COVID19

[StuartHopkin]

There is a lot pf gibberish written about this, but mass lateral flow testing has seemed a big waste of money since the schools went back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/15/rapid-covid-testing-in-england-may-be-scaled-back-over-false-positives

In March, around 80% of positives from lateral flow tests were correct.   

As April started with around half the number of cases, then the real positives are going to be around two thirds of total positives from these tests by now.  Going in to May only half the results will be real positives.  When looking at asymptopics then even these numbers will be overestimates.

For kids in schools, if they have symptoms they should stay at home and get tested properly by PCR.  If they are a close contact of someone with a positive PCR test, they should stay home.  If they don't have symptoms they should just go to school and not waste any resources and tim eon testing. 

Not only are these lateral flow tests a colossal waste of money, but then if people saw the real numbers (and many people don't know the difference in tests), confidence in all Covid tests is reduced.  In addition, I have seen multiple people suggest getting some of these lateral flow tests and testing themselves so they can carry on with their normal lives when they have symptoms. 

In other news, Tim Spector has cases down to not much more than 1,000 in the UK. 



There are several different  akes of lateral flow tests. The ones used by the government at the moment are chinese, sold to us by the Americans and are approx 80% accurate. There are test made by British and European companies Mologic and Avacta that are approx 95% accurate. However at present the government have decided to use extremely small numbers of these tests for  research purposes. When you have smaller numbers to find the better tests would be of more use but im not sure why they arent used. It may be cost reasons, im not sure.

The tests are way more accurate than that.  The reason for high false positives is because even if the test is only falsely positive 1 time in a thousand  then it becomes an issue if real positives are only 1 in a thousand.   In that case half your positives are going to be wrong.   That is where we are heading and why we now have an issue.

If you test people with symptoms, a far higher proportion of the people who get tested are genuine positive, so most positive results from that test will be real positives.

The testing is not suitable for the purpose it is used for right now.   Back in January when 1 in 60 people were genuinely positive the proportion of real positives from mass testing would have been much higher. 

So at 2k cases reported a day against 1m tests a day, half the cases being reported are possibly false positives?

Just trying to get my head round it.

All set up to roll it out at work as an official test site, but the implication of 1 in 1000 being the false positive rate is really of putting as that would mean one team of people sent away to isolate for 2 weeks every month for no reason.

We're not even meant to act on the info, they just receive a text, how can I not send that person straight home!

Ridiculous. Surely anyone who tests positive with an LF test should just be sent straight for a PCR?

They don't know the exact false positive rate, but it is about that. 

If anyone tests positive I think you are right.  The best thing to do would be to send them for a PCR test as soon as possible.  If that is negative and they have no symptoms, then at least they only miss a day or two.  I don't know the legality of it.

If my daughter.tests positive my plan is for an immediate PCR anyway. I have to get this past my wife and the school though...

The info pack is huge, probs 300 pages on setting up the site, recording results etc

In theory;

Site manager
Team leader
Testing operatives

Hand out barcoded cards to each person who comes for a test
Assist them with swabbing from a distance
Swab into a prepared rack
Samples into test cassettes with matching Bircotes
Record results
Log results on government portal
Feeds into track and trace
Testee gets texted result

Testee has do go to a similar website to register the test barcode to themselves.

So could send them for a PCR but if we do the right thing and log the result correctly then they can't come back to work regardless of the PCR test and we have a weird judgement call on all the close contacts in that person's team.

[Doobs]

There is a lot pf gibberish written about this, but mass lateral flow testing has seemed a big waste of money since the schools went back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/15/rapid-covid-testing-in-england-may-be-scaled-back-over-false-positives

In March, around 80% of positives from lateral flow tests were correct.   

As April started with around half the number of cases, then the real positives are going to be around two thirds of total positives from these tests by now.  Going in to May only half the results will be real positives.  When looking at asymptopics then even these numbers will be overestimates.

For kids in schools, if they have symptoms they should stay at home and get tested properly by PCR.  If they are a close contact of someone with a positive PCR test, they should stay home.  If they don't have symptoms they should just go to school and not waste any resources and tim eon testing. 

Not only are these lateral flow tests a colossal waste of money, but then if people saw the real numbers (and many people don't know the difference in tests), confidence in all Covid tests is reduced.  In addition, I have seen multiple people suggest getting some of these lateral flow tests and testing themselves so they can carry on with their normal lives when they have symptoms. 

