Coronavirus

[RobinB5]

IT professionals are not software product managers or software engineers. Identifying, documenting and translating customer use cases into tasks for software engineering as part of a product roadmap requires a specific set of skills. The NHS should look to the established and proven commercial software sector if they want this done to the required standards of resilience, stability and UX.

[C8RKH]

Actually @RobinB5, the term IT Professionals can cover:  Business Analysts, UX Designers, Data Analysts, etc etc. All of whom are an essential part of understanding the requirements to create a solution that is fit for purpose. After 35 years in the IT industry, including around 5 working directly with the NHS on systems such as Cancer Screening, Child Health, Patient Indexing, Medical Records etc, I can vouch for their being very many IT professionals who know how to gather reqts, design workflows, data structures, and the applications to process them. Very often the problem we had was that we were working with Clinicians who thought they knew how to do all this better than the people who did it for a living lol.

You shouldn't lety an IT Professional cure or administer treatment to a patient you want to live. At the same time you really do not want a Clinician to design the data structures and applications for an IT system, not if you want it to be delivered on time, to budget and to work.

COTS systems have been developed for some of the clinical fields, however, they are not designed to collaborate with each other (even using open API's etc) easily nor they do work, often, at the scale that the NHS would need in small devolved territories, let alone at the scale needed by the NHS in England.

[RobinB5]

Let's agree to differ @C8RKH. IT isn't a blanket term that encompasses software development, but maybe it's just semantics. 

[Colin P]

By my experience, it needs the business experts and the IT experts to work together. Unfortunately even when everything is explained, demonstrated and gone through what then happens is that the IT developers then put it into a specification for approval which is written in Geek so that when they build what they want to rather than what is asked for they can then refer back to it and say it was built as desired, yet clearly doesn’t fit the spec that was originally written in English. 

to put in NHS analogy. The patient can tell you their leg hurts. You can find out that it’s broken, but in my experience the IT function will then put their arm in plaster as they had a preformed cast that fit and present you with the specification written in a language only they speak that explains that you asked them to fix your arm. 

[C8RKH]

Yes, @RobinB5 it is probably semantics - IT is Information Technology, and IT professionals these days cover everything from running the platforms, networks, operations, security, and developing the applications and supporting them. People usually specialise in an area, ironically maybe, a bit like Medics. A few decades ago you could have had Information Technology, Information Systems and even Business Systems, but these days it tends to be IT, unless you're in the public sector where they seem to prefer ICT.

@Colin P - I've been in IT for 35 years. You've been in insurance for what, 30 years?  I can assure you that as much as you Insurance professionals can, and do fcuk up, so can some IT professionals.  I have sat with users who have described exactly what they wanted. I have explained to them why it wasn't a good idea. They insisted. I delivered. They then whinged it didn't work just like I told them it wouldn't at the start, when they reminded me that they were the business experts and I knew fcuk all. To err is human, whether you are in Insurance or IT. But not if you are medic as we all know they never make mistakes!

I'll leave it there by saying yes IT people can screw up just like anyone else, but usually not as often as finance people do and certainly not as often as most users do = although they just usually blame the computer! 

 

[RobinB5]

[910Esprit]

Throughout my five decade IT career (public and Private) I saw the proliferation of literally dozens of  'specialist' roles spawn into a self serving, virtually, unmanageable behemoth that now struggles to deliver anything for any sort of value for money.  

Additionally, the industry made a rod for its own back by moving away from centralised in-house systems (eg mainframes) investing in all kinds of 3rd party flaky applications with dodgy interfaces that run on multiple platforms that nobody understands anymore, if they ever did.   

I guess this is where AWS and Azure (Cloud computing) seek to capitalise, but I doubt this is a panacea and will bring its own new set of problems in the future. 

Final thought, The IT industry is full of mediocre talent as the pay and conditions are good and its very easy to hide.

Sorry for the off topic post!

[C8RKH]

Agreed! Although @910Esprit I'd argue we are still on topic as most code these days is as dangerous as a virus and makes people ill long term it is that bad....  Just like COVID then.

Maybe one of the Mods could create a new "Topic" re IT and move the relevant posts there.

