AT A GLANCE: HOW VALLANCE AND WHITTY DEFENDED THE LOCKDOWN
SATURDAY'S GLOOMY SLIDES
The pair admitted what one MP called the 'avalanche of data' they presented in Saturday's briefing may have been too much to handle for the public.
Sir Patrick said: 'I would always like to get things simpler than they were and clearer than they were... clearly some of those slides were quite complicated.'
Commenting on one spreadsheet that showed how some hospitals are already seeing more patients than they did in the spring, Professor Whitty admitted it 'wasn't an ideal slide'.
But Sir Patrick defended the use of the now-infamous graph that showed a possible 4,000 deaths per day by December said it was scientifically valid and was not 'discredited' despite recent days' backlash.
'These are scenarios that are put together on assumptions,' he said, 'Reasonable worst case scenario is something you don't want to happen but could reasonably happen if things went in a certain direction'.
TIER THREE WAS WORKING - JUST NOT FAST ENOUGH
Professor Chris Whitty said he believed the local lockdown measures were working but that the outbreak was too large for them to control alone.
Professor Whitty said: 'I am confident Tier Two has had an effect and that Tier Three has had a bigger effect.
'The communities in the North and Midlands in particular... have responded remarkably to this. And because of that, I am confident the rates are substantially lower than they would've been if this had not happened.
'But the early indications we have at the present is that this has not achieved getting the R below one - it has brought it much closer to one - but it is still doubling over a longer period of time.'
CHANCE OF LOCKDOWN ENDING ON DECEMBER 2
Whitty said the aim of the lockdown is to ensure that there is a 'realistic possibility' that after December 2 England will be able to move onto a 'different state of play'.
He suggested that when the circuit breaker ends the country will move into a middle ground, likely with tougher restrictions than are in place now, but not as strict as the ones that will precede them for the next month.
SECOND WAVE WOULD BE WORSE WITHOUT TOUGH ACTION
The scientists rammed home their warning that, without tougher action than the slow-moving local tier system, the second wave will become worse than the first one.
They said they had been discussing this prospect in meetings with Government officials 'virtually every day' for the last month.
'I think all of us would say that the rates will probably be lower than that top peak but I think reaching the peak that we reached in April strikes me as an entirely realistic situation,' Professor Whitty said.
LOCKDOWN IS A DIFFICULT DECISION 'BETWEEN BAD CHOICES' – BUT NOTHING TO DO WITH SCIENTISTS
Professor Whitty and Sir Patrick repeatedly distanced themselves from the Government's decision-making process and said what action is actually taken is out of their hands.
They have no role in assessing economic consequences, they said, and could provide only scientific advice and help ministers to interpret data.
'These are very difficult decisions, we have no illusions,' Professor Whitty said.
'None of us are under any illusions. We're choosing between bad choices – none of us should shy away from that.'
Professor Chris Whitty has suggested England's second lockdown could be over by Christmas — but warned the nation was in it for the 'long haul' and revealed that the draconian restrictions will likely be swapped out for a revamped tiered system.
During a grilling by MPs yesterday ahead of a vote on the tough blanket measures this afternoon, England's chief medical officer stoked hopes that families may be able to spend the festive period together after insisting there was a 'realistic possibility' that the measures could be lifted on December 2.
Ministers have refused to fully commit to the end date in case the blanket intervention does not have the desired effect. However, Professor Whitty argued there was a good chance England will have moved into a 'different state of play'.
Asked if the new lockdown that comes into force from tomorrow would work, Professor Whitty told MPs in the Science and Technology Select Committee: 'If people adhere to it in the way I expect they will, it will reduce R below one... It will make a huge difference.'
And he said the goal was to 'move into a series of tiers at the end of that period'. But he admitted Number 10 would have to consider adopting different rules to 'match the situation we see ourselves in at the end of this month'.
Around 10million people living in the North West and the Midlands are already under Tier Three, which bans socialising with other households and orders pubs to shut unless they serve substantial meals. Another 20million are under the second tightest bracket, which bans people from meeting friends and family indoors.
In the same briefing yesterday afternoon, Professor Whitty conceded that the 4,000 daily deaths prediction was unlikely to come true because the modelling was a worst-case scenario based on a situation where no extra measures were brought in.