In other news, Tim Spector has cases down to not much more than 1,000 in the UK. 



There are several different  akes of lateral flow tests. The ones used by the government at the moment are chinese, sold to us by the Americans and are approx 80% accurate. There are test made by British and European companies Mologic and Avacta that are approx 95% accurate. However at present the government have decided to use extremely small numbers of these tests for  research purposes. When you have smaller numbers to find the better tests would be of more use but im not sure why they arent used. It may be cost reasons, im not sure.

The tests are way more accurate than that.  The reason for high false positives is because even if the test is only falsely positive 1 time in a thousand  then it becomes an issue if real positives are only 1 in a thousand.   In that case half your positives are going to be wrong.   That is where we are heading and why we now have an issue.

If you test people with symptoms, a far higher proportion of the people who get tested are genuine positive, so most positive results from that test will be real positives.

The testing is not suitable for the purpose it is used for right now.   Back in January when 1 in 60 people were genuinely positive the proportion of real positives from mass testing would have been much higher. 

So at 2k cases reported a day against 1m tests a day, half the cases being reported are possibly false positives?

Just trying to get my head round it.

All set up to roll it out at work as an official test site, but the implication of 1 in 1000 being the false positive rate is really of putting as that would mean one team of people sent away to isolate for 2 weeks every month for no reason.

We're not even meant to act on the info, they just receive a text, how can I not send that person straight home!

Ridiculous. Surely anyone who tests positive with an LF test should just be sent straight for a PCR?

They don't know the exact false positive rate, but it is about that. 

If anyone tests positive I think you are right.  The best thing to do would be to send them for a PCR test as soon as possible.  If that is negative and they have no symptoms, then at least they only miss a day or two.  I don't know the legality of it.

If my daughter.tests positive my plan is for an immediate PCR anyway. I have to get this past my wife and the school though...

The info pack is huge, probs 300 pages on setting up the site, recording results etc

In theory;

Site manager
Team leader
Testing operatives

Hand out barcoded cards to each person who comes for a test
Assist them with swabbing from a distance
Swab into a prepared rack
Samples into test cassettes with matching Bircotes
Record results
Log results on government portal
Feeds into track and trace
Testee gets texted result

Testee has do go to a similar website to register the test barcode to themselves.

So could send them for a PCR but if we do the right thing and log the result correctly then they can't come back to work regardless of the PCR test and we have a weird judgement call on all the close contacts in that person's team.

Yuck.  I try to do the right thing with Covid, as I think they have been mostly getting things right recently.  Like when the cases went very high again, you could see why we needed to lock down.  Right now, they seem to be just doing stuff because it is in the plan, and not because the data shows it is needed.  Am going to go full David Icke soon.

[Doobs]

There is a lot pf gibberish written about this, but mass lateral flow testing has seemed a big waste of money since the schools went back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/15/rapid-covid-testing-in-england-may-be-scaled-back-over-false-positives

In March, around 80% of positives from lateral flow tests were correct.   

As April started with around half the number of cases, then the real positives are going to be around two thirds of total positives from these tests by now.  Going in to May only half the results will be real positives.  When looking at asymptopics then even these numbers will be overestimates.

For kids in schools, if they have symptoms they should stay at home and get tested properly by PCR.  If they are a close contact of someone with a positive PCR test, they should stay home.  If they don't have symptoms they should just go to school and not waste any resources and tim eon testing. 

Not only are these lateral flow tests a colossal waste of money, but then if people saw the real numbers (and many people don't know the difference in tests), confidence in all Covid tests is reduced.  In addition, I have seen multiple people suggest getting some of these lateral flow tests and testing themselves so they can carry on with their normal lives when they have symptoms. 

In other news, Tim Spector has cases down to not much more than 1,000 in the UK. 



There are several different  akes of lateral flow tests. The ones used by the government at the moment are chinese, sold to us by the Americans and are approx 80% accurate. There are test made by British and European companies Mologic and Avacta that are approx 95% accurate. However at present the government have decided to use extremely small numbers of these tests for  research purposes. When you have smaller numbers to find the better tests would be of more use but im not sure why they arent used. It may be cost reasons, im not sure.

