778

We knew it would

It'll rise again tomorrow as well

883 UK..interesting Sweden 185 today highest day,not looking good either..

All hopes after yesterdays Drop , Dashed

As for people cracking on about low numbers in countries  here and there , best say nothing imo

It's the standard weekend lag that we have previously witnessed. That's why it is more representative to look at daily averages on reasonable periods.

weekly figures possibly best indicator, and use overall figures rather than massaged givernment
corona virus death figures.

Gutted at todays figure bearing in mind yesterdays was lowest in 2 weeks.

a sure way to keep the sheep in the pen

The racing to return on June 1st or earlier market went for a drift on those figures today too. 1.74 to its present 1.86

Depressing , Scott , I thought we may have turned the Corner , Nearly 900

Prem baby survives the virus


The tiny premature baby who fought off coronavirus

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-52369708

prolly best to take a 4 day rolling average

Family of one Filipino Nurse who died, Donald Suelto, today reveal that they repeatedly phoned NHS111 to alert them to Donald's deteriorating health. They never answered the calls. In addition, he was denied PPE on the ward because he was told he wasn't working in a Covid Area..

Another disgusting bit of incompotency.

shameful

https://twitter.com/kazzacoey/status/1252533912989032448/photo/1

This is even worse ambulances arriving and fobbing people off..

more green shoots WASOC

I was surprised when the expert said the infection rate in the community is still between 0.5 and 1 under current restrictions, 0.75 mid-range, I would have expected much lower. Shows there's barely any room to ease restrictions without the rate climbing above 1 and becoming unsustainable again.

they are guessing, don't actually have a clue because they aint testing

100,000 a day more spin and lies, just guess it, fake it, and lie

Too late for testing IMO ,if  virus is rife in the general population ,what difference will testing make ?

Anyone close to the Vulnerable or Sick Must be tested , testing anyone else will just produce
a figure ,cant see what odds that will make any more

Surely those new infections are family members or those in hospital/care homes.

Still showing 1/500 tested positive where I live  out of over half a million , absolute rubbish

Daughter works for NEAS says at least 15/20 % have had or are suffering from the virus ........

You start Mass testing , we will end up with those with Anti Bodies.  and those with none

The none will lock themselves away , and no guarantee the virus cannot be caught again ...

Or the anti body people cannot still spread ?

INJ , its rife and running wild , the LOCKDOWN will slow it , and spread the time period

The NEAS figure is regarding Staff ..

easy to do random testing same as opinion polling, will give a good estimate of infection in the population.


if the tests work...

Her boss the Medical Director has it what hope the rest of us ...

The only true Figure is DEATHS , and even that is either  behind or Non Inclusive for Days ..

Anyone thinking we are coming out of LOCKDOWN in 3 weeks needs to think again .........

When Hancock is asked about an Exit Strategy ,he needs to be fooking honest and tell them

all to STFU , because there is None ..

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/uk-coronavirus-outbreak-peaked-before-21895937

This deluded individual was on Newsnight just yesterday. Suggesting that the UK is past the peak for infections and deaths. And that lockdown restrictions should be lifted starting a week on Friday. Where do they get these people?  The other "expert" on the programme wasn't exactly contradicting him either. 18 hours later the daily death rate has nearly doubled again. Hopefully we will not be hearing from this guy again for a long time.

7 day figure was around 6000 last week and now down to 5200 for most recent 7 day period. marginal decrease but judging from Italy, spain and france likely to be daily average of 400 to 500 for a few weeks yet

Mirror delighted to run the article as it contains two words "the Government"

I saw him on Newsnight. I just used the link to show what he was saying. There will be people who agree with him. I just think that what he said was so far off that he should have been challenged more.

Why hasn’t Ofcom had a pop at him?

I suppose Ofcom would be more concerned with the makers of the programme than with him. Although the guy has a lot more credibility than the likes of Icke, I still think that he is wrong. Hasn't he noticed that Sweden (for example) has a daily mortality SIX times higher than Nordic neighbours Norway? And 3 times higher than Denmark! Yet, he thinks that Sweden are an examplar of his "no lockdown necessary"  theory.

Apr 21, 2020 -- 4:35PM, mafeking wrote:

7 day figure was around 6000 last week and now down to 5200 for most recent 7 day period. marginal decrease but judging from Italy, spain and france likely to be daily average of 400 to 500 for a few weeks yet

This looks to be accurate to me. People are talking about getting over the peak and looking at releasing lockdown gradually. I'd say that's at least a few weeks premature if Italy and Spain are anything to go by. Releasing it too early will undo a lot of the containment the lockdown achieved and set you back, meaning a longer overall period of restriction.

