There are 1,257 hospitals in the UK. Yesterday they did 1,500 coronavirus tests between them. That is just over one each. Is there anyone who can honestly think that means the government is taking all reasonable steps to contain this virus? Please retweet if you think not.
It does appear that this is getting quite a lot of retweets, in which case I think it appropriate to record my sources.
The BBC provided the data on the number of tests being undertaken.
This is the source of the hospital data. I recognise that this might overstate the number that will ever undertake coronavirus testing, but of the available sources it appeared to be one of the most comprehensive.
Whichever way looked at, the fact that on average hospitals have been undertaking only a little over a test per day each is staggering given the number of people admitted to hospital each day in the UK with respiratory illnesses, almost all of whom must have been considered at least potential coronavirus cases, and all of whom should have been tested as a result.
Epidemiologists say that extensive testing is the best way to beat coronavirus. The U.K. has completely failed to deliver it. And that was a choice.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I think you’ve conflated England only data (BBC no. of tests) with uk wide data – the no. of hospitals. Interesting the significantly larger hospital:population ratio in Scotland – and being in Scotland, that makes me feel better!
But your point still stands Richard – there is not enough testing going on, and there doesn’t seem to be any push to try and do it, at least in Scotland. You’ve been covering the budget and economical response to the epidemic, and it really does make me despair, and Scotland is very much reliant on the uk response – will this make people at last realise that Scotland should be independent so we can make our own choices on how to respond? Never know.
The U.K. Government really does not seem to be taking this seriously at all. We had the idiot Alister Jack MP, Scotland Minister, on the radio ‘explaining’ gov’t response to coronavirus, it was woeful. Stuttering and telling us to wash our hands and we had to take responsibility for our own health,,, what t.f. is the point in having ANY government?!? They are doing pretty close to zero. And I don’t think people should be going around spreading ANY cold or flu just now – everyone needs their immune system in top condition, not weakened by the usual round of colds. (Jack’s advice there was you only need to stay off work if you had a fever with the cold symptoms,,,)
I know the labs have limited capacity, but we really could do with standard coronavirus testing instead of everyone guessing based on ‘risk factors’. At least if we know, we can make a measured judgement. We could have contained it maybe, if the government had made an effort, but now we are into ‘delay’ – which means they expect most people to catch it. Ugh.
Apologies…
But as you say, WTF….
The idea this somehow supports Scottish independence is a sick joke. Sorry. Let’s stop politicising this please.
I can’t understand the complacency. It’s the same in (normally super organised) Holland.
People are only being tested when there’s a proven exposure to someone that tested positive.
That’s fine for historical research, but it’s no good for containing the spread of a disease.
I had a long chat with a colleague last Thursday who at the end of the chat told me they had just returned from Lombardy!
On Sunday I got sick, and I’ve been off work since. I think I may well have Corona based on my symptoms, but I called the authorities and I only fall under their criteria for a test if it’s proven that I’ve come into contact with someone who already tested positive.
Surely wider spread testing makes more sense?
I hope all goes well….
So that means in my rural area, the likelihood of testing is 0. Because that’s what it feels like.
Has Trump’s EU travel ban (which rather perversely exempts the UK) effectively co-opted the UK into being the US’s offshore isolation zone/hub for those from the EU and other ‘banned’ areas who want to travel to the USA?
The whole of his behaviour is utterly bizarre – and crashing the stock market will not help his re-election
For the first time in years I have been laid low with what I can only assume is ‘flu (or the dreaded…). My son was with me last weekend and he will be seeing his kids this weekend. His eldest (16) was born very prematurely and has ongoing lung and heart problems. I tried to get tested to see whether he should cancel the visit (£350 worth of train tickets). 111 was useless as, if I haven’t been to an at risk country or been in contact with someone who has in the last 14 days, they won’t do anything and referred me to my GP. I live in London for goodness sake! I regularly take the tube and the buses — what makes anyone think that just because you’re not connected to people in at-risk places, you’re ok? Isn’t everywhere at-risk?
Having managed to get a telephone consultation with a doctor, she sympathised then told me that they weren’t able to do tests — but maybe this will change in a day or two. Too late for me, I replied. She said she’d consult with the other doctors to see if anything could be arranged.
Still heard nothing but the panic is over. My son is now unwell and has cancelled the much looked forward to visit.
I hope all goes well
Thanks for the concern.
No. Not really. I’m ill, my husband is ill, my son is ill and we’re all self isolating.
My son lives in Poole. He’s blind and has a guide dog that needs to be let out — and get some exercise. The normally very good Guide Dogs For the Blind can’t help until maybe Monday so he’s having to struggle out with his dog by himself (with between 37.5 and 39.1 of fever, hoping that no-one gets close to him.
Not much anyone can do. It is what it is.
That’s tough
And I am far too far away to help
I am genuinely apologetic about that
As well as dividing the number of tests in England by the number of hospitals in the UK, your figure for hospitals also appears to include all the UK’s private hospitals, and many others such as mental hospitals that I doubt would be doing much of the testing anyway.
