irony in the fact that only two weeks ago – yes just two weeks ago – Rishi Sunak was unveiling a Budget which trumpeted massive infrastructure spending and lots and lots more construction work. They were Rishi Rich and Bozza the Builder remember? In theory, the promise of billions of pounds of future work ought to keep the industry afloat despite a temporary lockdown.

But reality may be much more grim for job losses. And perhaps the real issue with construction is how coronavirus is laying bare an industry which is usually ignored because it rolls on regardless. One building firm boss emailed me today to say the industry had appalling payment processes, that big contractors bully smaller ones, that many firms go bust then resurface “ready to dupe the next subcontractor in the queue”. Add in zero-hours for some, health and safety fears for others and it’s no wonder the PM wants to steer clear of this mess of problems unless he absolutely has to.

But if this virus death toll gets much worse, Johnson may have to shut down most building sites (many of their suppliers are shutting anyway) and put the nation’s physical health before its economic health. A wider shutdown would also fit with the pattern of his handling of the crisis so far: hold off, hold off, then finally submit to the inevitable. Can he fix it? Yes he Khan. …”

At the end of momentus “stay at home” Wednesday, Owl copies this assessment of Boris Johnson and his government’s response to these early stages of the coronavirus epidemic.

The provisional verdict is that ministers did too little, too late.

Editorial: Boris Johnson’s response to coronavirus has been too little, too late

@IndyVoices  www.independent.co.uk 

It is not possible to know what is going through the prime minister’s mind during his Covid-19 press conferences, but a degree of trepidation is etched into those usually jovial features.

There is cause for concern. The rate of spread of the coronavirus, the number of cases and fatalities are all accelerating. Britain, by common consent, is already on the steep part of the upward curve of infection – and many say, on the same trajectory as Italy. In other words, the harrowing scenes we witness now in Italy’s hospitals could soon be replicated in Britain. By this time next month, the NHS could also be overwhelmed by the demand.

That is a terrifying prospect, and one Boris Johnson must be dreading. It now seems unlikely that the NHS will be able to secure all the necessary resources, especially respirators, in time. At that point, the theoretical questions now being posed about the British response to the pandemic will grow acute and immediate. It will be a moment of political reckoning.

It is, though, not too early now to ask whether the government’s early response was sufficiently robust and rapid. Is it too late to “flatten the curve”? It is not so long ago, for example, that the prime minister was joshing about shaking hands with people and only a matter of days since he suggested he would try to see his mother on Mother’s Day.

The prime minister’s approach throughout has been characterised by a resistance to put statutory limits on individual and corporate freedoms. Johnson was too slow to accept the inevitable after the publication of the Imperial College research on the likely course of casualties under the previous, more relaxed approach, and the new policy of suppression was adopted very belatedly. Only now have stricter rules been applied to public places, and the emergency powers legislation been presented to parliament.

The provisional verdict, then, is that ministers did too little, too late. Certainly there are mitigating factors. The government overestimated how far the public would obey its guidance Yet the government was also inconsistent with that guidance, which often shifted in a matter of days. The government’s defence is that it was guided by the chief medical officer and the chief scientific adviser – “the science”. If so, then there are legitimate questions about how that science was understood by those in government, as there remain serious questions as to the role of unqualified figures such as Dominic Cummings in deeply misguided strategies such as “herd immunity” – questions that will need answering sooner rather than later.

Owl thinks this article has a misleading title (see below) because it refers to the total number of tests. The substance of the article is the plea by former health secretary Jeremy Hunt  to ramp up the daily test rate which continues to run at 5,000 day.

 While typing this, Owl is listening to the radio. This reinforces Owl’s impression that a lot of emphasis is being placed on the early deployment of a simple antibody test. Certainly this would be a really important development, a game changer even, but the move from a successful laboratory test to one that can be used reliably in the real world may have hiccoughs along the way. It should not be used to take the pressure off infection testing, we need both.

