So understanding these case numbers helps in predicting where we will be next month in terms of hospitalisations and deaths. Yet we can't rely on these case numbers to predict where we are next month in terms of hospitalisations and deaths.
Surely you can see the issue there?
I think the other problem beyond those you correctly identify is the hypothesis they keep trotting out in press conferences that increasing cases in working age people(who die or are hospitalised in very small numbers comparatively to the very old) automatically ‘flow up’ to corresponding increases in older people.
I may be a simpleton but I genuinely see no evidence to support this (even though it ‘makes sense’) and continue to wonder why there are still, eight months into this, significant ongoing outbreaks in care homes and hospitals. It sounds like this problem is still yet to be solved for whatever reason and instead of admitting that difficult truth the government continues to push the line that more people going to Tesco (or an office or gym or nonessential shop in this lockdown) with asymptomatic virus spark off very long and complex chains of transmission that make its way to your Nan in a care home. This also ignores the ideas now that even though the R0 may be 1.2 or whatever it’s super spreaders who transmit the majority of virus and most cases give it to very few other people. I don’t see how the lockdown makes more than a margin difference to care home/hospital deaths of the very old if the facilities they are in are still outbreak environments despite no visitors being allowed in. The ONS found a correlation between generosity of sick leave for care home staff and virus levels in their facilities - how does banning me going to work or the gym solve that?
