09 October 2020

COVID-19: YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST

As an Oxbridge graduate scientist, professionally qualified and a musician, I took an active interest in how we could get musical activities re-opened after we went into lockdown back in March.

It soon became apparent that playing music or attending concerts, gigs and festivals were some of the most difficult activities to re-open.  Re-open those and the whole economy would be re-opened.

Over the months there are a number of occasions where anybody following this blog (see "Subscribe by eMail" to the right) would likely find out about something important before seeing it anywhere else.  "You Heard It Here First".  Here are just a few examples, which also display the range of topics I have written about.


1 August 2020:  LONGCOVID & COMPARING COVID-19 TO FLU

I had mentioned LongCOVID before August.  This was a blogpost focusing on it and why it is such an important reason COVID-19 is so much worse than Influenza.

 

7 August 2020:  COVID-19: TESTING, TESTING, 1-2-3

All the latest developments in "Got it" and "How it" testing.  Included the NudgeBox for faster results in hospitals and the LamPORE tests now being trialled in Salford, as announced by PM Johnson as the first phase of "Operation Moonshot".


7 August 2020:  COVID-19: TEST TRACE AND ISOLATE (A CRITIQUE)

"At the national level, NHS Test and Trace is clearly a waste of money, with little chance of getting better the way it is currently organised." So it has proved.

 

11 August 2020:  COVID-19: CROSS-IMMUNITY - A GAME-CHANGER?

New research suggesting that previous infection by a different type of corona virus can provide immunity.  Not from antibodies, but by T cells.  Potentially the basis for a different type of vaccine.

 

18 August 2020:  COVID-19: THE SIDE-EFFECTS OF LOCKDOWNS

Now a second lockdown is back on the cards, people are highlighting the downside 'side-effects' of lockdowns.  I started talking about these months ago, and summarised them in this blogpost.


23 August 2020: COVID-19: WHY ARE WE BEING SO RUDDY CAUTIOUS?

My explanation to anyone talking about letting us make our own decisions about what restrictions to follow, now resurfacing.

 

14 September 2020:  COVID-19: SO WHY IS IT WORTH GETTING A 'FLU JAB?

My jab is booked for this coming Tuesday.


16 September 2020:  COVID-19: ESSENCE AND BENEFITS OF A #NEARZERO STRATEGY

Finding a suitable strategy for the UK given its geographical position and interaction with other countries, whilst allowing musical activities and the economy to re-open.


1 October 2020:  COVID-19: ARE YOU SELF-EMPLOYED? IS THIS THE DEATH OF SEISS? 

A look at the replacement for the Furlough scheme for employees, and the knock-on changes to support for the self-employed.  The new JSS+ support announced by Rishi Sunak on 9 October is little better.


8 October 2020:  COVID-19: MASS SIMULTANEOUS SELF-ISOLATION plus

10 October 2020: COVID-19: CREATING A "FIRE BREAK" BY USING A MASS-SIM SELF-ISOLATION

A different way of approaching the winter and getting the economy open.


9 October 2020:  COVID-19: ANOTHER APPEARANCE ON THE BBC

I've also talked recently on BBC Radio about several other topics, including an assessment of the new NHS COVID-19 app (not fit for purpose), and the new COVID Secure wardens.

 

COVID-19: ANOTHER APPEARANCE ON THE BBC

In the last few weeks I have appeared live on BBC Radio Oxford's "Breakfast Club" several times, interviewed by Sony Award-winning presenter David Prever.

You can listen to these broadcasts for 29 days after the day of each broadcast, as follows: 

(1) THURSDAY 8 OCTOBER 2020

Talking about what the local Councils can do to help businesses adhere to Covid Secure laws and guidance, and the parallels of the new Council teams with air-raid wardens of World War 2.  Starting 3hr21.

I had also hoped to get on to talking about what the UK Government can do, with a short, sharp massive Mass-Sim Self-Isolation.  Changing the course of COVID-19 for the winter.


(2) WEDNESDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2020

Talking about 'false alerts' using the new NHS COVID-19 App. The whole feature started 3hr6:15 and I was the second speaker after 3hr10. 

This was raising points in this subsequent blogpost:


(3) WEDNESDAY 23 SEPTEMBER 2020

Talking about whether PM Johnson had done enough in the measures announced the day before, starting 3hr20

This was then discussed further in this blogpost:

COVID-19: HAS PM JOHNSON DONE ENOUGH?    

The discussion on 'what I would do if I was PM' was unexpected, and my response was what I would have suggested over the summer when daily "new confirmed cases" were below 1000.  

Now the rate is far higher, a more aggressive approach would be needed to get to #NearZero.  The approach came to me a few days after this broadcast.  But this idea has the advantage that it should require an even shorter "Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation" explained in this blogpost:

COVID-19: NOW HERE'S AN IDEA

  

(4) FRIDAY 11 SEPTEMBER 2020

Talking about the impending "Rule of 6", and its impact on families with four children and amateur musical groups, starting at 3:25:30

Here's the relevant blogpost:

COVID-19: 'RULE OF 6', 'OPERATION MOONSHOT' AND MORE



08 October 2020

COVID-19: MASS SIMULTANEOUS SELF-ISOLATION

Outside Parliament
Four words, Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation, to get the economy open.  In full.

Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation.  Four words that got a right slating from a variety of people when I tweeted them without explanation to BBC Politics earlier this week.  Without anyone understanding what those words might actually mean.  See my twitter feed.  To be fair, a couple of real issues were highlighted that need to be addressed, as discussed below.

Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation.  Four words designed to make life difficult for news readers. So let's call it a short, sharp, massive Mass-sim Self-Isolation.

Mass-sim Self-Isolation. Four words that would mean theatres, concert venues, sports and even potentially night clubs could re-open.  Musicians, actors and pantomime stars able to work, earn a living and contribute to the economy instead of claiming benefits.  Get these parts of the economy open, and the whole economy would be open.

How, while we wait for a vaccine?

 

LET'S SET THE SCENE

In the last few days, for the hospitality, night-time and entertainment industries:

  • Cineworld closed with the loss of thousands of jobs
  • Pubs and hospitality are completely closed in parts of Scotland, and that is threatened for parts of England as infection rates climb through the roof.
  • Every pantomime season cancelled
  • Music venues across the country boarded up
  • Oxford and Oxfordshire having infection rates high enough to put us into "Red Alert"

 And on the political scene this week:

  • Sir Keir Starmer saying at Prime Minister's Questions that "local communities are angry and frustrated" as infection rates continue to rise despite the local restrictions.  "This is getting ridiculous."
  • PM Johnson addressed the virtual Conservative Party conference by opening with "this disease that attacks not only human beings but so many of the greatest things about our country: our pubs, our clubs, our football, our theatre and all the gossipy gregariousness and love of human contact that drives the creativity of our economy".  But he went on to announce absolutely nothing relevant to bring those any of those back.
  • The day before, the Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak addressed the same conference by saying there would be "hard choices" in managing the country's finances "Over the medium term getting our borrowing and debt back under control." and "I have always said I couldn’t protect every job or every business. No chancellor could."  "

As a result the night-time industries and everyone who works in them are being thrown to the wolves, despite those industries being viable if there was no virus and no lockdown. 

