Saturday, October 3, 2020

An image of Sadiq Khan prior to his flu jab doesn’t reveal he didn’t get it

A photo of the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan getting the flu jab has gone viral on Facebook, with people claiming that because the cap is still on the needle, that he did not get the injection.

The original picture does show the cap on the needle. A spokesperson for the Mayor of London said: “The Mayor received his flu vaccination at a local pharmacist on Monday. This photo was taken just before he had the injection, which is why the cap is still on the needle. It is important that everyone who is eligible gets vaccinated as this is the best way to help protect yourself against flu.”

The pharmacist that gave him the jab can be seen preparing the site of injection on the upper arm, and adjusting the mayor’s shirt sleeve. The flu jab is given to most people in the UK as an intramuscular injection, in the deltoid muscle, which is at the very top of the arm.

Stay informed: https://northdenvernews.com/category/latest/

Description
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
  • 3D Comfort mask design
  • Convenient earloop design
  • Comfortable stretch fabric for tight fit
  • Easy to put on & remove
Note: These masks are not FDA approved nor are they N95. These masks are tested to meet the standards for Chinese KN-95. Tests confirmed almost 90% of particulate pollution, bacteria and viruses were successfully filtered when the mask was used. 20x more effective than cloth masks.
Specs
  • Color: white
  • Materials: 3-layer melt-blown non-woven PPE
  • Product dimensions: 1"H x 8"L x 5"W
  • 3D Comfort design
  • KN95 PRC Standard (Similar to NIOSH N95)
  • CE 0194
  • FFP2 - EN149 Filtration Level

Friday, October 2, 2020

No Evidence Biden Was ‘Using a Wire’ in Argument

Quick Take

Facebook posts baselessly accuse former Vice President Joe Biden of wearing a wire during the first presidential debate. The low-quality videos and photos being cited don’t support that claim.


Full Story 

Unsubstantiated claims about former Vice President Joe Biden circulated on social media ahead of the first presidential debate — and they followed the Sept. 29 event, too.

Widely shared posts on Facebook and Twitter following the debate suggested that the Democrat was “wearing a wire” and receiving help with his responses during his square-off with President Donald Trump.

The erroneous claim followed earlier, unfounded suggestions that Biden would be wearing an earpiece during the debate, an assertion that echoes similar partisan claims made over the years by both sides. Biden’s deputy campaign manager, Kate Bedingfield, reportedly called the claim “absurd” on a call with journalists and said, “Of course, he is not wearing an earpiece.”

And the low-quality photos and videos cited as evidence for the “wire” claim don’t support the argument.

On Facebook, a video shared more than 8,000 times shows a grainy recording of Biden putting his hand beneath his jacket as he appears to scratch his shoulder. The video zooms in and appears to show a line on Biden’s shirt.

“There it is, there it is. Biden’s wearing a wire,” a male voiceover says on the video. “Why do you need a wire, bro?”

Trump can be heard in the debate saying, “They can wear masks. They can do whatever they want. But they gotta open the states up. When you look at North Carolina…”

Higher quality video of that point in time during the debate (see below) shows the “wire” is actually a crease in Biden’s shirt.

Nevertheless, the claim has spread on social media. A similar video was uploaded to YouTube and was viewed more than 15,000 times. Users shared tweets using the hashtag #JoeWired.

Some posts slyly spread the falsehood in the form of a question. “Was Biden wearing a wire?” reads a meme that in one Facebook post was reshared 7,600 times.

That post and others homed in not only on the crease in the shirt but also on Biden’s wrist, with circles drawn to direct attention to a small object beneath the shirt cuff on his left wrist.

It’s unclear what exactly Biden had on his wrist, but there’s been no credible evidence put forward to support the notion that it was a “wire.” Instead, some have correctly pointed out that Biden is known to wear a rosary around his wrist in honor of his late son, Beau.

Biden talked about wearing the beads during a 2017 interview with Megyn Kelly, showing the rosary — also on his left wrist.

“I have not taken off the rosary Beau was wearing when he passed, since then,” he said. “It’s my connection with him.”

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to debunk misinformation shared on social media. Our previous stories can be found here.

This fact check is available at IFCN’s 2020 US Elections FactChat #Chatbot on WhatsApp. Click here for more.

Sources

Fichera, Angelo and Saranac Hale Spencer. “Baseless Online Claims Target Biden Ahead of First Debate.” FactCheck.org. 29 Sep 2020.