He told MPs: 'All of us would say rates will probably be lower than that top peak [of 4,000]'. Professor Whitty — who appeared alongside Number 10's chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance — added that a figure of around 1,000 deaths a day was 'entirely realistic' without tougher action.
But the experts defended the science behind the gloomy forecast, used to justify the second lockdown, and said it was realistic to expect levels seen in April would be surpassed at the peak of a second wave, unless there was a lockdown. Modelling presented to SAGE also warned hospitals could be overrun with virus patients by the end of this month.
Professor Whitty and Sir Patrick also admitted the three-tier lockdown approach - only introduced on October 14 - was starting to drive down the R rate and slow the spread of infections, particularly in northern hotspots which had been subjected to the toughest restrictions. But Professor Whitty claimed the measures were not working fast enough to counteract a mid-September surge in infections.
The Chief Medical Officer said: 'It is difficult to be absolutely confident about how far their effect [the tiered system] has gone. I am confident Tier Two has had an effect and that Tier Three has had a bigger effect. I am confident of that.
'The communities in the North and Midlands in particular, obviously London too has went into a Tier Two and some parts of eastern England too, have responded remarkably to this. And because of that, I am confident the rates are substantially lower than they would've been if this had not happened.
'But the early indications we have at the present is that this has not achieved getting the R below one - it has brought it much closer to one - but it is still doubling over a longer period of time.'
During the same briefing, Sir Patrick Vallance admitted he had 'regrets' over frightening people with a doomsday dossier that forecasted as many as 4,000 Covid-19 deaths a day over winter and was used to justify a second national lockdown.
Labour MP Graham Stringer asked Sir Patrick if he believed he had frightened people with the bleak deaths data presented during Saturday night's press briefing.
The chief scientific adviser said: 'I hope not and that's certainly not the aim... I think I positioned that as a scenario from a couple of weeks ago, based on an assumption to try and get a new reasonable worst-case scenario. And if that didn't come across then I regret that.
Defending he dossier, he added: 'Those figures were ones done by major academic groups based on those assumptions and, in the spirit of trying to make sure that things are shared and open, they are the things that we have seen [in the data so far], and it's important and I think people see that.'
It comes amid fears England may have jumped the gun with a second national lockdown after top scientists claimed the R rate had already dropped to the crucial level of one and that Covid-19 cases are actually 'flatlining'.
King's College London academics, who have been tracking the size of the coronavirus outbreak since the summer, argued infections were now 'plateauing' and there was a 'slight fall' in new cases across the UK last week.
Professor Tim Spector, the lead scientist behind the KCL study, revealed the R rate estimate on Twitter, hailing it as 'good news'. He has already questioned the need for a second national lockdown because the virus is 'running out of steam'.
SAGE — the Government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies — estimated last week the UK's R rate is between 1.1 and 1.3, meaning it had dropped for two weeks in a row. But the group, which has advised Number 10 throughout the pandemic, claimed cases were still growing rapidly across the country.
Boris Johnson is facing a Tory revolt on his national coronavirus lockdown in a crunch Commons vote today, with fears he will have to rely on Labour to get the plan through.
The draconian measures, ordering people to stay at home and shutting non-essential retail, bars and restaurants for a month, are set to come into force from midnight.
But while Sir Keir Starmer's backing means the PM is assured they will be rubber-stamped by MPs this afternoon, he is scrambling to contain a rising tide of anger on his own benches.