It's not so much death numbers falling as deaths are about 1-2 weeks behind what is actually happening today. A steady fall in new cases after a consistent amount of tests or else a steady fall in the rate of positives after an increasing number of people being tested is what you'd want to see, but a fall in new cases too because the next stage is to test and track cases and contacts and you can't even start that if your new cases is too high, as you won't have the human resources to go and chase down all the contacts of those new cases quickly enough to get on top of it.

Politicians have been lying to you from the start and are the wrong people to be making these decisions. Fobbing us all off talking about exit strategies to keep people off their backs. They know they've fúcked up and are the cause of this lockdown being needed in the first place. And they know they are miles away still from it being the right time to release it. They will probably look to release it prematurely as well, you'd have to expect that at this stage. They will always consider what is best for them politically and for their backers, which should be irrelevant in any of these decisions.

These deaths are added throughout the weekend lag ffs, so no its not nearly 900 at all ffs

I said this last week

Some right pathetic morons on this forum, utterly clueless

You are the worst of the lot, the biggest moron on this forum. Completely ignoring the effect of the lockdown on the numbers, which would be off the charts by now without it.

I tried reasoning with you, but that was before I learned that you initially thought it was a hoax, then turned up at your local hospital to find out and caught the virus And then you come on here and tell everyone I can't figure out which is thicker.

*You're

Oh fack off

Sad pathetic wan*or

The true daily figure ain't hard to find, if you don't look then you obviously get off on peddling utter filth anyway

Bunch of clowns

Plenty of deaths aren't recorded on the actual day Sontaran it's always been this way.

The deaths aren't for specific days they are just officially recorded deaths logged in each 24 hour period. Getting hooked up on the numbers each day isn't worth it, you are just looking for trends.

Why do they report daily deaths then?

And why do they report them as daily deaths?

When its obviously a blatant lie

The media are facking scum and they should be bulldozed with the reporters executed

I have read plenty of articles explaining this regarding deaths and occasionally they do clarify what the figures actually are stating on the news.

The 24 hour thing is just a consistent standard to have a daily figure which can be used to measure the longer term trends.

We all saw the acceleration and now see the plateau and in coming days we should start seeing the decline.

don't hold yer breath

I'd certainly put money on an evens bet we won't see these sorts of figures this time next week.

I should clarify before i get slaughtered that of course I wouldn't actually ever bet on deaths if I could, i mean the predictive nature of the science modelling they have followed.

Why not just look at the daily deaths off NHS Englands website (understanding that recent days are still to be fully included) and then maybe you could all cope with the FACT that the number of deaths has been falling since the 8th April.

Its not hard to check.

Roll the sleeves up and get the shot or go to the nearest detention centre until you've re-educated

The end

Think like the herd, don't question anything

even tougher to compare figures as we had easter and bank holidays in figures.

trend looks to be just getting over the peak.



fingers crossed it stays downwards and picks up speed to get to zero soon.

Dont try to compare figures. Just use the accurate ones instead.

It doesn't matter as long as you get the trends. Unless you want to get in a flap every day thinking each change is relevant.

The trends are apparent in the 24 hour figs over time and would be for the NHS daily figs too.

The trends are looking promising now and the data is levelling as suggested by the science that lead us into the lockdwon.

As for getting hung up on a label

On the 19th March they declared this virus a low infectious disease ffs


This obviously doesn't mean what you think it means in terms of how the disease unchecked could spread in the population.

Its low infectious SE what else does it mean?

I take it you think it means it's hard to catch and doesn't spread very easily?

TBH that's what I would have thought hearing the term in the past but I know from everything else I have sourced it can't mean that here.

There's no doubt from anything credible I have seen that's evidence based that suggests this disease isn't dangerous based mainly on it's ability to spread exponentially with such a high R rate of transmission (est around 2.5). The symptoms are not severe for many and the death rate is relatively low in % terms but unchecked it spreads to such an extent and infects so many the death rate would still be horrific because of the sheer weight of numbers.

*the death rate would still be horrific because of the sheer weight of numbers of infections

Spain,Italy France,US the figures are relentless cases going down but very skowly and 500 deaths aday is incredible the US have hiot 2,300 alreasy todat will be theior highest today over 3,000..

trump voters marching for the right to get infected and die

They are asking for it,absolute nutjobs never seen so many fruitcakes the only way they will learn p1gshit for brains.

gigg is just a sicko who gets on seeing numbers

Yes just like all the fit under 40s here who have been infected have all died. Hang on a minute.