“Joe Biden On Wearing His Son Beau’s Rosary Beads : It’s My Connection To Him | Megyn Kelly TODAY.” TODAY. 13 Nov 2017.

“Replay: The first 2020 presidential debate on CNN.” CNN. YouTube. 29 Sep 2020.

Rivera, Madeleine (@madeleinerivera). “Biden Deputy Campaign Manager @KBeds responded to this during a debate preview call today: ‘It is completely absurd. Of course, he is not wearing an earpiece, and we never asked for breaks.’” Twitter. 29 Sep 2020.

Roose, Kevin. “The Long History of ‘Hidden Earpiece’ Conspiracy Theories.” New York Times. 29 Sep 2020.

The post No Evidence Biden Was ‘Wearing a Wire’ in Debate appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Best local news: https://northdenvernews.com

Description
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
  • 3D Comfort mask design
  • Convenient earloop design
  • Comfortable stretch fabric for tight fit
  • Easy to put on & remove
Note: These masks are not FDA approved nor are they N95. These masks are tested to meet the standards for Chinese KN-95. Tests confirmed almost 90% of particulate pollution, bacteria and viruses were successfully filtered when the mask was used. 20x more effective than cloth masks.
Specs
  • Color: white
  • Materials: 3-layer melt-blown non-woven PPE
  • Product dimensions: 1"H x 8"L x 5"W
  • 3D Comfort design
  • KN95 PRC Standard (Similar to NIOSH N95)
  • CE 0194
  • FFP2 - EN149 Filtration Level

A Covid-19 diagnostic test won’t get other coronaviruses

A post on Facebook makes a number of claims about the Covid-19 pandemic, centring on the assertion that Covid-19 tests do not test for Covid-19 specifically, but any coronavirus, including ones which cause “nothing more than cold/flu like symptoms”. (Some coronaviruses cause what we know of as the common cold.) 

This is false. 

As we have written about extensively here, the diagnostic test used in the UK is called a PCR (polymerase chain reaction) test, which looks for the virus’s genetic material to see if someone currently has Covid-19. 

The Facebook post questions the reliability of PCR tests and there is something in this. 

PCR tests can sometimes indicate that someone does not have the virus when they do (false negative). They can also indicate that someone has the virus when they don’t (false positive).

It’s hard to say how many false negatives and positives PCR tests produce, but in general, these tests are “highly accurate”. 

Most importantly, what a PCR test won’t do is misinterpret the presence of other coronaviruses as the presence of the virus which causes Covid-19, as this post claims.

The possibility that a test might pick up related viruses that have genetic similarities to the virus you’re looking for (technically known as “cross-reactivity”) is something that is looked at when designing PCR tests. 

For example, one of the earliest PCR testing protocols, which was published on 13 January, specifically checked that the test did not pick up the four human coronaviruses that cause infections including the common cold. 

Results for a range of available PCR tests show that they do not cross-react with any viruses analysed, including other coronaviruses.

Where some of the confusion might have come about is because of the accuracy of antibody tests. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says: “There is a chance that a positive result means you have antibodies from an infection with a different virus from the same family of viruses.”

News and Views: https://northdenvernews.com

Description
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
  • 3D Comfort mask design
  • Convenient earloop design
  • Comfortable stretch fabric for tight fit
  • Easy to put on & remove
Note: These masks are not FDA approved nor are they N95. These masks are tested to meet the standards for Chinese KN-95. Tests confirmed almost 90% of particulate pollution, bacteria and viruses were successfully filtered when the mask was used. 20x more effective than cloth masks.
Specs
  • Color: white
  • Materials: 3-layer melt-blown non-woven PPE
  • Product dimensions: 1"H x 8"L x 5"W
  • 3D Comfort design
  • KN95 PRC Standard (Similar to NIOSH N95)
  • CE 0194
  • FFP2 - EN149 Filtration Level

Thursday, October 1, 2020

You Can Dislike Trump and also Assistance Institution Option


Every time Donald Trump says, “school choice is the civil rights issue of our time,” I cringe. It’s hard to think of a more debauched messenger for a parent-powered social justice movement based on equitable access to quality education.

And so I think it’s time for those of us who call ourselves liberal Democrats—especially in the age of COVID—to get real about the fact that we practice school choice every day.

I’ll go first. 

When I was a kid in Queens and about to start Martin Van Buren High School (where in 2016 14% of graduating seniors were college or career ready) my parents, who both worked in New York City public schools, exercised school choice and moved us to a higher-quality Long Island district.