Sir Patrick Vallance and Chris Whitty have admitted England's three-tiered lockdown system was working before the Government pressed the nuclear button on a second national shutdown
Top scientists at King's College London claimed today the R rate has already dropped to the crucial level of one in England
Department of Health figures saw a 12.5 per cent decrease in the number of cases from last Tuesday when figures reached 22,885 but were higher than yesterday's figures when cases reached 18,950
Fatalities rose by 8.17 per cent from last Tuesday after it was announced that another 395 people had died from the virus yesterday - bringing the total death toll in the country to 47,250
King's' academics, who have been tracking the size of the coronavirus outbreak since the summer, argued infections were now 'plateauing' and there was a 'slight fall' in new cases across the UK last week. Pictured: The team's graphs show a levelling off in cases in both England and across the UK in the last week
A similar trend has been spotted in Wales, where King's College London think the R may still be as high as 1.1
Scotland - which has already been under a tougher 'circuit-break' lockdown for weeks has seen cases plummet more quickly than the other home nations
MPs to vote today on the second lockdown in England as Boris faces a Tory rebellion
Boris Johnson is expected to win a vote on a second lockdown that is due to start at midnight, but 15 of his backbench MPs could defy the whip
Boris Johnson is facing a Tory revolt on his national coronavirus lockdown in a crunch Commons vote today - with fears he will have to rely on Labour to get the plan through.
The draconian measures, ordering people to stay at home and shutting non-essential retail, bars and restaurants for a month, are set to come into force from midnight.
But while Sir Keir Starmer's backing means the PM is assured they will be rubber-stamped by MPs this afternoon, he is scrambling to contain a rising tide of anger on his own benches.
Despite government whips hoping they had limited the scale of the mutiny, a series politicians broke cover this morning to say they will oppose the crackdown.
Former chief whip Mark Harper, ex-minister Steve Baker and backbencher Peter Bone were among those railing at the 'dubious' figures produced by Mr Johnson and his advisers to support the squeeze.
Figures released yesterday showed a 12 per cent drop in infections compared to last Tuesday, as 20,018 tested positive, while Boris Johnson has admitted the R number is 'only just above one'.
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab today said that the decision to move to a national lockdown had been taken reluctantly.
'I think all along... we’ve made clear, and in fact even Chris Whitty has made it clear, you can’t just disaggregate the Covid health aspect, the non-Covid health aspects from the economic aspects, the jobs and livelihoods, or indeed from the social aspects,' he told LBC radio.
'They’re all part of one integrated picture and so certainly we’ve been looking at all of those things together.
'Having to introduce this nationwide approach is certainly economically challenging. We’ve been honest about that.
'We didn’t want to do it, we’ve reluctantly done it as a last resort, and come December 2 we will revert to the tailored geographically-targeted approach because economically that is less painful.'
Meanwhile, there appeared to be friction between Sir Patrick and Professor Whitty when the pair were pressed on SAGE's 4,000 deaths a day prediction at the Commons committee yesterday afternoon.
The gloomy forecast was shocking because it suggested four times as many daily deaths this time round compared to the peak in April.
It was shown to the public at Saturday night's press conference to justify the lockdown - but the model it is based on has low confidence intervals because it looks five weeks into the future.
Sir Patrick told the Science and Technology Committee: 'As you look for longer term projections, the numbers are bound to be wrong in one direction or another, I mean they're almost bound to be wrong in one direction or another.'
He said with projections two weeks into the future 'you can have some degree of confidence', but beyond six weeks 'you start to have uncertainty and of course that's when you have to rely on data'.
Professor Whitty, appearing to distance himself from the model, said had personally 'never used' projections that looked further than six weeks ahead when advising ministers.
Former health secretary Jeremy Hunt told him: 'You haven't used it with any minister but you were prepared to jointly present it to the public at a very, very important press conference on Saturday afternoon on a day when the Prime Minister made a complete about-turn in his policy.
'And so, it wasn't important enough to present to ministers, I'm surprised you thought it was important enough to present to the public.'
Sir Patrick then conceded he had presented the graph to the Prime Minister prior to the conference. The pair were asked by Tory MP Aaron Bell whether the 'avalanche of data' presented on Saturday was 'an appropriate way' to make their case to the nation.
Sir Patrick told the committee: 'I would always like to get things simpler than they were and clearer than they were. I mean, you know, that would always be an aim and clearly some of those slides were quite complicated, and it is a very complicated thing.'
Professor Whitty added: 'Well this committee keeps on telling us to publish more data and publish more data, and then when we publish more data you say you publish too much data. We do our best. And we accept that there is no perfection in this.'
While the 4,000 deaths a day was unlikely to come to fruition, the scientists rammed home their warning that, without tougher action than the slow-moving local tier system, the second wave will become worse than the first one.