UK dearhs per million 255
NHS staff 1.5 million
NHS staff deaths 100
NHS staff deaths per million 67

100 dead so far crazy figures..

In the overall context of the outbreak how can you possibly say that?

I thought Hancock was very hesitant today, umming and ahhing all over the place. His previous compacency or arrogance seems to have gone. I think he now realises that what he thought would be a stellar political career is going down the pan at a rate of knots.

Think he realises Boris has done him and the rest will leave him hang out to dry on his 100k tests a day. He'll be the fall guy.

Couldv'e told him johnson was going to do him like a kipper before the errmmm illness..it was a million on.

Front page of The Telegraph going after him again tomorrow.

Watching Newsnight on delay and Greg Clarke throwing Public Health England under the bus.

665

That's for England, 70 announced for Scotland, and 15 for Wales.

757 i see today they have now given totals of 41,000 now more realistic..plus this

Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

Quick guide
Will there be a second wave of coronavirus?
Show
The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.


Coronavirus: the week explained - sign up for our email newsletter
Read more
That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, owing to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.

The hospital is being obliged to reject people needing care because it cannot get enough of the nurses usually based in other hospitals to work there, staff at the new facility claimed.

One member of staff said: “There are plenty of people working here, including plenty of doctors. But there aren’t enough critical care nurses. They’re already working in other hospitals and being run ragged there. There aren’t spare people [specialist nurses] around to do this. That’s the problem. That leads to patients having to be rejected, because there aren’t enough critical care nurses.”

Advertisement

Almost 20 other patients have been rejected by the Nightingale on medical grounds, for example because they were “too unwell to transfer” or had had a tube inserted into their throat to help them breathe, or because they did not meet the new hospital’s strict clinical admission criteria.

The Nightingale, which was opened in a high-profile ceremony involving Prince Charles on 3 April, admitted its first patient on 7 April and rejected the planned transfer of a patients from another London hospital for the first time on 9 April.

NHS England decided to create the hospital because they feared that within weeks hospitals in the capital would have been overwhelmed by the numbers of people needing intensive care.

At the time the health secretary, Matt Hancock, said that the NHS was “preparing for the worst but hoping for the best”.

One senior intensive care doctor said: “The Nightingale is clearly not a hospital. It’s an emergency overflow facility to ventilate patients to stop them from dying when hospitals have run out of space.”


Sir David Sloman, head of the NHS in London, oversaw the project, in which the army was closely involved, and it was approved by Sir Simon Stevens, chief executive of NHS England, and the prime minister, Boris Johnson.

Sloman wrote to NHS heads in London last Friday asking them to provide about 200 doctors and nurses so that the Nightingale could be used for a growing number of patients needing critical care and help established hospitals resume operations and preparations for the winter ahead.

Despite this, the Nightingale’s inability to admit patients has left established London hospitals unable to relieve the pressure on their overcrowded intensive care units by transferring people suffering from the coronavirus.

That has had the biggest impact on Northwick Park hospital, north-west London, which had to declare a “critical incident” and temporarily shut its doors to new admissions last month as the impact of the coronavirus worsened. It has been unable to transfer more than 30 patients to the Nightingale since 9 April, with many of those planned switches “cancelled due to staffing issues”, the documents show.

The Royal Free hospital, in Camden, London, has also had to abandon plans to transfer about 15 patients from its ICU to the Nightingale. Again, that was often due to lack of staff. Other hospitals in the capital, including St Mary’s, the Royal London and North Middlesex, have also had transfers blocked.

The Nightingale is already under intense scrutiny amid disagreements among NHS leaders and senior doctors in the capital over its purpose and whether or not it is a good use of resources.

A senior official at a London trust said: “It’s a white elephant. When it was conceived a month ago we were facing the prospect of hospitals in London being overrun and mass burial sites like in New York. We thought that London would be Italy and there would be more patients needing level 3 intensive care treatment by this stage.

“But the expected doubling every three days in the number of patients needing to be admitted to ICU didn’t happen. London hospitals doubled, tripled and in some cases quadrupled the capacity of their ICUs, so still have spare capacity, which means the Nightingale hasn’t been needed.”


'I accepted the very first patient': one nurse's first week at NHS Nightingale – video
Advertisement

Other NHS planners said it was better to over-prepare for the pandemic. A senior intensive care doctor said: “ It was a sensible project designed to stave off the type of situation we saw in Italy. It may have just been a matter of days and we would have been thankful it existed. Thankfully, good surge planning to massively increase critical care capacity in hospitals, and a last ditch redistribution effort to move patients from stressed small hospitals to larger hospitals with space, has meant that we have not needed this type of facility.”