Furthermore Sunak said the following on ITV:  

The Musicians' Union reacted angrily as follows:
  • "We know that our members’ jobs are entirely viable jobs – the only reason they are currently unable to work is because of the Government’s Coronavirus restrictions."
  • "... we desperately need the Chancellor to expand the SEISS to cover more than 20% of monthly profits and plug the gaps that mean that 38% of musicians are ineligible for the wage support schemes"

Here's the NME taking a broader look at the creative industries:

  • "Every week the arts feel ignored and unimportant is one more week where the collective anger rises"

 

SO IS THERE REALLY NO ALTERNATIVE?

The Government is saying that what they are doing is all they can do.  Having worked in business for many years solving really difficult problems, I believe there is an alternative worthy of debate.

At this stage this is a draft proposal, whilst I bounce the idea off people to establish if there are any red-flag show-stoppers.  There are several 'dark orange' issues, but every issue has a potential solution, I believe.

So what is the idea?  Could a short, sharp Mass-Sim Self-Isolation be a serious proposal?


WHAT IS "MASS SIMULTANEOUS SELF-ISOLATION"?

When NHS Test and Trace contact someone to self-isolate, that is an instruction to self-isolate for 14 days.  This is because it takes up to 14 days to develop symptoms, though now known to be up to 17 days.  

Everybody should therefore have enough food, medicines and any other essentials for them and their family to last 14 days without leaving the house.  After which time they will either:

  • Have developed symptoms, and may need to self-isolate for a short while longer, or
  • Have not developed symptoms, so can be assumed not to be infectious
If every body was to do this simultaneously, after 14 days or a little longer everybody would be in that position.  The virus effectively eliminated from the country.  Short and sharp action.

The infection rate may not then be absolutely zero, but near enough #NearZero that everything could re-open.  That could include all hospitality, night-time, sports and entertainment.
 
 
HOW ABOUT SUPPORT?
 
Businesses and individuals will need to be given two weeks' notice and provided with financial support.
 
But as one of the benefits of #NearZero is a far lower requirement for testing, the money saved would help in that support cost.
 

The recovery in the economy would then more than pay for that investment.  From the Exchequer's position:
  • Improved VAT receipts
  • Improved PAYE, NIC and personal tax receipts
  • Reduced social security payments
  • Reduced health and testing costs
  • Reduced interest cost on borrowings

WHAT EXEMPTIONS?

Clearly hospitals, care homes, prisons and a number of specific industries such as steel furnaces would need to remain open.  But only the vital, less than were previously regarded as "essential".  Supermarkets closed, for example. 

Everybody on a two-week curfew, except those people who have a specific vital reason to be out of their home or at their workplace.


FOR HOW LONG THOUGH?

For how long could new infections be kept down to very low levels is the big question, so the economy can remain open?:
  • New Zealand has shown how difficult it is to keep infection out of their country, even though they are far more remote from other countries than the UK. 
  • Clearly entry of people and goods into the UK needs to be controlled far better than hitherto, with any outbreak immediately identified and resolved

What if another Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation (MSSI) was needed every three months?  Maybe more often, maybe less.  Wouldn't it be better than carrying on as we are?

That's the point.  Do we really want to carry on as we are?  Do we want to see the hospitality, night-time and sports industries destroyed, and everyone involved struggling to survive?

Or do we want to reopen the economy for an investment of two weeks?  Who knows what the result would be.  The only way to find out is to give it a go.  Isn't it worth giving it a go?  

Give everybody two weeks' notice to self-isolate for just two weeks or at most three.

What would the Chancellor think about the prospect of an enhanced economy without killing off the hospitality and entertainment industries?

What do you think?   Worth a try?








COVID-19: THE GREAT BARRINGTON DEBACLE

The trio of authors
Tosh.  Let's not beat about the bush.  This proposal is utter tosh.

This week saw the launch of The Great Barrington Declaration.  As it says on their home page "As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call 'Focused Protection'."  

Read on, and "Focused Protection" is a form of herd immunity.

All the right concerns, but all the wrong solutions, as discussed in this BBC article.

 

ALL THE RIGHT ISSUES

For some months I have been warning about the dreadful 'side-effects' of lockdowns.  I published a blogpost on this subject in the middle of August, called unsurprisingly "COVID-19: THE SIDE-EFFECTS OF LOCKDOWNS".

But just like treatments for cancer, the dreadful can sometimes be justified if the malaise justifies it.  Hence my support for lockdowns. But keeping them as light as possible.  I published another blogpost on the same day titled "COVID-19:  WHEN CAN LOCKDOWNS BE JUSTIFIED?"

So I have every sympathy with the authors of the Declaration, the GPs and others who have supported it, and those who have written similarly about their concerns.

 

ALL THE WRONG SOLUTIONS

The Declaration's "Focused Protection" suggests, in essence, that older and more vulnerable people should lock themselves away whilst everyone else gets on with life.  A form of Herd Immunity.

There was a similar suggestion two months back, which I debunked in this blogpost "COVID-19 LOCKDOWN OPTIONS: OVER 50s? UNDER 50s? OR WHAT?"

Since then various new information has become available, so it is worth setting out why such an idea is a non-starter.  As Dr Stephen Griffin, associate professor at the  University of Leeds school of medicine  says "While clearly 'well intentioned', the declaration has profound ethical, logistical and scientific flaws"

Concentrating on the scientific flaws:

  • This study of Excess Deaths suggests COVID-19 has a noticeable impact on the over 45s, some or all of whom would effectively need to self-isolate under this proposal
    • A significant proportion of teachers, on whom schools rely
    • A significant proportion in the workplace generally, on which the economy relies
  • Herd immunity makes no mathemematical sense:
    • 60% minimum of a population requires either a reasonable level of daily infections for years, or an unfettered level to achieve herd immunity in a short time
  • An unfettered level of daily new infections would risk quickly overrunning the NHS, even amongst yonger age groups, and a quickly rising death toll
  • We still don't know how long immunity might last. T cells looking more likely than antibodies to provide long-erm immunity, but we don't know the total effect. 
  • That is all before we consider LongCOVID, which is looking like it affects many more people than die, often for people who were initially not ill enough to be hospitalised.  This is ignored in the Declaration.

Then there is the practical aspects of keeping those self-isolating separate from those who are not, which is impossible.  Multi-generational households, for example.  