They said they had been discussing this prospect in meetings with Government officials 'virtually every day' for the last month.
Sir Patrick (right) and Professor Whitty (left) were dragged before the science and technology select committee yesterday afternoon over claims their graph on Saturday was out of date
'I think all of us would say that the rates will probably be lower than that top peak but I think reaching the peak that we reached in April strikes me as an entirely realistic situation,' Professor Whitty said.
Cambridge team changes their estimate AGAIN and say Covid-19 deaths could top 700 by November 19 on current trends
The Cambridge University team whose modelling is being fed into SAGE to steer the Government through the Covid-19 crisis has lowered its estimates.
Researchers at the MRC Biostatistics Unit COVID-19 Working Group predict there will be between 380 and 710 daily deaths by November 14.
By comparison, the group said late last month there would be around 2,400 by the same date, in modelling which heavily influenced the decision for a second national lockdown.
For comparison, there were 1,000 daily deaths during the darkest days of the crisis in April. In the weeks leading up to the first peak, there were virtually no checks and balances on Covid-19 as leaders knew very little about the new disease.
Yet Cambridge's now-notorious model forecast 4,000 deaths by this December, despite the three-tiered lockdown system being in place and the majority of Brits complying with social distancing and mask-wearing guidelines.
It comes after separate researchers claimed the R rate has started to fall slightly in hotspot areas.
But Professor James Naismith, director of the Rosalind Franklin Institute, University of Oxford, said: 'It may be possible that the virus has plateaued, but this is not what nowcasting shows.'
When quizzed about the damaging effect the second lockdown could have on the economy, the pair repeatedly distanced themselves from the Government's decision-making process and said what action is actually taken is out of their hands.
They have no role in assessing economic consequences, they said, and could provide only scientific advice and help ministers to interpret data.
'These are very difficult decisions, we have no illusions,' Professor Whitty said. None of us are under any illusions. We're choosing between bad choices – none of us should shy away from that.'
On the back of Sir Patrick and Professor Whitty's grilling yesterday, the Department of Health published the tranche of data-sets behind Saturday's slides. They include infection, hospital admission and death statistics behind four main models by the Cambridge University, Imperial College London, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the University of Warwick.
Number 10 - and SAGE - have been accused of cherry-picking studies to justify lockdown rules and not being transparent enough with the public.
Boris Johnson yesterday promised there are 'better days before us' in the pandemic. The Prime Minister told Cabinet ministers the R number was 'only just above 1' and the lockdown would bring it back below threshold. He said 'we don't want to be doing things to repress liberty, we don't want to do anything to damage our economy' and said 'we would see fatalities running in the thousands if nothing was done'.
Before his comments, Oxford University's Professor Carl Heneghan claimed infections, hospital admissions and 'in effect' deaths were already flatlining before Saturday's announcement, raising more questions about the justification for a second lockdown.
And he slammed the graphs the Government's top scientific and medical adviser used to justify England's second lockdown in the gloomy TV briefing announcing the lockdown Saturday night, insisting they were misleading with one 'proven to be incorrect'. The one which suggested 4,000 deaths per day by December, was 'mathematically incorrect' and should not have been used, he claimed.
Sir Patrick Vallance and Professor Chris Whitty have come under fire for gloomy slides they presented in the press conference at the weekend, and will be grilled by MPs on Parliament's science committee this afternoon to justify the evidence for another national lockdown.
Meanwhile, Britain yesterday recorded its lowest number of daily Covid infections for a fortnight on the same day Boris Johnson desperately tried to convince Tory MPs to back a draconian second lockdown.
Department of Health figures showed 18,950 people tested positive for the disease, which was down 9.3 per cent in a week and the lowest since Monday, October 19 (18,804). The UK also saw another 136 coronavirus deaths — a rise of 33.3 per cent on the 102 lab-confirmed fatalities posted last week.
Top scientists said all signs now seemed to indicate the three-tier lockdown scheme was starting to work but had not been given enough time to be reflected in the data. It will pile pressure on Boris Johnson to pause the national shutdown on Thursday, which is set to last until December 2 but could be extended if the crisis is not controlled.