UK almost doubles number of coronavirus tests as cases surge

Andrew Woodcock Political Editor @andywoodcock  www.independent.co.uk 

Former health secretary Jeremy Hunt has issued a plea for the government to step up coronavirus testing, after it emerged that tests continue to run at around 5,000 a day.

As long ago as 11 March, the NHS set out its plans to ramp testing up to 10,000 a day, and last week Boris Johnson told the House of Commons that this would be increased to 25,000. In an upbeat press conference on Thursday, the prime minister suggested the number could eventually reach 250,000 as new tests came on stream.

But figures released today showed that 5,605 tests were conducted on Monday, bringing the tally between 16 and 23 March to 39,840, almost doubling the total since the beginning of the outbreak to 83,945.

The figures were published as it emerged that Mr Johnson wrote to UK research institutes on Sunday asking them to lend the NHS the expensive machines needed to carry out tests for Covid-19, and warning that there were none available for the government to buy. 

Health secretary Matt Hancock told the House of Commons that officials were negotiating the purchase of “millions” more kits, with the aim of ramping up the rate of testing.

But Mr Hunt, now chair of the Commons Health Committee, warned that the public would lose confidence unless the government spelt out how quickly it could scale up testing.

He called for a move to widespread testing in the community of the kind seen in the successful suppression strategies in countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong.

Mr Hunt told MPs: “The concern is that we appear to be testing on a daily basis virtually no more people than over a week ago, when the commitment was to increase the daily amount of tests form 5,000 to 25,000.”

He asked the health secretary to “give us an estimated date when we will get back to routine Covid-19 testing in the community of all suspected cases”.

Mr Hunt said: “Even if that is three to four weeks away, a date means that there is a plan and without a date, people won’t be confident that there is a plan.”

Mr Hancock refused to give a target date for wider tests, but said the Department of Health was in the process of purchasing “millions” of tests for use “as quickly as possible”.

Staff at hospitals and care homes for the elderly across the country have expressed rising frustration about a lack of tests, which leave them unable to be sure whether to remain at work or stay home to avoid infecting colleagues. An online petition calling for the priority testing of frontline NHS staff has gathered 1.2m signatures.

The World Health Organisation has called on governments around the globe to “test, test, test” as widely as possible so infected people can be isolated and their contacts traced.

The Politico website reported that the email sent to research institutes around the country on Sunday included a personal plea from prime minister Boris Johnson stating that No 10 was making an “urgent appeal” for machines to carry out coronavirus tests “in the national interest”.

An unnamed source within the research sector told Politico: “It’s great that they are ramping up testing, but it should have been done weeks ago. This is costing lives every day.” 

But a government source said the message was the latest in a number of requests for help to the private sector and academia stretching back several weeks.

In the email, a senior Downing Street aide said: “We will meet all expenses and assume all liabilities and requirements associated with the use of these machines for this purpose. We undertake to return or replace the equipment when the emergency is over. We would very much like to collect any machines you have tomorrow (Mon 23) or Tuesday.”

An attached letter from Mr Johnson said that “there are no machines available to buy,” and that the “urgent appeal” is therefore “in the national interest.”

He added: “If you have any staff who are experienced in using the machines … that would also be very helpful.”

Labour’s shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth raised concerns over the PM’s apparent suggestion that there were “no machines available”.

Mr Ashworth told the House of Commons: “Many NHS staff will be asking why didn’t we procure machines and kits sooner?”

Mr Hancock refused to comment on the email, but told MPs he “did not recognise” claims that the government was finding it impossible to buy testing machines.

“It is true, absolutely, that we are bringing testing machines together to provide a more efficient testing system,” he told the House of Commons. 

“I am very grateful to the universities who have these testing machines and are putting them into the system. This is a national effort and they are playing their part, but we are also buying machines where we can.”

Mr Johnson’s official spokesman said: “It is no secret that we are rapidly scaling up our efforts to boost testing capacity to protect the vulnerable, support our NHS and save lives.