When my husband and I decided to move from upstate New York to be closer to our business and family in New York City, we took a protractor (remember those?) and drew a 50-mile radius around mid-Manhattan. That’s how we ended up looking for a home in Central New Jersey, which was more affordable than Westchester or Connecticut or Long Island. With two little ones, local school quality was a primary driver and Princeton seemed perfect with its top-flight schools and easy commute to the train station. 

That is until the real estate agent started showing us listings within our budget, or lack thereof. So we ended up in a school district south of Princeton, where the schools were not as great but still good and we could pay the rent. If we had moved one more district south, we’d be in Trenton where rents were cheaper and schools were awful. But we chose Lawrence because of its schools. We exercised school choice by way of the real estate market because we could afford to.

Civil rights aren’t supposed to come with a price tag

Our youngest, who has multiple disabilities and was enrolled in a day program, has been home since mid-March because of the coronavirus. We got a call from his program, which is thinking of bringing kids back, and I told them we’d need to see the full scope of their plans before we made a decision, especially since social-distancing and mask-wearing can be challenging for people on the spectrum. While we’d love to have him out of the house (he’d like that too!), we have the resources to keep him home because brightbeam, where I work,  has been fully-virtual for years and my husband is mostly around. We have the privilege of putting health considerations first and making a choice that’s right for our family, especially since our son manages Zoom programming pretty well.

Parents make choices based on their child’s needs and circumstances all the time. That’s what parenting is, right? There’s no correct answer, just a risk:benefit calculation.  

This mom (who is also a New York Times reporter) writes that in New York City “numbers are low enough that my husband and I have a real choice to make” and they decided to send their children to school. 

This mom, who chose to keep her son home, noted, “at the end of the day, this is our child. We’ve been making decisions for him our whole life, regardless of what the district or the Department of Education says.”

Here’s the thing: If you care about school quality you support school choice. If you are a parent in the age of COVID you support school choice—in fact, it’s embedded into your decision-making every day. You may not think of it that way but it’s true.

Maybe the Problem Isn’t School Choice

Maybe the problem isn’t school choice itself but its tainted connotations, boosted by those who strive to quell any challenge to institutional stasis. After all, it’s so easy to forget that the Democratic Party has a long history of embracing school choice. In 1972 the late great Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan proposed a tuition tax credit for families who send their kids to non-public schools. In 2015 former President Barack Obama was praised by the National Alliance of Public Charters Schools for his recognition of charters as a “highly valued public education option for millions of American families.”

But Trump is Trump. While so many equate school choice with civil rights (John Legend!) the term has become toxically Trumpified. Those who support the status quo giggle in delight at the prospect that ‘The Donald’s’ recitation of a school choice aphorism will trigger knee-jerk shoot-the-messenger reactions that have nothing to do with kids, especially Black low-income students whose parents support school choice, both public charters (55% in favor) and vouchers to private schools (67% in favor). 

A modest proposal: Can we ignore the messenger and heed the message? Do we need to rename “school choice” in order to de-Trumpify the term? What phrase for you best summons the image of parents striving to improve the academic trajectory of their children? What phrase connotes social mobility, freedom, a fairer distribution of wealth, and the power to protect those you most love from not only contagion but intellectual stagnation? 

I’m open to suggestions. What do you choose?

This piece was originally published on NJ Left Behind as “You Can Hate Trump And Support School Choice.”
Colorado News

Development in Administrative Personnel, Assistant Principals Far Outpaces Educator Hiring

The staffing numbers intuitively match what observers have experienced as an expansion of federal laws and regulations—red tape—that required administrators to comply with.

Are schools really spending more on administration than they used to? The short answer is yes.

A recent Education Next blog post, “Could Covid Finally Disrupt the Top-Down Education Bureaucracy?” by the founder of the Campaign for Common Good, Philip K. Howard, included this passage: “While teacher pay has stagnated over the past two decades, the percentage of school budgets going to administrators has skyrocketed. Half the states now have more noninstructional personnel than teachers. The Charleston County, South Carolina, school system had 30 administrators earning over $100,000 in 2013. Last year it had 133 administrators earning more than $100,000. Union officials and central bureaucrats owe their careers to the bureaucratic labyrinth they create and oversee.”

That paragraph touched a nerve and generated some pushback from skeptics. One, in private correspondence, claimed we were mischaracterizing or misunderstanding “custodians or teacher aides.” The reader pointed to a table from the U.S. Department of Education drawn from the department’s National Public Education Financial Survey, claiming it contradicted the claim that administrative spending had increased.