Number 10 was lambasted for being too slow to go into lockdown during the first wave in spring - Britain was one of the last countries in Europe to implement the draconian measures - which is thought to be partly behind the UK having the highest death toll on the continent. There is a suspicion that Downing Street decided to lock down as soon as possible over winter to avoid making the same mistakes, and coming under the same scrutiny, as it did in spring.
The KCL data — based on millions of people who use the symptom-tracking app — suggests the R-rate is now at one, which would mean the pandemic is no longer increasing in some of the worst areas
King's College London academics claimed the R rate has already dropped to the crucial level of one in England, but SAGE estimates it is between 1.1 and 1.3 (shown, SAGE's predicted R rates across the country)
This slide presented on live TV on Saturday shows a projection of deaths hitting 4,000 per day by the end of December (blue line) but experts say they are 'concerned' about the decision to include this because it is based on old data that has since been updated
The 4,000 deaths per day scenario was based on the assumption that there would be 1,000 per day by the start of November. Real numbers of people dying are significantly lower, with an average 182 per day in England and 162 confirmed yesterday for the whole UK
COVID-19 ACCOUNTED FOR 1 IN 10 DEATHS IN MID-OCTOBER
Coronavirus accounted for one in every 10 deaths in England in mid-October up from one in 15 a week earlier, official figures show.
In the week ending October 23, 978 out of the total 10,739 people who died had Covid-19 (9.1 per cent), according to the Office for National Statistics, compared to 6.4 per cent a week earlier – 670 out of 10,534.
The increase in coronavirus-related deaths marked the seventh week in a row that the number had increased after it dropped below 100 per week for a brief period during the summer.
And the data shows that the number of people who died in care homes, where residents are among the most vulnerable to Covid-19, doubled in the fortnight up to October 23.
ONS data showed that a total of 211 care home residents died with the disease in the most recent week, compared to 105 deaths in the week to October 9.
Care homes faced devastation in the first wave of coronavirus when more than 10,000 residents were killed by the virus which spread among the vulnerable and often elderly people living in the homes. Testing was too scarce to stop the virus and scientists found that residents tended not to show typical symptoms as often.
Campaign groups have urged the Health Secretary not to suspend care home visits during the second lockdown for fear isolation deteriorates residents' health further. But the fact the virus appears to be resurging in the sector will likely make ministers more hesitant to green-light the move.
Meanwhile, there are sill 1,000 excess deaths happening in England and Wales every week, which is presumed to be a knock-on consequence of the pandemic.
The ONS found the majority were deaths that occurred in people's houses. Experts say shutting down NHS services and delaying treatments during the first lockdown is still having deadly effects on the nation's health.
The KCL data — based on millions of people who use the symptom-tracking app — suggests the R-rate is now at one, which would mean the pandemic is no longer increasing in some of the worst areas.
Keeping the R rate — which represents the average number of people each Covid-infected patient passes it to — below one is critical to prevent cases from spiralling exponentially.
According to the scientists, who calculate the R rate by comparing new infections with the speed of growth over time, cases in northern England and the Midlands, which are bearing the brunt of the second wave of infections, stopped increasing four days ago.
Other experts have also questioned why further measures were announced before the three-tiered system was given time to take effect.
Experts have told MailOnline it takes three weeks for interventions to take effect on the epidemic. Mr Johnson's tiered approach only came into force on October 14.
Professor Heneghan, who has been an outspoken critic of the Government's lockdown strategy, said that trends in the country's epidemic have changed in recent weeks and stopped accelerating.
Although deaths will continue to rise for weeks because of infections that have already happened, he said they would slow down accordingly.
Professor Heneghan said on BBC Radio 4's Today programme yesterday morning: 'Right now cases are shifting in a way they weren't three weeks ago. They are starting to flatline.
'Admissions are flatlining and, in effect, deaths are starting to flatline so there will be an update, I hope, on this system tomorrow on Wednesday that will give us a clear understanding of where we're going.'
On his use of the word flatline for hospital admissions, Professor Heneghan said: 'So one of the things about hospital admissions is it doesn't take into account discharges, it also doesn't tell you who that person is, for instance everybody going into hospital is being tested.
