Most recent T&T data now out, covers 4th - 10th Feb

LFD use continues to rise but more slowly than last week and T&T performance remains consistent.

And as ever we don't know about who isn't tested and who struggles to isolate.

🧵

https://t.co/lffa72M9YJ

The number of people being tested each week remains high at around 3m, but this is due to increasing use of rapid lateral flow devices as PCR test use falls.
The number of LFDs used has increased five-fold since the start of Jan, and 35% in the past two weeks (although noticeable slowdown this most recent week).

By contrast, PCR test use for people with symptoms fallen week on week for the past month (PHE positivity data due later).
LFDs are generally used by people without symptoms to find cases that might otherwise unknowingly transmit disease. Current use focuses in places like schools, health and care, some workplaces, and community testing sites run by local gov for people who can't work from home.
There's definite variation in their use across the country (but note chart isn't pop adjusted) and as mentioned last week, will need to keep close eye on how use varies, particularly among more vulnerable and deprived groups.

Need to mitigate any unintended harm, esp around jobs
The number of people testing positive is falling as we know, meaning around 30% fewer transferred to T&T this week compared with last week.

That's 106k cases.
Test turnaround time is consistently as fast as it's ever been, with 85% of in person PCR test results received within 24 hours.
Of the 106k cases transferred, 92k were reached (87% of those handled), and 68k (74%) gave details of contacts.

Both these percentages are similar to previous weeks.
There were 191,242 contacts identified, or 2.1 contacts per case (although for the 5,344 cases handled by PHE health protection teams, the median number of contacts per case was 25 - largely due to management of variants of concern).
94% of contacts were reached.

Worth noting that given lockdown, 87% of identified contacts were household contacts of which 97% were reached, this compares with 71% of non-household contacts.

These percentages reached have all been similar since start of Dec.
And there are ongoing differences by local authority which have highlighted before and still need more detailed explanation.
The national data also doesn't report the impact of local contact tracing teams on overall T&T performance.

Local teams generally pick up cases that can't be reached by the national team within 24hrs and their role may become ever more important as case numbers fall.
Finally, end-to-end time is consistently as good as it's ever been.

Room for improvement but definitely not getting worse.
And as with every week, these data don’t tell us about people who don’t get tested despite symptoms and who don't always isolate.
Everyone needs to be confident they will have the support needed if testing positive, and that their job – however insecure – will not be put at risk.
We'll update our @HealthFdn T&T performance tracker with @cfraserepi later this afternoon with these data.
Wk 3 T&T @felly500 @trishgreenhalgh @deb_cohen @martinmckee @carolecadwalla @mgtmccartney @ADPHUK
@Jeanelleuk @fascinatorfun @profchrisham @petermbenglish
@HPIAndyCowper @Davewwest @HSJEditor @KateAlvanley
@IndependentSage @nedwards_1 @chrischirp @SamanthaJonesUK
@ewanbirney @TimHarford @devisridhar @FurberA @andrewleedr @kieran_walshe @DrChadborn @Dr_D_Robertson

And pls say if you'd rather not be tagged in these threads each week.

More from Government

🧵⬇️1. Fb is LifeLog, LifeLog is Darpa, and DARPA is a Enterprise Run by CIA... Well... Past President... Big Tech, Big Pharma, MSM, HOLLYWOOD, DC...

Past Presidents....Zuckerberg, Gates...
All C_A... the Family business.... The company...


2. Past Presidents....Zuckerberg, Gates...
All C_A... the Family business.... The company...The Farm.... all C_A assets... most of them related by blood, business, or marriage...


3. "The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst." - J. Edgar Hoover


4. diff. names & faces.... Monsters that lurk in the Shadows. Swamp, Deep State, Establishment, Globalist Elite Cabal...

Shall we go back...How far back...


5. I know these monsters... it's when I try to explain them to others is when I run into a problem.This is why I'm better at retweeting and compiling. I never know where to start... Everytime I try to thread, i end up w/ a messy monstrous web.I'm better at helping others thread.
I don't normally do threads like this but I did want to provide some deeper thoughts on the below and why having a video game based on a real world war crime from the same people that received CIA funding isn't the best idea.

This will go pretty in depth FYI.


The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:

1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.

2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.

Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.

These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.

It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.

This is where one of the first red flags comes up.

The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.

When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?