Let alone the adverse effects on those self-isolating.

The Great Barrington Declaration proposal is utter tosh.


06 October 2020

COVID-19: WHAT IF WE WERE TO STOP COVID-19 TESTING?


What a stupid question!  Or is it?

There's fundamentally two types of tests:

  • "Got it" tests, currently done using a technique called RT-PCR
  • "Had it" tests, currently done by testing for antibodies

Two big topics.  After yesterday's shambles with Excel, let's look at why "Got it" tests for COVID-19 are done, and whether we should be doing something different.

 

BASICS OF THE VIRUS

Before we can assess "Got it" testing for the SARS-COV-2 virus (SARS2) that causes the COVID-19 disease, we need to understand some basic facts:

  • The SARS2 virus is too small to be seen in the most powerful visual microscope.  An electron microscope is needed.
  • The virus contains RNA, which is what allows the virus to replicate within a human cell
    • There are several strains and many variations, but key aspects identify the RNA as being from SARS2
  • When the virus is deactivated in some way, remnants of the RNA are left.  So a test for RNA does not identify whether the viruses were active at the time of taking the sample
  • The proper way to test for active SARS2 is to grow a culture.  That takes far too long for testing purposes, in excess of 7 days
  • People become infectious before they display symptoms. So it is important to identify presence of virus in people who are not displaying symptoms, and get them to isolate before they infect anybody more

 

SO WHAT OPTIONS DO WE HAVE TO TEST FOR SARS2?

There's three decreasing levels:

  • Whether there is active SARS2
  • Whether there is SARS2
  • Whether there is SARS2 RNA
Culturing samples to identify active SARS2 is not practical, as it takes too long to culture a sample.

Could we spot intact SARS2 with some form of microscope, with AI software optimised for identifying it?  I haven't heard of such an initiative, but hopefully someone is working on it.  Wouldn't be easy to be sure it was SARS2

Which leaves us with having to 'make do' with RNA testing.  There are three major drawbacks with this approach, whatever technology is used:

  • The sample has to be good enough to contain enough viruses to be detected:
    • A viral infection needs some time to grow enough in the body to be detected.  This may take a couple of days after infection.  So a negative result may just be that the test was done too early
    • Swabbing is notoriously unreliable, producing 30% false negatives even when done by an experienced professional.  Worse when self-swabbing
    • Saliva samples are now being used, but they haven't been used hitherto because saliva contains less viruses than swabs
  • As any form of RNA detects remnant RNA, a positive test result may be telling you the person has had COVID-19, but they could be no longer infectious:
    • Which is why testing is not done more than a few days after initial symptoms
    • If someone has been tested when asymptomatic, we don't know whether a positive result is that they have active virus, or they had the virus some time ago and are not still infectious
  • Cost:
    • The current RT-PCR test has been reported by the Financial Times as costing around £100 per test.  Scale that up to millions a week and the cost is eye-watering
    • Alternative reliable tests are at least £20 per test.  Still eye-watering at scale

 

SO WHAT IS "OPERATION MOONSHOT"?

There seems to be two aspects to Operation Moonshot that are getting confused, but are both worthwhile:

  • Trialling of new RNA tests:
    • A test for use in hospitals, to produce results more quickly, using 'NudgeBox from an Imperial College London spinout company called DNANudge, also using RT-PCR
    • A quicker, cheaper test based on RT-LAMP technology for use for the general public, using LamPORE tests from Oxford Nanopore
  • Looking for a new type of test that is simple and cheap enough for everyone to use at home on a daily basis, whether symptomatic or not:
    • If not as reliable as the 'proper' tests, at least be 'indicative' to identify if a proper test should be done

When I reviewed tests two months ago in early August, I made two key observations:

  • The need for cheap indicative tests, as envisaged in Operation Moonshot.  Are people in Government reading my blogposts?
  • RT-PCR was not appropriate for mass testing:
    • Too complex
    • Lack of availability of test reagents, although that might only have been a temporary problem
    • Reliance on unreliable swabbing, as explained above
    • Very expensive, as explained below

The only problem in principle with Operation Moonshot is that nothing is likely to change much this side of Christmas, nearly three months away.


SO WHY HAS RT-PCR BEEN SCALED UP?

So why has RT-PCR been scaled up, with plans to do more?

The World Health Organisation suggests that Test/Trace/Isolate is an important part of dealing with COVID-19, as does nearly every expert on infectious disease.  They are right in theory, but is that correct in practice, given what has been discussed above?

Frankly is scaling up RT-PCR more political expediency than a scientific necessity?

To answer those questions let's look at testing objectives for 'Got It' tests.


'GOT IT' TESTING

There are several objectives of 'Got it' testing:

  • For patients being admitted to hospital 
    • As part of overall pre-treatment testing
    • To isolate those with COVID-19 away from other patients
  • For general public, whether need to self-isolate or get back to work:
    • Key workers, such as hospital staff
    • For others
  • To get contacts of positively-tested people to self-isolate, and thereby reduce transmission of the virus by people who are infectious but wouldn't otherwise know it
  • Monitor level of new infections

There are two of these objectives that are essential, covered by NHS testing in what is called "Pillar 1":

  • Hospital admissions
  • Key workers, such as health workers and emergency service personnel, who need to get back to work as soon as possible

The other three objectives are covered by the outsourced "NHS Test and Trace", in what is called "Pillar 2":

  • General public
  • Contact tracing, now under threat of £1000 fine for not complying with a self-isolation instruction
  • Monitor level of new infections

So the question posed at the start can be re-phrased as "What if we were to stop Pillar 2 COVID-19 testing"?  The answer is not necessarily obvious. 

So let's explore this question.


GETTING A PILLAR 2 TEST

There are several ways you can get a "Pillar 2" test, all of which currently involve swabbing and use of RT-PCR:

  • Drive-through or temporary facility where somebody experienced takes the swab
  • Take your own swab at one of these facilities, under supervision
  • Take your own swab at home, with no supervision

The main Oxford Hospitals advise that around 30% of experienced swabs were inadequate .  There is no inherent reason why that would have improved, and self-swabbing is likely to be worse.

I had a test when the staff at the temporary facility in Oxford insisted I take a test, even though I protested I had no symptoms.  I went ahead in the interests of research. The result was negative, as expected.  But the email with that news reflected the risk of false negatives:

  • I should still self-isolate for 14 days if "someone you live with tests positive or you've been traced as a contact of someone who tested positive."
  • However "If you're not a contact [of someone tested positive] you may return to work if you've not had a fever for 48 hours and feel well" or otherwise get back out living 'COVID-normally'.

  • At least until I show symptoms again, when I should "get tested and self-isolate for 10 days from when they start".


So it seems I would need to self-isolate for 10 or 14 days if there's any doubt.  I would also need to wait 2 days after fever or feeling unwell, which is a typical time for any other type of illness.