'If you look at the patients in hospital data, that's a much more useful measure and if you look at that on the 31st October it was 9,213 and it actually dropped for the first time on 1st November to 9,077 by about 130 patients.
'That's the first drop in over a month on that data set. So I would look at patients in hospital, not the number being actually admitted which is very variable and quite noisy in what its context is.'
Professor Heneghan explained that the now-infamous 4,000 deaths per day graph shown on Saturday was based on data that was weeks out of date.
It was using a model based on the projection that there would be 1,000 deaths per day by now, the start of November. In reality the daily average is lower than 200.
In example of how the outbreak is slowing down in places with tough lockdown rules, Professor Heneghan pointed to Liverpool.
Liverpool, which is in a Tier Three local lockdown is one of the worst-hit parts of the country, with hospitals in the city facing more patients than they did in coronavirus's first wave in March and April and the region's ambulance service last night declaring a 'major incident' and warning of serious delays.
Professor Heneghan said the R value in Liverpool is 'well below one at this moment in time'. He said there is a problem in the city but cases have halved and hospital admissions have 'stabilised'.
He continued: 'What you've got is these pockets around the country where trusts like Liverpool have got into trouble with over half the patients being Covid patients.
'But again, let's look at the data, the data in Liverpool is showing cases have come down by about half. Admissions have now stabilised so, yes, there is a problem in Liverpool but actually the Tier restriction, the people in Liverpool have dropped cases from about 490 a day to 260 a day.'
Sir Patrick and Professor Whitty were dragged before the science and technology select committee yesterday afternoon over claims their graph on Saturday was out of date.
The figures presented by Sir Patrick, who is the Government's Chief Scientific Adviser, suggested there could be 4,000 deaths per day by December 20.
But the data from October 9 was produced before the new tier system came into force, which has helped beat back the virus.
Scientists from Oxford University said if the forecasting was correct then there would currently be about 1,000 deaths per day, yet the average over the last week was 265, with yesterday at 136.
The modelling was also based on the R rate being at 1.3 to 1.5 despite the government understanding it to be between 1.1 and 1.3.
Top scientists said the falling infection data could be evidence of England's three-tier lockdown system starting to take effect, by cutting down the speed of growth in the North, raising questions about whether Number 10 jumped the gun with a second national shutdown, which SAGE warned was needed to save Christmas.
Statistics published this week have produced a wide range of possible daily infections in England, from as few as 34,000, according to an estimate by King's College London to as many as 96,000, according to the Government-run REACT study
Recovery, a campaign group against lockdowns, beams its message: 'Lockdowns don't work' onto the Houses of Parliament in Westminster
Calling the boffins' bluff: How No10's experts manipulated data and drew biased conclusions to 'terrify' England into locking down, writes ROSS CLARK
It was the Halloween horror no one had been expecting: a series of mind-boggling graphs and charts presented at Saturday's Downing Street press conference that purported to show the Covid-19 pandemic was out of control and a second national lockdown was needed.
But do the graphs and charts really support this? ROSS CLARK find outs ...
THE HEAT MAP
This chart was designed to show that some hospitals – shown in red – already had more Covid-19 patients than at the peak of the first wave in the spring.
Hospitals shown in amber have more than half as many virus patients as they had then, while green indicates hospitals with fewer than half the number of patients they had at the peak of the first wave.
This chart was designed to show that some hospitals – shown in red – already had more Covid-19 patients than at the peak of the first wave in the spring
Certainly the chart gave the impression that hospitals were already close to overflowing.
But the truth isn't nearly as terrifying.
For while 29 hospitals are shown on the slide, the full dataset, published by NHS England, actually includes 482 NHS and private hospitals in England – at least 232 of which (and probably more as some entries were left blank) had not a single Covid-19 patient on October 27.
This is hardly surprising since official figures showed there were 9,213 patients in hospital with the disease on October 31, compared with 17,172 at the spring peak.
Even back then hospitals were far from full and the Nightingale units were virtually empty.