The tests are way more accurate than that.  The reason for high false positives is because even if the test is only falsely positive 1 time in a thousand  then it becomes an issue if real positives are only 1 in a thousand.   In that case half your positives are going to be wrong.   That is where we are heading and why we now have an issue.

If you test people with symptoms, a far higher proportion of the people who get tested are genuine positive, so most positive results from that test will be real positives.

The testing is not suitable for the purpose it is used for right now.   Back in January when 1 in 60 people were genuinely positive the proportion of real positives from mass testing would have been much higher. 

Why we can see 50% false positives when 99.9% of positives are correctly identified by the test.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/18/obscure-maths-bayes-theorem-reliability-covid-lateral-flow-tests-probability

[StuartHopkin]

There is a lot pf gibberish written about this, but mass lateral flow testing has seemed a big waste of money since the schools went back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/15/rapid-covid-testing-in-england-may-be-scaled-back-over-false-positives

In March, around 80% of positives from lateral flow tests were correct.   

As April started with around half the number of cases, then the real positives are going to be around two thirds of total positives from these tests by now.  Going in to May only half the results will be real positives.  When looking at asymptopics then even these numbers will be overestimates.

For kids in schools, if they have symptoms they should stay at home and get tested properly by PCR.  If they are a close contact of someone with a positive PCR test, they should stay home.  If they don't have symptoms they should just go to school and not waste any resources and tim eon testing. 

Not only are these lateral flow tests a colossal waste of money, but then if people saw the real numbers (and many people don't know the difference in tests), confidence in all Covid tests is reduced.  In addition, I have seen multiple people suggest getting some of these lateral flow tests and testing themselves so they can carry on with their normal lives when they have symptoms. 

In other news, Tim Spector has cases down to not much more than 1,000 in the UK. 



There are several different  akes of lateral flow tests. The ones used by the government at the moment are chinese, sold to us by the Americans and are approx 80% accurate. There are test made by British and European companies Mologic and Avacta that are approx 95% accurate. However at present the government have decided to use extremely small numbers of these tests for  research purposes. When you have smaller numbers to find the better tests would be of more use but im not sure why they arent used. It may be cost reasons, im not sure.

The tests are way more accurate than that.  The reason for high false positives is because even if the test is only falsely positive 1 time in a thousand  then it becomes an issue if real positives are only 1 in a thousand.   In that case half your positives are going to be wrong.   That is where we are heading and why we now have an issue.

If you test people with symptoms, a far higher proportion of the people who get tested are genuine positive, so most positive results from that test will be real positives.

The testing is not suitable for the purpose it is used for right now.   Back in January when 1 in 60 people were genuinely positive the proportion of real positives from mass testing would have been much higher. 

Why we can see 50% false positives when 99.9% of positives are correctly identified by the test.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/18/obscure-maths-bayes-theorem-reliability-covid-lateral-flow-tests-probability

Great article.

Looks like you must isolate after a positive LFD but a negative PCR overrules it, and cancels all close contact isolation.

Just trying to search through the bumf to see if that is official.

[Doobs]

There is a lot pf gibberish written about this, but mass lateral flow testing has seemed a big waste of money since the schools went back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/15/rapid-covid-testing-in-england-may-be-scaled-back-over-false-positives

In March, around 80% of positives from lateral flow tests were correct.   

As April started with around half the number of cases, then the real positives are going to be around two thirds of total positives from these tests by now.  Going in to May only half the results will be real positives.  When looking at asymptopics then even these numbers will be overestimates.

For kids in schools, if they have symptoms they should stay at home and get tested properly by PCR.  If they are a close contact of someone with a positive PCR test, they should stay home.  If they don't have symptoms they should just go to school and not waste any resources and tim eon testing. 

Not only are these lateral flow tests a colossal waste of money, but then if people saw the real numbers (and many people don't know the difference in tests), confidence in all Covid tests is reduced.  In addition, I have seen multiple people suggest getting some of these lateral flow tests and testing themselves so they can carry on with their normal lives when they have symptoms. 

In other news, Tim Spector has cases down to not much more than 1,000 in the UK. 