“Together with Public Health England and the NHS, we are exploring how we can work across industry and academic sectors to establish viable options which will significant ramp up the number of tests we can carry out.”

“We had a choice early on in the UK’s trajectory to go down the South Korean path of mass testing, isolating carriers of the virus (50% of whom are asymptomatic), tracing all contacts to ensure they isolate as well, and at the same time taking soft measures to delay the spread. Instead, we watched and waited, and whether it was academic navel-gazing, political infighting, a sense of British exceptionalism, or a deliberate choice to minimise economic disruption over saving lives, we have ended up in a position where we are now closer to the Italy scenario than anticipated, and are faced with taking more and more drastic measures.”

Devi Sridhar   www.theguardian.com  Prof Devi Sridhar is chair of global public health at the University of Edinburgh

Those of us who have been tracking the novel coronavirus since December can easily identify its key milestones. There was mid-January, when human to human transmission of coronavirus was confirmed. Then later that month Hubei province hit 500 cases, the unprecedented lockdown extended to almost 60 million people, and the Lancet published a study showing that a third of patients require admission to intensive care, and 29% get so bad that they need ventilation. By the end of February, a sobering WHO-China joint mission press conference illustrated the massive policy response in China – and, on 29 February, the UK saw its first case of local transmission.

In the UK we have had nine weeks to listen, learn and prepare. We have had nine weeks to run outbreak simulations, set up supply chains to ensure sufficient personal protective equipment (PPE) and ventilators, and bring about the availability of rapid, cheap tests. We have had nine weeks to establish algorithms to support contact tracing, and start mass awareness campaigns not only about hand-washing, but about the risks that the virus would pose to social and economic activity if not taken seriously by all. Countries such as Senegal were doing this in January.

The UK’s head start in managing the outbreak continued as our confirmed case count remained lower than our neighbours’. However, on 12 March, Boris Johnson announced that all minor testing and contact tracing would stop and passive self-isolation would be introduced for those with symptoms, all part of a herd immunity strategy supposedly endorsed by the “best science”. After a backlash from scientists, the government clarified that it was not explicitly pursuing herd immunity, but would be taking measures at the “right time guided by the evidence”, all according to a plan which it did not share with the public.

On 17 March, Imperial College released a study noting that it had revised the model the government had been using, and stating that suppressing the virus was in fact the best way to avoid a vast number of people dying. The earlier model did not include the ICU data shared in the Lancet on 24 January. Instead, it was similar, but much later information from Italy, that changed their recommendation.

So, at the end of week, the UK government did a 180-degree turn, reversing what it had said only days previously. It made the decision to take the same measures other countries had in order to delay the spread of virus: closing schools except for the children of key workers, closing pubs and other gathering places, asking households to self-isolate for 14 days and focusing on scaling up testing to 25,000 tests per day over the next month. However, capacity issues and lost time mean that testing will take time to ramp up, PPE supply chains are strained, and all while patient numbers continue to increase as we follow Italy’s path.

The twists and turns described above have created a climate where the public do not trust that the government is responding in their best interests. Many cannot say what the government’s strategy is, or are confused about how serious coronavirus is for their health. Communication during a crisis must be clear, transparent, open and responsive. The confusion over herd immunity, for example, has made people reasonably think that the government wants everyone to get the virus to protect the economy, that it is not taking more decisive action because this is not a serious threat, or that the government does not know what it is doing. None of these are the whole story, but such perceptions are certainly not helpful in a crisis.

We had a choice early on in the UK’s trajectory to go down the South Korean path of mass testing, isolating carriers of the virus (50% of whom are asymptomatic), tracing all contacts to ensure they isolate as well, and at the same time taking soft measures to delay the spread. Instead, we watched and waited, and whether it was academic navel-gazing, political infighting, a sense of British exceptionalism, or a deliberate choice to minimise economic disruption over saving lives, we have ended up in a position where we are now closer to the Italy scenario than anticipated, and are faced with taking more and more drastic measures.