So that minimises the consequences of false negatives. But it means something else as well.  

There's little value getting a negative result.  Furthermore, if you have symptoms, there is little value in getting a positive result.  In practice you would have (or should have) self-isolated anyway, although it is good to know for sure.  In most cases a negative result is not going to release you from that requirement to self-isolate.  Indeed there's the prospect of a £1000 fine for breaking a self-isolation instruction.

Furthermore a positive test result only means there's RNA in your sample, not whether you are still infectious.  

In practice then, a "Got it" test is not especially helpful to the people being tested outside of a hospital setting.  


VALUE OF TESTING FOR INFECTION MONITORING

Before looking at Tracing, let's check whether there is any value in the test statistics for monitoring the location and severity of outbreaks.

Yes there is, but there are other alternative and in some respects more reliable sources:

  • The Office for National Statistics "COVID-19 Infection Survey" which tests a sample of people across the country at random, for both "Got it" and "Had it", taking swab and blood samples.  The sample includes people who are not symptomatic, identifying where infections are taking place before they get reflected in the Pillar 2 figures.  The expansion of the ONS Survey to 400,000 people was announced in August.
  • The ZOE app run by King's College, which involves over 4 million people who have been able to download the app, and tracking their symptoms. 
  • Various other studies run by other universities
So would the loss of "Pillar 2" testing affect decisions? The recent problems with losing over 15,000 Pillar 2 test records shows the Government is not reliant on them for that purpose.  So pillar 2 results are clearly not essential for the purpose of monitoring spread of the infection, and the occurrence and size of individual outbreaks.
 
 
THE POTENTIAL VALUE OF TEST AND TRACE
 
So we've concluded that there is little added value from Pillar 2 testing in two respects:
  • Little value to person being tested
  • Little value to track size and location of outbreaks, because there is other reliable information available
The real potential value of Test and Trace is to trace contacts of positively-tested people, and ask the contacts to self-isolate.  That reduces transmission.  That's if people do it, which we know has been poor.  As has the been the poor success of the Test and Trace service managing to contact contacts.
 
Support for those being asked to self-isolate is vital, and there is the carrot of £500, but also now the threat of a £1000 fine.

Frankly I don't want to live under that shadow.  Fearing that phone call.  A risk becoming ever more likely as infection levels rise.  Having to self-isolate for 14 days with no certainty I've actually contracted the disease.
 
Indeed the only real advantage of using the new NHS COVID-19 app is to log into venues anonymously, otherwise venues are compelled to collect contact details from me.  I bet people give false details, or details of someone else. I fear being the butt of that jest. 
 
So whilst contact tracing and isolation is in theory vital in the fight against transmission, in practice it has some major downsides.  Downsides that would be justified if SARS2 was as lethal as the original SARS or MERS, but difficult to justify for SARS2, even with LongCOVID.  Even if the contact and self-isolation percentages were perfect.


BUT THE COST!

The Financial Times has reported that each test costs around £100.  Figures of around £10 billion are bandied about for the entire cost of the Test and Trace Pillar 2 process.  With the entire Health budget of around £178 billion in a normal year, the cost for the Test and Trace programme needs some serious justification.


So we have:
  • Little value to person being tested
  • Little value in tracking size and location of outbreaks, because there is other reliable information available 
  • Ineffective and 'unwelcome' tracing service
  • Extortionate cost

Looks like a no-brainer to me.  Pillar 2 testing cannot be justified, other than for the Government to show they are doing something, by complying with WHO advice.  Keeping the media off their backs, except when it goes wrong.  

Think what else we could do with that money, either to fight COVID-19 or for other initiatives. 


WHAT ABOUT CHEAPER, FASTER, MORE RELIABLE TESTING METHODS?

If false negatives could be substantially reduced, such as by saliva sampling or some other testing method, then the test results overall would be of much greater value.  If the cost was then far lower, public testing would be worthwhile.

But it would be arguably easier and more effective if Test and Trace for the general public was brought into the Pillar 1 fold, and local tracing implemented in place of the current impersonal national system.

I look forward to Operation Moonshot identifying a test that everyone could use on a daily basis, even if it was only indicative.  At least that would highlight who needs to get tested properly, and local contact tracers could follow up to extinguish a local outbreak.

 

WHAT ELSE SHOULD WE DO?

The issues with testing capacity and tracing would be substantially reduced if the new infection level would be brought down to #NearZero, alongside a whole host of other benefits:

That requires action far tougher than current suppression measures, Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation.

Cancel Pillar 2 testing and the money saved in testing could provide full support for self-isolation and so much more. 
 
So it wasn't such a stupid question to stop Pillar 2 testing.  Pillar 2 testing should be stopped, though Pillar 1 testing should continue and be the foundation for all reliable testing in future.








05 October 2020

COVID-19: WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG TO SPOT THE EXCEL PROBLEM?

Wow.  England's testing statistics have been understated by over 15 thousand, mainly for tests in the North West of England, because of an IT problem.  

Positive tests have been notified to people being tested by the people carrying out the testing, but the test details notified to the central system were not loaded properly.  That caused two problems:

  1. The test results were not counted.
  2. Contact tracers were not aware of omitted tests, so contacts were not followed up.  Which is a key point of testing, in getting contacts to self-isolate promptly to reduce transmission of the virus.

I'm presuming the actual technical reason in the linked article is the correct reason for these omissions, I'm 99% certain I know why the problem was not spotted immediately. 

 

WHY IT TOOK SO LONG TO SPOT THE TESTING STATISTICS HAD BEEN UNDERSTATED

It just happens that one of the last projects I was involved in was using Excel as the reporting engine for a £100 million food service company, covering their many depots around England.  A very high volume of low value transactions.  

The issue was getting data OUT of a central database to analyse and report using Excel, as is common for financial reporting.  But this was plagued with the same basic problem.  We were using an old version of the database software that output data manually as the modern .xlsx format, but scheduled outputs were using the older .xls.  The .xls version not being suitable for the task, due to the low number of rows that format could handle.  So we had to find a different way to automate scheduled data extracts each morning.

The Test and Trace problem is about loading data INTO the central system.  But exactly the same basic problem, using .xls rather than .xlsx, and finding the .xls format would not handle enough rows.  Data just gets dropped.  I've seen it with my own eyes. 

The difference was that I had implemented control totals for the food service company, which were not there before, which immediately identified there was a problem.    For example, if total revenues for the day was £X, so the extract had to total £X too.

I've previously mentioned that I reviewed the development of Sony's main trading system "STN", running on an IBM mainframe.  Data had to be passed from one part of the system to another, under the control of the Operations team.  There were few if any control total checks for completeness.  The IT Director was grateful for me identifying this issue.  My recommendations for implementing control totals were immediately implemented.  Avoiding a similar understatement problem at Sony.