Such a financial survey, though, is a hazardous operation. The school district administrators that fill out financial surveys have every interest in obscuring spending on administration, mischaracterizing it as spending on instruction. It’s a little like asking your ne’er-do-well husband to report how much money he spends on beer. He’d rather report it as “supermarket expenses,” or “food and beverage expenses,” or some other broad category that blurs what it really is.

That particular Department of Education table, for what little it is worth, shows that the share of current expenditures for public schools spent on “instruction” decreased to 60.90 percent in 2015-2016 from 61.53 percent in 2000-2001, while the sum of the shares devoted to “school administration” and “general administration” also decreased slightly, to 7.59 percent in 2015-2016 from 7.66 percent in 2000-2001. But, as the note at the bottom says, that table “excludes spending for state education agencies.” Spending by state education agencies probably should count as administrative spending, because it rarely involves directly teaching students. Another line called “other support services”—which includes “business support services concerned with paying, transporting, exchanging, and maintaining goods and services for local education agencies; central support services, including planning, research, evaluation, information, staff, and data processing services; and other support services”—might also be defined as administration. That has grown modestly, to a 3.62 percent share in 2015-2016 from 3.28 in 2000-2001. Whether the people doing the planning and evaluating are properly defined as administrators or as planners and evaluators is something people may debate; for sure, though, they are not teachers. They are not even teacher aides or custodians.

A clearer picture is available from another Department of Education table. It lists “Staff employed in public elementary and secondary school systems, by type of assignment.” Here are some highlights, based on the most recent year for which data are available:

School Year School District Administrative Staff Principals and Assistant Principals Teachers
Fall 2000 97,270 141,792 2,941,461
Fall 2017 155,273 189,155 3,169,750
Increase (my calculation) 59.6 percent 33.4 percent 7.7 percent

Ah-ha. Those numbers are hard to argue with. The education department may characterize an additional assistant principal as “instructional” spending, and the assistant principal may even have some roles such as coaching teachers or disciplining students that affect instruction. But an administrator is an administrator, regardless of whether she is based in a school or in a district office, just like beer is beer regardless of whether it is bought at the supermarket or at the liquor store.

Anyone curious to pursue the matter further will discover even more data that support Howard’s original point. Additional information to corroborate the idea of skyrocketing administrative spending may be obtained from a different source: the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. This is federal Department of Labor data collected in a national survey of all employers. The category of “education administrators, kindergarten through secondary” in May 2019 included 271,020 people earning a mean annual wage of $100,340. In 1999, there were 186,220 people in this category, earning a mean annual wage of $65,480. That is 45.5 percent growth in the number of administrators. For comparison’s sake, the category “elementary school teachers, except special education,” encompassed 1,430,480 people in 2019 earning a mean wage of $63,930. In 1999, this teacher category included 1,357,340 people, earning an average of $39,560. That is 5.4 percent growth in the number of teachers.

Public school elementary and secondary school enrollment over this rough period showed only modest growth, to about 50.7 million in fall 2017 from about 47.2 million in fall 2000. The number of public elementary and secondary schools grew to 98,469 in 2017-18 from 93,273 in 2000-2001. The math works out to nearly three $100,000-a-year administrators for every school.

For those who want to get really technical about it, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has developed an alternative methodology for these occupational surveys and has published its numbers based on that alternative model-based method, which it calls MB3. By that alternative count, the number of “education administrators, elementary and secondary school” grew to 264,240 in 2018 from 236,460 in 2015. That is 11.7 percent growth in three years. During the same time span, the number of “elementary school, except special education” teachers grew to 1,415,580 from 1,366,870, or 3.6 percent. The MB3 data are only available for 2015 through 2018.

One may quibble about methodological flaws involving data collection, sampling error and assumptions, response rates, or comparison over time in either the two Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates or the Department of Education’s “staff employed…by type of assignment” table. The Bureau of Labor in particular cautions that its Occupational Employment Statistics are “less useful for comparisons of two or more points in time,” and says “it is difficult to make conclusive comparisons of OES data over time. However, comparisons of occupations that are not affected by classification changes may be possible if the methodological assumptions hold.” All three series of numbers, though, are telling similar stories of administrative staffing growth far exceeding the pace of hiring classroom teachers. The numbers intuitively match what observers have experienced as an expansion of federal laws and regulations during the same period that have required administrators to comply with—No Child Left Behind, the Obama administration’s Race to the Top and waivers programs, and a redefined and more robustly enforced Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.