The move from the Mainframes really gathered pace in the 90's. We went from tightly managed systems to a proliferation of mid-range platforms that failed to connect and talk to each other. I started out life in IT at 18 as a Systems Operator and a System 370 Assembler programmer (coding in machine language using hexadecimal numbering). In those days you wrote efficient, tight code. These days, most programmers don't really programme any more then reuse modules/codes and have no idea whether it is efficient or not, neither do they care as the cost of processing, memory and storage reduced. Many of my current customers have seen their costs explode as a result of going to the cloud - how bizarre given it was supposed to make everything much cheaper

 

[Barrykearley]

Funny old think though chaps - you are discussing IT and the way it morphs into a whole new arena.

just chucking it out there - but the politicians and scientists are doing exactly that currently? 

[andydclements]

Time to criticise poor journalism/ poor statement of "facts" by PM (Could be one, the other or both). In fact I get miffed by the equivalent when it come to sales offering "Up to XX% off". Whilst it may be true it's a pointless statement to make. In this case there may be as many as 90% of people in ICU that have not had a booster, that "fact" would still hold true if only 1% of those in ICU hadn't had their booster.  a statement of something like "Approx 70% of those in ICU haven't had their booster" has some meaning.  "up to 90%" only really tells us that at least 10% of those in ICU have had their booster. I get that BJ wants to appear to have the facts (why has my brain just reminded me of Diane Abbot???) but a sloppy statement of this nature just doesn't do anything because as soon as you think about it, it points to him doesn't have the facts and is trying a bit of smoke & mirrors.

 

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-boris-johnson-says-up-to-90-in-intensive-care-have-not-had-a-booster-and-urges-people-to-get-jabbed-12505590

[Barrykearley]

Even worse when they state omicron makes up a certain percentage - which is a complete guess since they ain’t processing that quantity of pcr tests. These are the same folks who forecast outcomes of elections and such pishe. 
 

consider the number of people who are vaccinated and the figures required for herd immunity and it’s baffling the continued approach. 

Then think about the numbers released yesterday based on positive folks - the new record high - which is over xmas where more folks have been scared into testing before seeing relatives and the delay in reporting. Surely the numbers are actually a massive reduction in daily cases since the reporting of numbers over the weekend is always delayed.

get ready for 4th, 5th and 6th - and them trying to further remove people’s freedoms. 

[gregs24]

3 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

Even worse when they state omicron makes up a certain percentage - which is a complete guess since they ain’t processing that quantity of pcr tests. These are the same folks who forecast outcomes of elections and such pishe. 
 

consider the number of people who are vaccinated and the figures required for herd immunity and it’s baffling the continued approach. 

Then think about the numbers released yesterday based on positive folks - the new record high - which is over xmas where more folks have been scared into testing before seeing relatives and the delay in reporting. Surely the numbers are actually a massive reduction in daily cases since the reporting of numbers over the weekend is always delayed.

get ready for 4th, 5th and 6th - and them trying to further remove people’s freedoms. 

As explained before 'herd immunity' for COVID is not a realistic target or strategy because it is not a sterilising vaccine immunity - never was, never will be.

Testing numbers and the impact on positive cases / positivity percentage were also clearly explained before. Nothing to do with scaring people into testing - although if more people have tested as is likely, that is a GOOD thing in preventing infecting at risk relatives. Why you persist with the talk of scaremongering when the risk is real I don't understand.

As explained before about how 'omicron' case percentage can be fairly accurately estimated based on PCR test s - gene drop out.

Omicron daily overview: 27 December 2021 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

The data is all easily and freely available - no need to guess or assume anything

Edited December 29, 2021 by gregs24

[Barrykearley]

1 hour ago, gregs24 said:

never was, never will be.

Was in many government scientists views.

1 hour ago, gregs24 said:

no need to guess

Yet time after time - government MPs and appointed representatives spout out all sorts  of different stats and data. 
 

only need to look at the devolved regions responses and you will see why any government or administration does what it thinks is right for its own benefits. 

2 hours ago, gregs24 said:

although if more people have tested as is likely, that is a GOOD thing in preventing infecting at risk relatives. Why you persist with the talk of scaremongering when the risk is real 

Ahh tests - I’m glad you mentioned those - the very same ones that are 44% accurate when used correctly.

I for one don’t just blindly believe government figures - you only need to look at job seekers numbers to put it into context. 

[windymiller]

seemingly south africa's daily cases has dropped by 40% maybe were just a few weeks behind them ?

 

 

[Barrykearley]

cases up, deaths down, confirmed cases up.  8240 in hospitals out of the 140000ish beds. 
 

the real ticking timebomb is those whom are not presenting to GPs or hospitals with early stage cancers. The good news is though it would seem in peak flu season the death rate for that has plummeted. 
 

oh I do wonder if there’s a correlation 🧐

[gregs24]

34 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

Was in many government scientists views.