Control totals for completeness is a basic technique.  Yet this new Test and Trace problem is the third time I've seen basic completeness checks seemingly omitted.  Or were they there, but the issue not resolved?  Face. Palms.


COVID-19: DON'T TELL SID

This would be a gas if it wasn’t so serious.


THE PROBLEM

We now find our lives blighted by COVID-19.  Significant restrictions across the country, and more in the north of England.  Theatres, concert venues and sports closed.  Pantomimes cancelled.  Now the Cineworld cinema chain is closing this week.  

Overall there's hundreds of thousands of jobs and self-employed contracts at risk.  The Shadow Chancellor is right to say the new support schemes are not enough and indeed not going to work  Furthermore, millions of people are missing their favourite pastimes.  

PM Johnson confirmed on Sunday that the winter is going to be tough and "bumpy". Chancellor Sunak is substantially reducing support as the furlough scheme comes to an end shortly.  Support cut to businesses, the employed and indeed the self-employed.   He can't support every job.  That means the night-time industry effectively sacrificed, just because it isn't viable now.

Whilst we patiently await a vaccine, do we really want to live like this?  Is there a better way?  Indeed is there a solution that would let us live with the virus?  And be better for the Treasury?


SOLUTION EXAMPLES

In my professional life I have developed solutions to complex ‘impossible’ problems on numerous occasions. To mention just two:

  • Two divisions within a business group were to be merged, and needed to be managed with one team on one system with one set of business processes.  But the divisions were part of two different legal entities, which was going to take months to sort out with an outside investor.  In the meantime the two businesses had to be accounted for separately, using two different stock valuation methods, actual and standard.  Once we had the solution designed and approved, the MD of the combined business said “I didn’t think we would be able to find a solution”.  I had led the design.  Result.
  • A well-known business had a major problem that three other Chartered Accountant had investigated but not solved.  I had a hunch, based on my experience of systems, and with my tenacity and gentle cajoling of colleagues, I found the solution.  The solution contributed more profit to their year-end “Dash for Cash”, involving all directors and employees, than all their other initiatives put together.  Result.

I've also audited the main financial systems at British Gas in Staines, as it happens.


DEVELOPING AN INTEREST IN DEFEATING COVID-19

Back in early March 2020, before the lockdown, I started to take an interest in COVID-19.  As a graduate Oxbridge scientist, I had studied genetics and test spectroscopy.  I started posting interesting articles on COVID-19 that I had found, which weren’t reflected in the mainstream media.

That interest has increased.  My main hobby of playing music and attending concerts, gigs and music festivals was closed down in March.  Every such activity has remained closed.  Some venues boarded up, with no hope in sight of being opened under this Government’s strategy.

It has therefore been my ambition to get these activities re-started and re-opened.  For me and my many pals in the industry.  Being the most difficult industry to reopen means reopening the whole economy.  Which is to everyone’s benefit.  Including to the Treasury's benefit.

But this has to be done without the virus running rampant, as that would inevitably mean the NHS being over-run.  Preferably keeping deaths and LongCOVID to a minimum.

Impossible? The Government seems to think so.  But I don’t believe in impossible.

In doing my research, I’ve helped the production of an academic paper about RT-PCR testing for Birmingham University.  That involved the review of literally hundreds of academic papers looking for relevant content.  And using the opportunity to read about a whole raft of issues including physical symptoms, treatments, the mental effects and the ‘side-effects’ of lockdowns.  Seeing important developments before they get reported in the mainstream media.

I’ve done my research, which of course continues.  So what’s the answer?


FINDING A SOLUTION

We actually have two problems:

  1. What level of infection is the optimum balance between lives and livelihoods, including between deaths and the economy?
  2. How do we get to that level, and importantly stay there?


THE OPTIMUM BALANCE

One solution to the balance problem is what New Zealand has tried to do, which is to “eliminate” the virus to zero level.  They were initially successful.  But they’ve found that viruses get into the country via people and possibly chilled food, even though New Zealand is far more isolated than the UK.   Realistically, full elimination is not feasible for the UK.

So my solution to this apparently impossible problem of balancing lives and livelihoods is #NearZero.  Subtlety different from “elimination” proposed by the Independent SAGE group, in being a different frame of mind.  Recognising that a small background infection level is unavoidable, and gearing up to keep it below 1000 a day.  

One thousand a day was suggested by Professor Chris Whitty the Chief Medical Adviser back in March, but seemingly forgotten.  

That very low level of infection would mean we could reopen the economy AND save lives.   At less than 4 people a day per hundred thousand being infected, there would be about 20 being out and about infectious before symptoms in a town like Watford.  30 out and about in a City such as Oxford.  The chances of meeting someone infectious slim enough to live with.  Provided:

  • Any outbreak is pounced upon and extinguished back to a very low level
  • There’s better controls on people and goods coming in to the UK

Two topics covered in more detail in this article.

#NearZero would also minimise LongCOVID, that threatens to seriously affect far more people of all ages including young adults and children.  LongCOVID is symptoms suffered for more than two or three months.  It’s lethargy, as typically follow any serious infection, and also damage to bodily organs.  

When the SARS-COV-2 virus gets into the bloodstream, it causes microclots that can cause strokes and other organ damage.  The virus can also directly attack organ cells using the same ACE2 mechanism which it uses to infect the respiratory system.  Overall the organs at risk include liver, kidneys, heart, digestive system and brain.  Plus the lungs and respiratory system initially infected.


One thousand new infections a day in the UK, with its population mainly in England, is around 17 per hundred thousand.  Not everyone tries to get tested and for other technical reasons the official “new confirmed cases” is understated by a factor of around five.  Which means we would need to get the national infection level under 200 total a day, less than 4 per hundred thousand.

That’s lower than achieved in the summer, and far lower than most of the UK now.

 
BUT HOW TO GET THERE?

So #NearZero is the target.  How do we get there?  How do we then stay at #NearZero long enough to be worth the effort?  

A simple second lockdown should have been sufficient in the summer.  But now the infection level has substantially increased in so many areas of the country above 4 per day per hundred thousand.  So neither the current local restrictions nor a national lockdown would be sufficient.  It needs something far more potent.

So here’s an idea for debate.  Not easy, but I am getting support for it being worth the effort.  A Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation.

We’re all ready (aren’t we?) to be contacted by NHS Test and Trace and asked to immediately self-isolate under threat of a £1000 fine.   Those of us who have downloaded the app and plan to use it should also expect to receive self-isolation instructions, but without the threat of a fine due to the privacy-compliant architecture.

So how about doing a self-isolation all together?  A Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation (MSSI).  Probably just two weeks.

A full ‘circuit break’, cutting off the transmission ‘current’ as much as can be possible.  A proper circuit break, not just closing pubs.