Moreover, none of these administrative staffing figures include the growing administrative burden on existing teaching staff. Special education teachers, for instance, spend more time each week on paperwork than they do on grading papers, communicating with parents, sharing expertise with colleagues, supervising paraprofessionals, and attending Individualized Education Plan meetings combined, according to a study conducted in 2006. A 2019 report from the South Carolina Department of Education showed that 70 percent of teachers in that state believed that the amount of paperwork they are required to complete prevented them from effectively facilitating student learning. These burdens are not reflected in budgets or employment figures but represent real costs in terms of staff time, diminished instructional capacity, and endemic burnout in the teaching profession.

The optimal number of administrators, or of federal and state regulations, is something about which reasonable people may differ. Reasonable people may also differ about the optimal ratio of administrators to teachers, and of both to students. Not all administrators are bad; surely there are cases in which hiring additional administrators at the school or district level have improved student outcomes. Without full-time administrators, compliance burdens fall more heavily on classroom teachers or risk going unmet. Some charter schools have strategically split the principal role into an operations leader and an instructional leader, a move that adds an administrator but may well be good for school quality.

One reason, though, that politicians got away with allowing the number of $100,000-a-year administrators to grow four or seven times as fast as the number of teachers is that even when someone smart like Philip K. Howard does blow the whistle on it, the first reaction of too many academics and mainstream journalists is to snipe at him and deny the reality of the situation, instead of investigating or following up the news he unearthed.

Ira Stoll is managing editor of Education Next.

The post Growth in Administrative Staff, Assistant Principals Far Outpaces Teacher Hiring appeared first on Education Next.

more news https://northdenvernews.com

Punishments for not using face coverings, not social distancing and for having indecent pictures of children differ depending upon the precise offence

A Facebook post with almost 25,000 shares has claimed that the punishment for not wearing a face covering, or meeting in groups are significantly stronger than for possessing indecent images of children.

The post says:

“£3k fine for not wearing a cloth over your face

£10k fine for a group gathering

£0 fine and 12 month suspended sentence for owning 10,000 child porn images, 2 out of 3 caught are spared jail altogether.”

As we have written before, the punishments for breaking social distancing rules and possession of child pornography vary depending on the nature of offence. This post describes the higher end of fines for mask and social distancing breaches in England for repeat offenders.

Sentencing for possession of indecent images of children vary depending on the case 

It’s not clear if the post is referring to a specific case of someone who was caught with 10,000 independent images of children and received no fine and a 12 month suspended sentence. 

We found the case of one man, Liam Rothery, of Whitehaven who had more than 10,000 images, who was sentenced to a 36-month community order, told to complete a sex offenders course, 150 hours’ of unpaid work, a rehabilitation requirement and had to sign the sex offender register for five years. Another man, Marcus Armstrong, of Trowbridge, at the time a special constable, had downloaded hundreds of indecent images, and was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment, suspended for two years.

Although these cases don’t match the claim exactly, it does seem possible that someone could be sentenced to a years’ suspended sentence but no fine for this sort of offence, depending on the circumstances. 

The Sentencing Council says that the punishment for possessing indecent images of children can result in a maximum of five years in custody, and possession with intention to distribute it carries a maximum of ten years, although the sentence will depend on many factors, like whether the defendant has any previous convictions and if they show remorse.

Fines for not obeying mask and social distancing rules

In England, the police can issue fines of £200, reduced to £100 if paid within 14 days for a first offence of failing to wear a face covering when necessary without a valid exemption. This can double for repeat offenders up to a maximum fine of £6,400, although it was previously a maximum of £3,200, which is closer to what the post claims. The rules vary between Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

In England, a group larger than six people meeting can result in a fine of £100, but can double for repeat offenders up to £6,400. Organisers of large gatherings, such as illegal parties may be fined up to £10,000. You can find information for Scotland here, Northern Ireland here, and Wales here.

Read more: https://thecherrycreeknews.com/

Description
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
  • 3D Comfort mask design
  • Convenient earloop design
  • Comfortable stretch fabric for tight fit
  • Easy to put on & remove
Note: These masks are not FDA approved nor are they N95. These masks are tested to meet the standards for Chinese KN-95. Tests confirmed almost 90% of particulate pollution, bacteria and viruses were successfully filtered when the mask was used. 20x more effective than cloth masks.
Specs
  • Color: white
  • Materials: 3-layer melt-blown non-woven PPE
  • Product dimensions: 1"H x 8"L x 5"W
  • 3D Comfort design
  • KN95 PRC Standard (Similar to NIOSH N95)
  • CE 0194
  • FFP2 - EN149 Filtration Level

It’s wrong to say that only 3% of Covid-19 cases are caused by restaurants and bars

“PUBS and restaurants caused less than three per cent of coronavirus infections in the week before the 10pm curfew, official data shows.”