For while 29 hospitals are shown on the slide, the full dataset, published by NHS England, actually includes 482 NHS and private hospitals in England at least 232 of which had not a single Covid-19 patient on October 27
WHERE CASES ARE ACTUALLY FALLING
Chris Whitty unveiled two charts showing where in England Covid-19 infections were increasing, with brown and yellow zones highlighting where cases were up and blue showing they were down.
'Virtually across the entire country now there is a significant rate of increase,' announced the chief medical officer.
The map, however, begs to differ. In fact, it shows there are 34 districts in England where cases are static or falling.
Two charts showing where in England Covid-19 infections were increasing, with brown and yellow zones highlighting where cases were up and blue showing they were down
Most remarkably – although it is difficult to spot, and only becomes obvious when you magnify the chart – it reveals that cases have fallen sharply across Merseyside over the past week, and that in parts of Liverpool they have fallen by more than 60 per cent.
This is significant because Liverpool was the first part of the country to be placed into Tier Three restrictions.
But if such measures appear to be working, why the need for the second national lockdown?
IS GROWTH REALLY EXPONENTIAL?
One slide – based on data from tests on a randomised sample of the population – showed 'the prevalence of the disease has been going up extremely rapidly over the past few weeks'.
However, the chart actually suggested that the rate was no longer increasing exponentially, contrary to what Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief scientific adviser, predicted in his briefing of September 14.
While the chart shows that in mid-September cases of Covid were doubling almost every week, the most recent figures show that it has taken two and a half weeks for another two-fold rise.
While the chart shows that in mid-September cases of Covid were doubling almost every week, the most recent figures show that it has taken two and a half weeks for another two-fold rise
REGIONAL RATES
Another slide consists of regional charts based on Office for National Statistics data about the prevalence of Covid-19 in the general population.
Professor Whitty heralded this as proof that 'there is an increase in every part of the country apart possibly from the North East, where they have been taking additional measures – and there is some evidence of some flattening but not so far of falling'.
Yet the graph on the slide didn't tally with that. It instead showed a clear fall in infection numbers in the North East.
Moreover, the curve is clearly flattening in London, the West Midlands and the South East.
VIRUS SLOWING AMONG MOST VULNERABLE
A further chart shows confirmed Covid-19 cases, week by week, for each region of England, split by age group with under-16s at the bottom and the over-60s at the top.
Professor Whitty used it to claim that the infection 'steadily moves up the ages, so it doesn't remain constrained by any one age group'.
The ripple change in the colours certainly seemed to support this.
But on closer inspection – only visible if you magnify the image – it becomes clear the chart contains figures in each coloured box for infections per 100,000 people.
What they show is that, crucially, rates of infection are growing much more slowly among the vulnerable over-60s than among young people in September, when there was a surge among students.
It has taken 24 days for over-60 cases to double in the North East and the North West, and 18 days in London.
In the North West new cases have been flat for four days – suggesting the pandemic is not ripping through the over-60s as previously assumed.
R RATE IN REVERSE
The R number is the average number infected by a single carrier. If the figure is below one, the epidemic withers; above one and it grows.
This slide clearly showed that the R number had fallen back in the past three weeks to between 1.1 and 1.3 – suggesting that while the epidemic was still growing, it was doing so at a slower rate.
Yet despite this encouraging sign, Sir Patrick used the slide as an opportunity to explain that the Government has asked academics to produce scenarios of what might happen 'on assumptions that R stays above one and goes between 1.3 to 1.5 and possibly up over the course of the winter'.
But why would they use such an inflated value, especially given the recent restrictions in Tier Three and Three areas? Naturally, he didn't say.
https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiamh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmRhaWx5bWFpbC5jby51ay9uZXdzL2FydGljbGUtODkxMjg1Ny9FbmdsYW5kLW5lZWQtdGllcmVkLWxvY2tkb3duLURlYy0yLUNocmlzLVdoaXR0eS1zYXlzLmh0bWzSAW5odHRwczovL3d3dy5kYWlseW1haWwuY28udWsvbmV3cy9hcnRpY2xlLTg5MTI4NTcvYW1wL0VuZ2xhbmQtbmVlZC10aWVyZWQtbG9ja2Rvd24tRGVjLTItQ2hyaXMtV2hpdHR5LXNheXMuaHRtbA?oc=5