There are several different  akes of lateral flow tests. The ones used by the government at the moment are chinese, sold to us by the Americans and are approx 80% accurate. There are test made by British and European companies Mologic and Avacta that are approx 95% accurate. However at present the government have decided to use extremely small numbers of these tests for  research purposes. When you have smaller numbers to find the better tests would be of more use but im not sure why they arent used. It may be cost reasons, im not sure.

The tests are way more accurate than that.  The reason for high false positives is because even if the test is only falsely positive 1 time in a thousand  then it becomes an issue if real positives are only 1 in a thousand.   In that case half your positives are going to be wrong.   That is where we are heading and why we now have an issue.

If you test people with symptoms, a far higher proportion of the people who get tested are genuine positive, so most positive results from that test will be real positives.

The testing is not suitable for the purpose it is used for right now.   Back in January when 1 in 60 people were genuinely positive the proportion of real positives from mass testing would have been much higher. 

Why we can see 50% false positives when 99.9% of positives are correctly identified by the test.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/18/obscure-maths-bayes-theorem-reliability-covid-lateral-flow-tests-probability

Great article.

Looks like you must isolate after a positive LFD but a negative PCR overrules it, and cancels all close contact isolation.

Just trying to search through the bumf to see if that is official.

It feels that should really be the case, but I am pretty sure it wasn't when they started testing in schools.  At that stage I think teachers and NHS people were automatically sent fro a confirmatory PCR test, but school kids weren't.  This should have changed, but I can't remember reading that it had.  And just because something is sensible, doesn't meant it happens.

I'd be interested to see how likely it is to have two false positive LFT tests in a row.  Does the thing that causes the LFT to be false positive cause it to be false positive a second time, or is it just random?  I suspect it is something imbetween.   It feels like just doing a second LFT straight after a positive test result would be useful, but it is better to do the second one as a PCR.  The chances of both a PCR and LFt both showing false positive is very small (like probably 1 in a million small).

Anyway, looking forward to your Vegas flight?  https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/covid-flight-record-infections-india-b1833655.html.  India has a serious Covid problem right now, but there were 47 positives from less than 200 people on one flight.  This is a big outlier obviously, but there must have been a serious spreader on that flight.  I'd be intrigued to find out what symptoms the spreader(s) had if any?  But given all passengers tested negative before the flight and you'd imagine severe Covid would be really obvious, then the symptoms can't have been that severe?

 

[StuartHopkin]

There is a lot pf gibberish written about this, but mass lateral flow testing has seemed a big waste of money since the schools went back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/15/rapid-covid-testing-in-england-may-be-scaled-back-over-false-positives

In March, around 80% of positives from lateral flow tests were correct.   

As April started with around half the number of cases, then the real positives are going to be around two thirds of total positives from these tests by now.  Going in to May only half the results will be real positives.  When looking at asymptopics then even these numbers will be overestimates.

For kids in schools, if they have symptoms they should stay at home and get tested properly by PCR.  If they are a close contact of someone with a positive PCR test, they should stay home.  If they don't have symptoms they should just go to school and not waste any resources and tim eon testing. 

Not only are these lateral flow tests a colossal waste of money, but then if people saw the real numbers (and many people don't know the difference in tests), confidence in all Covid tests is reduced.  In addition, I have seen multiple people suggest getting some of these lateral flow tests and testing themselves so they can carry on with their normal lives when they have symptoms. 

In other news, Tim Spector has cases down to not much more than 1,000 in the UK. 



There are several different  akes of lateral flow tests. The ones used by the government at the moment are chinese, sold to us by the Americans and are approx 80% accurate. There are test made by British and European companies Mologic and Avacta that are approx 95% accurate. However at present the government have decided to use extremely small numbers of these tests for  research purposes. When you have smaller numbers to find the better tests would be of more use but im not sure why they arent used. It may be cost reasons, im not sure.

The tests are way more accurate than that.  The reason for high false positives is because even if the test is only falsely positive 1 time in a thousand  then it becomes an issue if real positives are only 1 in a thousand.   In that case half your positives are going to be wrong.   That is where we are heading and why we now have an issue.

If you test people with symptoms, a far higher proportion of the people who get tested are genuine positive, so most positive results from that test will be real positives.

The testing is not suitable for the purpose it is used for right now.   Back in January when 1 in 60 people were genuinely positive the proportion of real positives from mass testing would have been much higher. 