The Sun, 27 September 2020

The Sun, the Daily Star and the Telegraph have all claimed that pubs and restaurants caused just 3% of Covid-19 infections in the week before the new 10pm curfew was announced. 

This is a misreading of data published by Public Health England (PHE), which does not cover all Covid-19 cases. 

What the data shows

The 10pm curfew for businesses selling food or drink – including pubs, bars and restaurants – came into force on 24 September in England.

PHE’s weekly surveillance report shows that in the week to 20 September, 772 new acute respiratory infection (ARI) incidents were reported in England, of which 22 incidents were from “food outlet/restaurant settings.”

The process for reporting ARI incidents varies by PHE centre, but incidents are reported based on situations where:

  • two or more laboratory confirmed cases linked to a particular setting, or 
  • an outbreak is suspected,

are reported to a PHE health protection team (HPT). 

PHE says: “All suspected outbreaks are further investigated by the HPT in liaison with local partners and a significant proportion do not meet the criteria of a confirmed outbreak. For example if suspected cases test negative for COVID19 or other respiratory pathogens, or cases are subsequently found not to have direct links to the setting.”

An ARI incident can be for any respiratory pathogen, including Covid-19 and the flu. 

Of the 772 ARI incidents reported in England in the week to 20 September, 532 had at least one linked case that tested positive for Covid-19. Of these, 17 (3%) were from food outlets and restaurant settings.   

Incidents in educational settings were most common, followed by care homes. 

The criteria for an ARI incident means that this data does not cover all Covid-19 cases. For example, if just one new Covid-19 infection was linked back to a pub setting and there was no suspected outbreak, this would not be classed as an ARI incident. 

Over this period there were 26,259 new cases of Covid-19 confirmed in England, compared to 532 “incidents”, though each incident can also include multiple cases. The PHE data does not show how many people were infected in each incident.

So rather than 3% of all Covid-19 cases coming from restaurants in the week before the 10pm curfew, as was reported, in actual fact it was 3% of reported incidents linked to Covid-19 investigated by PHE.

The PHE report also says that, since 10 August, all people who test positive for Covid-19 and are traced by the Test and Trace system in England are asked about “places they have been and activities they have done in the days before becoming unwell (in the 2-7 days prior to symptom onset).”

It adds: “Although this can’t say for certain if this is where someone picked up the infection, the information may be helpful to indicate possible places where transmission is happening.”

Between 10 August and 24 September, the most common event recorded was eating out, reported by 14.6% of people who tested positive, followed by shopping, reported by 13.4%. 

Cause and effect

Even just looking at confirmed ARI incidents, the phrasing used by the newspapers of certain activities having “caused” the spread of Covid-19 is not strictly accurate.

It’s possible that Covid-19 picked up in restaurants and pubs may be recorded as an incident in another setting. 

For example, a child picking up Covid-19 at a restaurant and then spreading it in school could be recorded as a school outbreak, despite the initial case having been brought in from a restaurant. 

Alternatively, if two adults in the same workplace contracted Covid-19 at separate pubs, neither of which was identified as a location of an incident by PHE, then in some cases their workplace would be listed as the setting of this incident, despite the fact that both cases were contracted at pubs.

Stay informed: https://northdenvernews.com/

Description
Due to the unprecedented crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, BRIO has dedicated 100% of their operations to importing critically needed respirator masks. Featuring a 3D comfort design, these KN95 masks provide filtration against particulate pollution, gases, as well as bacteria, viruses, and most odors. It's made with comfortable stretch fabric and has convenient earloops for a tight fit. These masks are perfect for everyday wear. Order your 5-Pack now!
  • 3D Comfort mask design
  • Convenient earloop design
  • Comfortable stretch fabric for tight fit
  • Easy to put on & remove
Note: These masks are not FDA approved nor are they N95. These masks are tested to meet the standards for Chinese KN-95. Tests confirmed almost 90% of particulate pollution, bacteria and viruses were successfully filtered when the mask was used. 20x more effective than cloth masks.
Specs
  • Color: white
  • Materials: 3-layer melt-blown non-woven PPE
  • Product dimensions: 1"H x 8"L x 5"W
  • 3D Comfort design
  • KN95 PRC Standard (Similar to NIOSH N95)
  • CE 0194
  • FFP2 - EN149 Filtration Level