Perhaps the delay was due to fears about a second wave of the virus, next winter. But why not then work on buying time for the NHS to prepare, for health staff to get PPE, to make testing available, to boost beds and equipment, to trial antiviral treatments, or get us closer to the point that one of the vaccine candidates being investigated might actually work. Why not use the time to learn more about reinfection by the virus, about immune response, which seems to affect who needs ICU care, and about who recovers spontaneously? To understand where this virus came from, whether it is indeed seasonal, and how it could mutate? Why give in at such an early stage unless the goal is to get through this outbreak quickly so that whoever is left can help get the economy back to normal? It is still not clear who exactly is advising the government, who sits on the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, and what factors the prime minister and his colleagues are taking into account in his decision-making.

Where does all this leave us now? Given that we lost the window of containment several weeks ago, the only feasible path forward seems to be to put in stringent physical distancing measures to delay the spread of the virus. But these alone will not be enough. We also need to backtrack and start doing the mass testing, tracing and isolating that are integral to breaking chains of transmission. Putting these measures in place does not mean that we will immediately solve NHS capacity challenges, or that we will not see a massive rise in patients dying. They will, however, help to slow down the spread. We must also continue to push for the protection of the health workforce and frontline responders who are exposed to high viral loads. And we must race to make up for the time lost during two months of passivity.

On March 12, Boris Johnson announced that all minor testing and contact tracing would stop and passive self-isolation would be introduced for those with symptoms, supposedly endorsed by the “best science”. In the absence of much needed reliable data, Cambridge statisticians have resorted to using death rates in innovative ways, macabre but necessary in desperate times.

Caelainn Barr www.theguardian.com

The coronavirus established itself early on in Italy where reported deaths are now in excess of those recorded in China.

But is the crisis witnessed in Italy about to play out in the UK? And when are lockdowns and other interventions likely to start to make a difference?

Though there are some similarities – the picture is complex

Number of victims

The death toll in Britain is roughly two weeks behind that of Italy, according to researchers who have analysed the data.

In week 10 of this year, ending 6 March, Italy announced 176 new Covid-19 deaths, comparable to the 166 deaths the UK reported in week 12.

If the spread of the pandemic in the UK tracks Italy’s closely, the domestic death toll could soon rise sharply.

Italian authorities recorded 1,066 new Covid-19 deaths in week 11, the equivalent of this week in the UK’s outbreak.

“It looks as though we are two weeks behind Italy in number of Covid-19 deaths,” said Prof Sheila Bird, formerly of the MRC’s Biostatistics Unit at Cambridge University.

“But all this means is that we have comparable population sizes and had a comparable number of deaths in week 12 as Italy had in week 10. We may be on a less steep trajectory than Italy, but it’s too early to know yet.”

On Monday, a new analysis of data from both countries showed that deaths may indeed be rising marginally more slowly in Britain than they did in Italy. Prof David Spiegelhalter, at Cambridge University’s Statistical Laboratory, looked at the numbers of deaths reported in the 14 days since the fifth fatality in each country. The figures suggest that UK Covid-19 deaths have risen on average about 30% per day, versus 37% during the equivalent period of Italy’s epidemic.

Spiegelhalter stressed that the outlook was “all very uncertain at the moment” not least because the two populations and their nations’ responses to the outbreak differ so much. There was “some reason for hope,” he said of the UK situation, “although we will must be ready for having hundreds of deaths a day.”

Has Italy reached its peak – and what about the UK?

The same analysis hints that Italy may be approaching a peak in its epidemic, but the answer will only be clear if the country continues to report falling numbers of new deaths over the coming days and weeks.

The UK’s peak may not be so severe if the UK’s response to the outbreak has been effective, Spiegelhalter said, but the answer to that is not yet clear.

Compared with Britain, Italy had less time to prepare, the virus may have been circulating more widely before it was detected, and the country has more older people who are more tightly connected to family and friends.

However, comparisons present problems, as it’s not possible to truly compare like-with-like.