Maybe we'd have to do this every few months, if new cases threatened to rise.  But an investment of say two weeks that would provide a number of weeks when  life can work as normal.  2 off and say 11 on.  That would be worthwhile.


THE PRACTICALITIES

A full proper ‘circuit break’ will mean everyone stocking up with food and medicines so that literally every shop can be closed down.

Emergency services will need to continue, as would residents in hospitals, care homes, prisons and the like.  Staff being allowed to travel. Petrol and other sheer necessities kept open on a small scale.

Other absolutely vital activities to be identified.  Overcoming any hurdles.

Vital workers would need to be allowed out and about, but otherwise there would be a curfew.  Policed under threat of the existing £1000 fine.

Tough.  Very tough.  But fair.  The whole country.



SO WHAT ABOUT SID?

Sid won’t like it.  But he might agree to an ‘investment’ in an MSSI if he sees that we could get back to some normality without the significant job losses forecast.

He would then be a Mass Simultaneous SI Do.  But possibly unconvinced as a SI Don’t.

Which are you?  SI Do or SI Don't?  Or do you want to think about it?

04 October 2020

COVID-19: HISSING SID

The latest "new confirmed cases" of COVID-19 are over 12,000 and still rising.  Deaths too.

The restriction measures in the hottest spots around the country seem to be working by slowing growth in infections, but nowhere near well enough to get infection levels down.  

To get the economy fully open, and life back to near-normal, we need to get infections down to very low levels, #NearZero. 

Yet here we are.  We can't plan ahead.  Not in our businesses nor in our personal lives.  What can we do at Christmas?   In the present, kids are being sent home from  school, disrupting their education and parents' ability to work.  Students are being held captive in their digs.

Our wretched lives was brought home when switching on the local BBC radio here yesterday afternoon.  Oxford United's visiting football team had a COVID-19 outbreak and were having to self-isolate.  The match postponed at the last minute:


Not just sports.  Theatres and music venues remain closed, with many jobs and livelihoods at risk.  Do we want to carry on like this until there's a vaccine? Really?

A full lockdown like we had in March and April will not be enough to get infections down to #NearZero in any reasonable timeframe.  We certainly don't want weeks of that again.

If we want to get our lives back to normal, and I'm sure you do, we need to think the unthinkable.  And say the unsayable.  A short, sharp Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation.

If you want to find out what that would entail, and the benefits to our lives and livelihoods of doing it (not to mention the advantages to the Treasury) then do click here.

Remember you heard it here first.  Or would have done.  I'm still trying to say it.  Short, sharp Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation.  You try.  Let's do it.



03 October 2020

COVID-19: WHICH PARTS OF THE NHS COVID-19 APP ARE WORTH USING?

The NHS COVID-19 app was launched with great fanfare for England and Wales just over a week ago. At least 14.5 million downloads from a population of around 60 million.  Some 24% of the population, enough to potentially be really valuable in the fight against COVID-19.  But only if people actually use it, and only if the app works 'sensibly'.

This is an update to the article here.  I said I had hoped to use the app, but would not download it until a number of concerns had been overcome. This was because of initial concerns it had been poorly designed and tested, and appeared to not be fit for purpose.

A few days later and some new issues have arisen, and also that some aspects are not as serious as first appeared:

  • On the negative side, for example, 'phantom alerts' outside of the actual app are confusing people, suggesting little if any 'beta testing' has taken place with end-users.  Some beta-testing has taken place, but clearly not enough. What else is going wrong in the app?
  • On the positive side, the authorities can't know (at least as yet) if you have been sent a self-isolate alert.  So there is no risk of a £1000 fine, as is the case with an instruction from a human contact tracer
  • Also alerts to self-isolate do not occur as a result of scanning into a venue where someone else has been who has tested positive, neither automatically nor manually.  I had initially assumed self-isolation alerts would happen, because without them there is little value of venue scanning in the fight against COVID-19.  All that happens is you could get an alert to watch out for symptoms.  But people will be doing that anyway.  Presumably it would be useful for human contact tracers to follow up on venues where infected people have visited.

So my fundamental conclusion remains unchanged.  Having worked extensively in the development and testing of much more sophisticated systems, the app comes across as having been poorly designed and inadequately tested.  Not fit for purpose.  In particular over-zealous in alerting people to the risk of having been infected.  

Though the app could offer some advantages from using it.  Confused?  Let me explain.

Interesting that the Police force across the country have been instructed not to load the app on to their work phones, and not to use certain aspects of the app on their personal phones.  That could be because:

  • The Police authorities share my concerns
  • And/or have found more concerns.  
  • Or they are erring on the side of caution as they simply don't know, because the app was launched before the Police had been involved in the testing.  In which case that would underline my concerns about inadequate testing, and the resulting lack of trust in the app.


THE BASIC TECHNOLOGY

This is the second iteration of the app, with a totally different de-centralised data architecture and proximity engine than the first version.  There have been millions of downloads despite:

The tablet restriction is odd.  I often take my iPad when I go to the pub, typically to look things up and show it to my pals on a larger screen than my phone.  It would be more useful to scan the QR code and see the pub or restaurant's menu on the larger screen.  My iPad has a valid iOS release, yet the app won't download.  I've tried it.

But my mobile phone is Android (I like to keep a foot in both camps).  Will I download the app onto there?

Possibly now.  Not because the app is much good, but the risks of not using the app could be greater, given the potential £1000 fine  Certainly now I am getting emails that various venues that I visit are displaying the QR code, but where there is little or no chance of being close enough to someone to be infected.


SO WHY MIGHT I USE THE APP?

In principle I was hoping that the app would be good enough to download and use.  But it looks as if it was rushed out and released before it had been adequately "beta tested" with members of the general public, the police and others.  Anybody downloading it is effectively taking part in a giant beta test.  The results so far are not satisfactory.  

The main function of the app is to help to reduce infections.  That is by advising users when they have been potentially exposed to infection, in the hope those people will self-isolate before they show symptoms, thereby reducing transmission of the virus:

  • An alert advising self-isolation according to the proximity algorithm
  • An alert to watch out for symptoms if used a QR code to check into a venue.  Frankly that adds nothing but worry, as anyone sensible would be looking out for symptoms anyway

In each case, the central system, and the authorities using it, cannot see who has been alerted (although this might change), and so it has been confirmed that no fines can be levied.

The BBC have published an article confirming some problems with the app, notably relating to not being able to check out of a venue.  What is said is "you cannot be alerted that somebody arrived in the pub hours after you left, and they later tested positive, because your phones could not have been physically close to each other at the same time".  That is true, in terms of a self-isolation alert.  Whether you have the proximity function in the app switched on or not.  But you can bee still notified by the QR code alert type, because your phone and the central system don't know when you left that venue that day, only if or when you check into another.