Stevens echoed that view at the weekend, saying: “We have not yet had to make extensive use of the Nightingale London thanks to the hard work of NHS staff, who have freed up more than 30,000 existing hospital beds, and the public, who have played their part by staying at home and saving lives.”

An NHS London spokesperson said: “The most important point about staff at the Nightingale is that thanks to their care and expertise, patients in that hospital are being successfully treated, discharged and ultimately having their life saved.

Share your story
Share your stories
If you have been affected or have any information, we'd like to hear from you. You can get in touch by filling in the form below, anonymously if you wish or contact us via WhatsApp by clicking here or adding the contact +44(0)7867825056. Only the Guardian can see your contributions and one of our journalists may contact you to discuss further.

Tell us
“There remains spare capacity in the critical care network across the capital to look after all coronavirus patients and others who need our care, and while it is incredibly reassuring for both staff and patients to have backup capacity at the Nightingale to alleviate pressure on ICU departments where needed, patients can be transferred to other hospitals in the city if they are better placed to receive them at that time – as is always the case.”

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “It is misleading to suggest coronavirus patients are being turned away from NHS Nightingale due to a shortage of staff.

“NHS Nightingale has been set up to treat patients if the NHS was overwhelmed but thanks to the great work of selfless NHS staff, there is spare capacity in existing London hospitals to treat all coronavirus patients there instead.”

They said a rise in London in that 665

So much for the hospitals empty,not enpugh staff at nightingale to even operate it,turning covid patients away absolute diagrace just unbelievable the things that are happening..

thousands of old folk not even allowed to go to hospital , killed off in care homes to keep
the number of vacant hospital beds as high as possible

why are people being taken to the Nightingale when there is capacity at other Hospitals ?

Why are they going to the Nightingale anyway ??   How many patients have been treated there ??

So all LONDON HOSPITALS are full ?

The Nightingale is an overflow unit ,why would it be fully manned ?? How many has it treated ??

that's what I cant get my head around handjob aloud day in,day out to spin this 3,000 spare bed line who brags about spare beds when 40,000 plus could have died,and the biggest reason for spare icu beds is on average 800 a day dying ,if hospital beds were full it might suggest we,re saving more

killed off in care homes to keep
the number of vacant hospital beds as high as possible  ??

Well if that is the case why are people going to the Nightingale ??

he said today we,re passed the peak so who gives a foook about spare beds

The Guardian Does 1TP , according to them people are being sent to an overflow Unit for some reason , What is the reason

759 official UK figure for today, 4,451 new cases, 22,814 tests, 13,522 people tested

Sounds like a complete load of Old Pony , of course the Nightingale will not be fully staffed ,why would it be  , What do you want 100s of members of staff standing around whistling ??

as usual with handjob gets something in his mind and never gives up on it 100,000 test ,spare beds etc, but call me fussy I want spare beds because people are leaving hospital recovered not because 800 a day are dying

Any figures on hospital Capacity ANG , perhaps we can find out why people are off to the Nightingale ..

They keep showing us a slide that shows the number of patients in London hospital critical care beds as reducing.

The cumulative number of deaths has jumped by 763, includes a backdated adjustment of 4 for Northern Ireland.

well either they are talking Shyte or the GUARDian are talking shyte ...

The sweden project going well another 172 deaths 680 cases..

on another point 50 thousand test available , what ever they are , so why are only 20,000 being done daily ??

Availability of 100000 within a week , what difference does that make is the tests are not being done ??

I know if I had the chance of being tested I would be straight down there ..

All very strange to say the Least .....

Government response to the Nightingale coverage :

Several media reports running today about NHS Nightingale are misleading.

There is no shortage of nurses and all coronavirus patients who need treatment are being treated in existing London hospitals.

NHS Nightingale has been set up to treat patients if the NHS was overwhelmed, but thanks to the great work of selfless NHS staff, there is spare capacity in existing London hospitals.

NHS Nightingale’s staffing model was always designed to be flexible based on demand across London.

Critical care nurses working across the city have received additional training and are ready to be deployed to NHS Nightingale to treat coronavirus patients should capacity be reached in existing London hospitals.

Isn't there a bit of a contradiction in that final senetence ?

if you havnt got symptons why do you want a test

on another point 50 thousand test available , what ever they are , so why are only 20,000 being done daily ??


A long way to travel for many.  If you don't drive, it means using public transport.