(In a way this is an echo of the government’s claim to be building “30 new hospitals”: they are not all large district general hospitals.)
There are plenty of anecdotes (some already posted here) of people who have not been able to secure tests, which is worrying, and 111 seems to be overwhelmed. We have to hope that intensive care services are not similarly overwhelmed in a week or two, otherwise we will see Italy-scale deaths. (That said, the majority of tests, for those who can secure them, are still coming negative.)
This is still going to get worse before it gets better.
Even if I did – and I knew I had included private hospitals – and absolutely correctly so in their case because they do handle some really quite sick people – the ratio is still dire and vastly below anything that should have been done. I am wholly unapologetic for making the point.
I am not criticising you for making the point or asking you to apologise for doing do. You might want to agree that the numbers are wrong and/or misleading, but that is a matter for you. Even if it is 500 hospitals doing 3 tests each, it is still not enough. It would be interesting to see the actual numbers on a per-hospital or per-health authority (or trust or county or whatever) basis.
This post seems to be making the rounds – https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca – and it makes the plausible point that things are probably much worse than the official numbers suggest.
Since the whole point was to indicate the inadequacy of the scale of testing I think the point I made was just fine
https://www.england.nhs.uk/2020/03/nhs-to-ramp-up-coronavirus-testing-labs/
it seems the NHS is ramping up the tests using cutting edge kit hardly available anywhere else!
I totally agree with you Richard, as ever. It does seem to the outside observer the Government is taking a “there’s no such thing as a little bit pregnant” approach to Coronavirus testing. By that I mean they seem to take the opinion that there’s little point in testing – you either have it or you don’t. If you have it, the message seems to be “there’s not a lot the State will do to help you any way”. The onus is on individuals to “get on with it, unless things get really bad” (and by then it will probably be too late anyway as the NHS doesn’t have the beds/staff to cope).
Besides, if the Government isn’t testing, they can say legitimately the number of cases is much lower than it is, in some misguided attempt to “support the economy”. If people don’t have an official “diagnosis” then they can’t access the financial support measures being mooted – and the cynical in me says that is going to save a lot of money, isn’t it? Typical Tory policy – on paper it looks all well and good, but the devil is in the detail and by the time they work out how harmful it all is, it will be too late.
I note the BBC news this morning is now telling people not to ring 111 now – you have to access advice online only. Not something older people are necessarily able to do. Even if you are “invited” to be tested (you can’t just turn up and get a test) you are supposed to go to a “testing hub” in a car to be tested and remain in the car while being tested – what happens to those who don’t have cars?
Ah… keep calm and carry on is all well and good but this isn’t being handled well, it seems to me given the massive price increase of essential products such as cold and flu remedies, OTC pain relief and tissues etc. Why is there no moratorium in place to prevent price gouging at least? What resources are the Government going to make available to enable people to nurse family members at home? Already GPs are falling behind in basic essential services such as filling in repeat prescriptions. A tiresome, necessary and time consuming job which has been made much harder and more complicated in recent years due to Brexit preparations to control supplies of certain medicines. If people are unable to access their repeat medications, they will get sicker – putting even more pressure on the NHS.
We will know the full scope of the outbreak in just 4 weeks. We will either have a country where vast swathes of the country pretty much has lost their job and face losing their homes due to the collapse of smaller businesses – particularly in the hospitality, tourism, air travel and food industries; or we will find that most of the MPs and the Cabinet are sick and there’s noone left to run the country and changes will be needed at the top.
I’ve heard People say here cynically that “the planet needs a good cull, if we are to save it.” It will hit the upper and middle class the most – those that can afford to fly on holiday and take cruises. It won’t affect the poorest as much – they are pretty much self-isolated due to economic circumstance any way. They aren’t the ones going to restaurants, football matches, concerts, flying off on holiday and going on cruises. In four weeks time when the effects really start to bite, and people realise they no longer have pension funds or jobs, maybe, finally, this country will wake up and realise the massive mistakes we as an electorate have been making and force real changes that are long over due and the rest of us have been calling for for years now.
We are witnessing, I suggest, an end of an era – akin to the Fall of the Roman Empire. All empires fall eventually, and as the old curse goes – “may you live in interesting times”. Well folks, it just got really interesting.
Richard, I was writing a long post which disappeared before I finished it. I hadn’t finished and I don’t have a copy to complete it, so feel free not to post it. But I think there is a point about public information here.
Some really interesting things coming up at Progressive Pulse, such as this: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/social-distancing-measures-in-response-to-the-COVID-19-epidemic.pdf
Suggesting that social distancing is very effective, and the sooner the better: “if a range of non-pharmaceutical interventions, including social distancing, had been conducted one week, two weeks, or three weeks earlier in China, the number of cases could have been reduced by 66%, 86%, and 95%, respectively, together with significantly reducing the number of affected areas”