£1000 fines can however be levied if they know who you are.  Such as if a venue is asked for a list of visitors who have provided their details to the venue because you haven't used the app to check in.

Another issue is that the app is known to consume significant battery power,:

  • It needs to have Bluetooth switched on for the proximity sensor to work
  • The app itself uses power, with or without Bluetooth 

Just to confirm there is no compulsion to use the app if you have downloaded it.  

 

SO HOW MIGHT I USE THE APP?
 
I only use Bluetooth for my phone in the car, where I can keep it powered from the cigar lighter.  Otherwise experience tells me the phone battery can die if too much is running.

So I won't be switching Bluetooth on in a pub garden, for example. Nor indoors, in a pub, at home, nor anywhere else.  That also means I won't be plagued by false self-isolation requests, which is my principle concern. 

But if I arrive at a venue which is legally compelled to display a QR code for me to scan, scanning it would avoid the alternatives if I didn't scan it.  I am supposed to:

  • Register with the venue through the internet onto an electronic list, or
  • Register on a manually prepared list
In both cases those lists could be made available to public health personnel who could then compel me to self-isolate.  I would risk a £1000 fine if I didn't.  Even if I know I was nowhere near anybody to possibly catch the disease.
 
So I could switch on the app to check in to a venue, and switch it straight back off again, without at any stage switching on Bluetooth.
 
Just to reinforce a point.  I am perfectly happy to do my duty and self-isolate, but only if I can be confident that there is a significant risk of me having caught the disease.  The app's design and limited testing gives me no confidence that is the case, and the inherent risk of false alerts is too high.  So I am not prepared to use it, other than reducing the risk of my bearing a fine or unnecessary loss of earnings, especially as I am self-employed.
 
Having downloaded the app, there are various other useful functions, but all can be done without the app.  Though perhaps more conveniently with it.
 
Update 12/10/20:  The App will have details of the local restrictions.  The information will be available on the main web sites, but will be especially useful on the app.

 
IN CONCLUSION
 
I might (but only might) now download the app on my phone for two reasons:
  • Check into venues, to avoid the alternatives
  • Convenience of the functions not involved with alerts

I will not be using the app to use the proximity sensor.  That is to avoid false self-isolation alerts.

 

 

 





02 October 2020

COVID-19: IT'S YOUR CHOICE

Let me give you a choice:

(1) You self-isolate for two weeks, maybe three, after which all the theatres, concerts, pubs and even nightclubs would be open, or

(2) You self-isolate for two weeks, after which everything that is shut down now would still be shut

Which would you choose?

 

WHAT'S THE CASE TODAY?

If you've downloaded and use the NHS COVID-19 app, you have signed up to potentially self-isolate.  The app issues Self-Isolation Alerts.  The alert you receive may be correct, it might be false.  Either way you are expected to follow the instruction to self-isolate for 14 days.

In any case we all may be told by the human contact tracers to self-isolate for 14 days.  That's under the threat of a £1000 fine.  They know who you are.

Presumably you've already made sure you've got a two week supply of food in your cupboards, freezer and fridge.  Plus any medicines you would need, and anything else.  You'll be ready to self-isolate if instructed.


LET'S HAVE THAT QUESTION AGAIN

So you have a choice, this time reversed:

(1) Carry on as we are, with any self-isolation you are compelled to do.  At the end of which infection cases will still be high, your favourite theatre would still be closed, and your own business/employer may be closed

(2) You self-isolate alongside everybody else (a short, sharp Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation), virtually eliminate the virus, and re-open every business. 

Which would you choose?


THE VISION

When the virus is best-part eliminated, #NearZero, businesses can open, children (and teachers) can go back to school safely, students can be unlocked from their digs.  Life back to near-normal.

The economy thriving.  The Chancellor of the Exchequer beaming.


WHAT IF THE VIRUS COMES BACK?

The threat of a resurgence will always be there.  People coming into the country.  Physical items coming into the country.  New Zealand has proved complete elimination is impossible.

To keep any resurgence to a minimum:

  • Inbound:
    • Testing and quarantine controls over people arriving from abroad, be they British nationals returning or visitors.  Better than we have today.
    • Testing and controls over physical items arriving from abroad, especially chilled foods on which the virus can last longer
  • Outbreak control:
    • Early warning, such as widespread sewerage testing
    • Local rapid response
    • Local restrictions
    • Regular testing of everyone locally, be they symptomatic or not

 

HOW LONG COULD WE KEEP THE ECONOMY FULLY OPEN?

How long could we keep infections down to a very low level, #NearZero, so the whole economy could be kept open?

Three months?  Six months?  Longer?

What if we have to do a Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation (MSSI) again?  Let's say infections had risen such that an MSSI was needed again after three months.  That's two weeks MSSI followed by eleven weeks of the economy being fully open.  Two weeks off, eleven weeks on.  

If this was our quarterly cycle until a better solution was available, would that be such a bad thing?  Better than continuing on as we are?

We won't know unless we try it.


BUT WE COULDN'T POSSIBLY DO THAT!

Do you see the vision?  Businesses open.  Your favourite theatre or concert venue open.

So what is the minimum that would need to stay open during an MSSI?

Could we all get stocked up with food, medicines and such like, so the majority of the supply chain could stop? 

Some things would need to stay open.  There's hospitals, care homes, prisons and individuals needing daily care.  The staff would need to get to work.  The police and other emergency services. Who else? 

A lot to think through.  But quickly.

 

YES WE CAN

If you believe the vision of an open economy is worth attaining, let's consider every issue as a hurdle to be vaulted, not a barrier.

Would you say a short, sharp Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation is worth a try?






 

 

 

01 October 2020

COVID-19: SUPER-SUPPRESSION AND MSI

Yesterday PM Johnson, supported by Professor Chris Whitty (Chief Medical officer) and Sir Patrick Vallance (Chief Scientific Officer) updated the nation on the progress of the COVID-19 disease and the Government's response.  The focus was principally on England, because the devolved administrations are responsible for the response in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Key points arising were:

  • Infections continue to rise, especially in Northern England and the Midlands
  • This is now translating into rising hospitalisations and rising deaths
  • Sir Patrick admitted "We don't have this under control at the moment"
  • Johnson said "the best way forwards, to protect the NHS, save lives, to keep our children in school and the economy moving, is to follow the rules wherever we live."
  • He also said "If the evidence requires it, we will not hesitate to take further measures that would, I’m afraid, be more costly than the ones we have put into effect now"

But is he right?:

  • Is the Government's strategy the best way?
  • Need further measures be more costly?

 

THE ECONOMIC SCENARIO

As we've seen in this summary of the financial support for employees and the self-employed being put in place for the next six months, many people will find they get little or no support, other than resorting to Universal Credit.

The ongoing closure of the entertainment and night-time industries nationally, plus national and local restrictions on hospitality, means the economy is not fully open.