Why we can see 50% false positives when 99.9% of positives are correctly identified by the test.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/18/obscure-maths-bayes-theorem-reliability-covid-lateral-flow-tests-probability

Great article.

Looks like you must isolate after a positive LFD but a negative PCR overrules it, and cancels all close contact isolation.

Just trying to search through the bumf to see if that is official.

It feels that should really be the case, but I am pretty sure it wasn't when they started testing in schools.  At that stage I think teachers and NHS people were automatically sent fro a confirmatory PCR test, but school kids weren't.  This should have changed, but I can't remember reading that it had.  And just because something is sensible, doesn't meant it happens.

I'd be interested to see how likely it is to have two false positive LFT tests in a row.  Does the thing that causes the LFT to be false positive cause it to be false positive a second time, or is it just random?  I suspect it is something imbetween.   It feels like just doing a second LFT straight after a positive test result would be useful, but it is better to do the second one as a PCR.  The chances of both a PCR and LFt both showing false positive is very small (like probably 1 in a million small).

Anyway, looking forward to your Vegas flight?  https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/covid-flight-record-infections-india-b1833655.html.  India has a serious Covid problem right now, but there were 47 positives from less than 200 people on one flight.  This is a big outlier obviously, but there must have been a serious spreader on that flight.  I'd be intrigued to find out what symptoms the spreader(s) had if any?  But given all passengers tested negative before the flight and you'd imagine severe Covid would be really obvious, then the symptoms can't have been that severe?

I obviously have no idea if we are going or not, 7 weeks today so I assume things will become clear shortly!

Sounds like there will be a green list from the 17 May.
Sounds like the US will be green.
Virgin still showing Vegas flights commencing from 17 May.

So the main question seems to be whether the US will let tourists in??

To be honest I'm not overly concerned about the flight. I assume testing requirements will catch most people, and even if they don't they wont let the infected in Upper will they? 

My one concern is testing positive before the flight home, as I think my wife may fly out to kill me, if I have to 'extend' the trip by 2 weeks 

[StuartHopkin]

MGM are offering in room Covid Testing

https://www.mgmresorts.com/en/open.html

About half way down that page

$235 and they will come and swab you and get your results within an hour ready to fly home

[EvilPie]

MGM are offering in room Covid Testing

https://www.mgmresorts.com/en/open.html

About half way down that page

$235 and they will come and swab you and get your results within an hour ready to fly home

Have to play some serious dice to get those comp'd.

[Doobs]

Just for you Marky.  I never visit Ivor anymore, as even his supporters seem to have given up on him, but... 

https://twitter.com/WrongAgainIvor

Whoever it is doesn't seem much of a fan of Pandata. 

[Doobs]

Wednesday update.

Deaths have carried on falling, but there is now a lot of fluctuation day to day.  The rate of improvement each week is around 30% a week, with roughly 20 deaths a day a week ago vs roughly 30 a day the week before.

Infections and cases still seem to be falling, but rates of improvement are now down to about 15% a week (Easter caused some interuptions, so it isn't that clear).  I saw someone claiming that R was now 1.4 or so last week.  There are cranks on both sides it seems, as that seems very unlikey on what I have seen.

Vaccinations are interesting, as first doses have fallen off a cliff.  The 7 day average has collapsed from 500k a day, 2 or 3 weeks ago, to 100k a day last week.  Most of the vaccination doses are now been used for second vaccinations of elderly people (300k a day or so).  There hasn't been a massive fall off in total vaccination doses yet.

So not much going on to justify the continuation of UK restrictions, though the following this morning from John Roberts is interesting. 

https://twitter.com/john_actuary/status/1382256588006813700

There is now some evidence that antbodies to Covid are falling among the elderly.  This might be corrected by 2nd dosed of the vaccines, and may nort reflect decreased immunity.  The elderly are already thought to have a lower benefit from vaccination.  Also the Astra Zenca vaccine has lower efiiciacy over the South African variant.  So not entirely out of the woods yet, but the levels of South African variant in the UK are still very low.  Moving to secoond doses for the vulnerable seems like very good timing in the circumstances.

There is a lot of variance in the daily numbers, but we seem to have hit a flat spot again.

Deaths in England are still around 20 a day and hospitalisations are about 200 a day.  Cases look like they are still falling, but only by about 10% over the last week. 