One factor that will have a substantial impact on deaths is the capacity for hospitals to care for the most seriously ill patients, and this differs markedly from country to country. “When you hit the capacity of intensive care beds then you might get an additional shift up which could reset the rate of increase thereafter,” said Bird.

Different demographics – and testing

One reason for Italy’s high death rate could be the country’s demographics – 23% of its population are aged 65 and over. The UK is younger on average – with 18% of its population in this age category. Covid-19 is more dangerous for older people.

Testing and the number of confirmed cases is also an issue.

Differences in testing policy, for example, will account for some of the variations in mortality rates as testing more patients will increase the number of confirmed cases, and is likely to reduce the overall mortality rate. Data on patient characteristics such as age and underlying health conditions is another factor we don’t know about.

Germany, where 21% of the population are over 65, appears to have one of the world’s lowest death rates. The country has reported just 94 deaths from 24,873 cases, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. The reasons for this are not yet clear, but they could include differences in data gathering or its high testing rate.

As Adam Kucharski, who is modelling the outbreak at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, points out, deaths reported today do not reflect the state of the epidemic at the moment.

Those who die are typically infected about four weeks earlier. “Strictly speaking we should say something like: transmission in the UK four weeks ago was where Italy was about six weeks ago,” he said.

The lockdown effect

For the same reason, the impact of the cascade of lockdowns across Italy, and ever more stringent restrictions on movement brought in across the UK, will take time to show up in the daily death tolls. A wave of Italians fled to the country’s south when news leaked on 8 March that the government intended to quarantine 16 million people in the high-risk north. If those people carried the infection with them, the deaths that result are not likely to show up until at least the start of next week.

In the UK, where pubs, clubs, restaurants and theatres shuttered only days ago, and school closures began this week, any resulting impact on deaths will not be apparent until mid-April soonest. “It’s quite likely to be at least three weeks before we see a slow down in the deaths. And they will potentially still be increasing. It depends how much social distancing we’ve managed to achieve,” said Bird.

More than 7,500 former NHS staff have heeded the government’s call to rejoin the health service and help tackle the coronavirus outbreak. They include about 5,633 nurses and midwives and 1,930 doctors.

Denis Campbell  www.theguardian.com

Matt Hancock told MPs on Monday that 7,563 clinical staff had applied to come back into the NHS by seeking to rejoin the register for their professions.

The returning clinicians are one of the main elements of the NHS’s drive to expand its workforce in readiness for dealing with the large number of people the Covid-19 virus will leave seriously ill.

Updating the Commons about staffing numbers, the health secretary said: “7,563 clinicians have so far answered our call to return to work, including members of this house, and I want to pay tribute to every single one of them.

“These are difficult times and they have risen to the call of the nation’s needs and we know that many more will join them.”

All 18,000 final-year nursing students in England are also being asked to work in hospitals to help expand the workforce, and junior doctors training as psychiatrists are also being transferred to work in acute hospitals for the forseeable future in some parts of England.

MPs among the returnees include the Conservatives’ Maria Caulfield, a former NHS cancer nurse, who plans to work at a hospital in her Lewes constituency. Dr Rosena Allin-Khan, who succeeded Sadiq Khan as the MP for Tooting when he became mayor of London in 2016, is returning to her former role as an A&E doctor at St George’s hospital in her constituency. Dr Kieran Mullan, the Tory MP for Crewe and Nantwich, is also returning to his role as a doctor in a hospital emergency department.

Former Lib Dem cabinet minister Sir Ed Davey said there were many qualified healthcare professionals in the UK’s refugee community.

He added: “I’ve spoken to a refugee charity, RefuAid, who says they have 514 qualified healthcare professionals on their books – people who are willing to work, fully qualified in their own country, but there are bureaucratic barriers to them coming forward.”

Hancock said he would examine the details, noting there was a need to make sure people were capable of doing the required work.

The coronavirus bill currently going through parliament provides for the emergency registration of health and social care professionals including nurses, midwives, paramedics and social workers.