Many children are being sent home from school to self-isolate, in many cases removing their parents from work to look after them.

No business can plan ahead, nor individuals.  What will happen at Christmas?  We're living each day as it comes.  This cannot carry on.

The Government's current strategy is already costing the nation a fortune.


ARE THE GOVERNMENT'S CURRENT RESTRICTIVE MEASURES WORKING?

There is evidence that the rate of increase in infections is slowing, but infections are still increasing.  Localised restrictions have only worked well in Luton.


The Government is crossing fingers that the measures will result in a decrease in cases.  But with deaths already up at 71 per day for the last two days, is crossing fingers enough?


WHAT ABOUT A SECOND NATIONAL LOCKDOWN?

The first lockdown reduced infection levels to about a sixth.  In the summer that would have been enough to get to very low levels, around 200 "new confirmed cases" per day.  But now that isn't enough to get levels down to what they were in the summer, let alone to a very low level.

The economic cost of a lockdown would be high, for little impact. 

 

THE ALTERNATIVE

What if we could most of the economy open?  Get back to theatres?  To gigs? To sports?  

Not to have to worry about kids being sent home? Nor students locked in halls of residence?

All this is possible if we get to very low levels of infection, #NearZero.

 

The Government has been following a "suppression" strategy.  This would be "super-suppression".

The idea is that get to #NearZero, and jobs are saved, industries currently closed are saved, and that costs the Exchequer far less.

Indeed #NearZero is good for the Exchequer and its Chancellor.


BUT HOW TO GET TO #NEARZERO?

Jane Merrick reports that the Government is considering simplifying restrictive measures into just three tiers.  But will any of these be tough enough?  Unlikely.

People typically develop symptoms in around 5 days, but can take up to 14.  So if you can self-isolate everybody, within two weeks everyone infected will have developed symptoms, and will know if necessary to continue isolating.  Anyone in their household will likely have been infected early in that fortnight, and many will have developed symptoms within that fortnight.  Three weeks and virtually everybody will have developed symptoms who is going to.  Anyone asymptomatic might also be expected to be no longer infectious after two or three weeks.

Which means in theory that we could reach #NearZero in as little as two or three weeks, if everybody were to self-isolate.  

Could this be a practical reality?  

Everybody who downloads the NHS COVID-19 app should expect to receive a self-isolation alert, and be ready with sufficient food, medicines and anything else they need for 14 days.  Everybody else likewise, as anyone can receive such an instruction.

So could everyone self-isolate together?  A Mass Self-Isolation (MSI)?  Why not?  There will need to be some exceptions, such as those who need daily care.  But fundamentally an MSI is feasible.


HOW TO STAY NEARZERO?

But having got to #NearZero, how do you stay there? 

The biggest issue is visitors from abroad, and potentially physical objects, especially if chilled. A better approach to testing and quarantine is required.  But with the best will in the world, viruses will get into the country, as New Zealand has found.

Any outbreak needs to be pounced on.  But if that doesn't work we could have another  MSI. 

Is a 2-week MSI every three months such a bad thing if we can then get 11 weeks of near normal life?  A stronger economy every quarter overall than we are getting at the moment.

Super-suppression with a Mass Self-Isolation.  The passport to a near-normal life across this winter?  Let's discuss and debate to find the nest way to get this to work.


 







 

 


COVID-19: ARE YOU SELF-EMPLOYED? IS THIS THE DEATH OF SEISS?

Rishi Sunak
Never ask a QTWAIN.  A headline with a Question To Which the Answer Is 'No'.  I can get away with this headline because I am genuinely concerned that Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor, is leaving everyone to fend for themselves.  Businesses, employees and the self-employed.  Sink or swim.  As if the COVID-19 disease is about to disappear, yet of course it isn't the way things are going.

 

FOR EMPLOYEES

For employees, the JRS (Job Retention Scheme) is being wound down by the end of October and replaced by the JSS (Job Support Scheme).  The JSS is a scheme to support part-time work, replacing the JRS Furlough scheme designed to protect employees who were not working at all for their employer.  Now expecting people to be working.

The net effect for employers is that the JSS is not as attractive as Rishi indicated.  The concern is that it may be far less useful than hoped to the point of being  useless.  There's various scenarios.  As an example, if an employee works for a third of the normal time, "firms must pick up 55 per cent, [one third of normal wages/salaries plus a third of the remainder, 22%] compared to 20 per cent under furlough. It has sparked fears that many businesses will simply lay staff off instead of taking it up".  It's complex, but indications are that employers won't use JSS, so the employees won't benefit.

 

FOR THE SELF-EMPLOYED

The same concern of being virtually useless applies to the Self-Employed Income Support Scheme (SEISS).  In broad terms:

  • Support is dropping from 70% (originally 80%) to only 20% of relevant earnings
  • The next quarterly payment seems to be planned for November, three months after the last.  The implication is it is for November to January (with a fourth payment for February to April), whereas the August payment was June-August (after the first for March - May).  That may well mean two months monies unpaid at some point in the future, by comparison to employees.
  • Eligibility has not been broadened, so the many 'self-employed' who were not eligible before will still not be included
  • Indeed eligibility is being REDUCED.  There will be two new conditions, both of which remain to be defined by Government:
    • "Actively trading".  So potentially the next instalment of SEISS will not be available to people not working, whether that is in closed industries or otherwise not having clients
    • And "Impacted by reduced demand"

Is this the death of SEISS?  Some people will benefit, but only a little, and it will be worthless to many.


WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES?

There are other schemes to help organisations, but these are not as generous as might be hoped.  The bottom line is that support for those industries that are not viable NOW, but would be viable if the legal restrictions were to be lifted, are effectively being left to die.  This applies to theatres, concerts, gigs, nightclubs, zoos, sports and a whole raft of other businesses and organisations.  So sad!

The people employed by such organisations, and the self-employed usually involved, will be left with having to seek support from Universal Credit.

I do hope the Government has a change of heart.

I'm not the only one concerned.  This article echoes the dreadful effect on employees and the self-employed.

 

WHAT'S THE ALTERNATIVE?

We must take stronger action against COVID-19 to get closed organisations like theatres open for business.  That's why I have been thinking the unthinkable to have a short, sharp complete "circuit break" to get down to a very low level of infections,  #NearZero.  That would allow much of the economy to reopen strongly,  reduce deaths, and get life back to near-normal.

How to do a full short circuit break in the form of a Mass Self-Isolation is 'germinating' through discussion with colleagues.  Nothing yet has been identified as a 'showstopper'.  Difficult issues, certainly, but nothing impossible.  

An idea worthy of further consideration and debate, to find the best way to unlock the economy and let us get back to near-normal.  Before the country we love is destroyed.



 

 

 




Popular Posts