Vaccinations are about the same levels of last week, so still not much sign of a vaccine shortage yet.

I assume this all means that there is likely to be an increase in cases and hospitalisations as we open up, but deaths should be nothing like the first two waves.

Moving on to something else.

I have seen this before, but another study shows smoking seems to be a positive for avoiding dying of Covid.

...yet another study finds smokers much less likely to be hospitalised with COVID-19.

https://twitter.com/cjsnowdon/status/1384802146474921984

When I first saw similar in the early days of Covid, I just assumed it was bad smoking data, but am pretty sure it is a real effect now. 

I wouldn't recommend smoking going forward, even if this is shown to be true.  In the future post vaccination world, cancer and heart disease are likely to reclaim their status as the top 2 killers, and smoking signiifcantly increasesf mortality for both.  But for brief periods in the last 12 months, smoking may have been almost good for you.  It is still way more likely to give you blood clots than vaccination too.

 

[Marky147]

Just for you Marky.  I never visit Ivor anymore, as even his supporters seem to have given up on him, but... 

https://twitter.com/WrongAgainIvor

Whoever it is doesn't seem much of a fan of Pandata. 

Don't think anyone with any sense is, and you best believe I've been following that account for while

[Doobs]

Quick Sweden update.

Sweden had a relatively succesful 2020 with lower Covid deaths than other countries (including ours).  I don't want to get into arguments, but on the surface it seems that their propulation have been better at following voluntary guidelines than a lot of other countires (including ours).

As of now, The UK is definitely beating Sweden in ridding ourselves of Covid.  

Some comparisons:

Sweden has a current positive test rate of 11% compared to a 0.2% in the UK.  Sweden now has a 50% higher number of total cases than the UK has (population adjusted), but still has a lower confirmed number of deaths (population adjusted).  Sweden has a better health service than ours, a more even society, and a lower population density, all of which are likely to have led to lower Covid deaths overall.   Going forward, after a much more sluggish start to their program, Sweden's weekly vaccination figures are now approaching those of the UK.  They are still a long way behind in total vaccinations, having vaccinated around half of the numbers we have when adjusted for the respective populations.  

They have also got luckier with the timing of their epidemic.  Cases have been increasing over the last few months, but they didn't have as bigger spike in cases as we did.  The UK variant has now become very common there, but they vaccinated many of their most vulnerable before that happened.  So, it is very unlikely that the UK variant will cause the deaths it did here, even if cases continue to rise there.  This is because most Covid deaths occur in the oldest 10% of so of society, and Sweden is well past vaccinating this section of society already.

In 6 months or so, their total Covid deaths aren't likely to be far off ours, with differences likely down to how Covid deaths are measured and not because one Country is much worse than the others.

I think if we had done a Sweden, we would likely have had a much worse outbreak then they did.  Someone described Brazil the other day as Sweden without the Swedes; whilst I don't think we'd ever have reached the scenes in Brazil, we are kidding ourselves if we think we could have had a similar result as Sweden if we followed their path.          
    

[Marky147]

Bit of Tim before bed.

[Marky147]

I think if we had done a Sweden, we would likely have had a much worse outbreak then they did.  Someone described Brazil the other day as Sweden without the Swedes; whilst I don't think we'd ever have reached the scenes in Brazil, we are kidding ourselves if we think we could have had a similar result as Sweden if we followed their path.          

All Ivor did was bleat Sweden for most of the year, and he's going completely off the rails now.

He's gone really insane, and it's almost like drunken ranting most of the time.

[Doobs]

Bit of Tim before bed.

Good stuff.  He is seeing things a bit different than the official figures.  I'd say that we may just be seeing a lot of false positives, but hosptalisations didn't really fall either.  Deaths are really hard to judge as you can see 10 one day and 25 the next as numbers are very low.  Guess we'll see a fall again next week in cases and hospitalisations, as Tim Spector usually sees the trends first.  The news from India is particularly grim right now. 

Meanwhile, just two months ago.

https://twitter.com/fatemperor/status/1362469534788108289

India winning big in the No-Lockdown stakes - just like Florida and all the others!

Presumably we won't be getting any India updates for some time going forward, though there is always a good chance he manages to link the surge to vaccines (he probably already has somewhere in that wall of tweets)