Yet time after time - government MPs and appointed representatives spout out all sorts  of different stats and data. 
 

only need to look at the devolved regions responses and you will see why any government or administration does what it thinks is right for its own benefits. 

Ahh tests - I’m glad you mentioned those - the very same ones that are 44% accurate when used correctly.

I for one don’t just blindly believe government figures - you only need to look at job seekers numbers to put it into context. 

Herd immunity was never a scientists view. What the press and politicians thought is largely irrelevant

As I have said before - I do not use the press or politicians as a source of information - go to the data - it is there and easy to find.

Devolved governments have done what they see fit - who will be correct? You seem to think it is all scaremongering so should be happy England is less severe?

Which test is 44% accurate - provide the information please

So if you do not believe 'government figures' what figures do you believe and please provide them for us

23 minutes ago, windymiller said:

seemingly south africa's daily cases has dropped by 40% maybe were just a few weeks behind them ?

 

 

Looking likely. I suspect as I mentioned before, because of the lag between catching COVID and testing positive (especially over Christmas) we are probably at our peak now. If the number of sick people I know is anything to go by we are!

19 minutes ago, Barrykearley said:

cases up, deaths down, confirmed cases up.  8240 in hospitals out of the 140000ish beds. 
 

the real ticking timebomb is those whom are not presenting to GPs or hospitals with early stage cancers. The good news is though it would seem in peak flu season the death rate for that has plummeted. 
 

oh I do wonder if there’s a correlation 🧐

As was explained over and over to you there are not 140,000 critical care beds. Not sure why you can't grasp this ?

Deaths would not be rising yet due to 'omicron' anyway as you know, but hospitalisations are only growing slowly so it looks positive. 

Clearly mitigation for COVID benefits all respiratory diseases such as flu

[Barrykearley]

14 minutes ago, gregs24 said:

As was explained over and over to you there are not 140,000 critical care beds. Not sure why you can't grasp this ?

Not sure why you seem so incapable of understanding that not all people in hospitals with covid are in critical care beds. They are not. It would seem you are equally as happy to whip up the fear.

This was the sort of pishe that the remainers spouted during the brexit process and still spout.

im sure there’s some whom still believe Tony Blair and his weapons of mass destruction.

[ChrisJ]

Talking of numbers - FOI request (not by me) made to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary earlier this year.

[Barrykearley]

Sssshhhh @ChrisJ - next thing you’ll be linking in the large amount of hearses for sale on eBay 🙄

You forget the hospitals a buckling under the management paperwork of this pandemic. Training I’m aware of that if someone is in need of cpr in a hospital then full PPE should be donned before carrying out this process. Takes almost as long to get that kit on as it does for an individual to become brain dead.

[andydclements]

I thought you don't die of COVID-19, you die of things like the pneumonia brought on by it, or heart failure brought on by it. They can name it on the death certificate but that needs the person to certify that the other thing wouldn't have occurred without COVID-19 which requires a lot of supposition.

[gregs24]

2 hours ago, Barrykearley said:

Not sure why you seem so incapable of understanding that not all people in hospitals with covid are in critical care beds. They are not. It would seem you are equally as happy to whip up the fear.

This was the sort of pishe that the remainers spouted during the brexit process and still spout.

im sure there’s some whom still believe Tony Blair and his weapons of mass destruction.

I have no problems understanding exactly what the crystal clear figures on COVID cases in hospital mean and that some are in hospital with things as well as COVID. But where are those 1300 people a day being admitted now (up from 700 per day 2 weeks ago) going when they arrive? Fracture clinic, stroke ward, surgical ward ? No they are going in via critical care. They may move on to other beds later. 

At the end of the day we either believe the figures provided, and have that backed up by my own personal experience (and that of my family) or we believe Barry from Worcestershire who talks of about 140000 beds, provides no figures of his own and still rants on about Brexit and Tony Blair ......

I'll leave others to decide what to believe

[gregs24]

3 hours ago, ChrisJ said:

Talking of numbers - FOI request (not by me) made to Aberdeen Royal Infirmary earlier this year.

The number of people that die with COVID as the ONLY cause mentioned are VERY small. COVID causes numerous systemic effects and it is usual for these comorbidities to be mentioned on certification. So whilst the answer is correct to the specific question it does not reflect the true COVID deaths for the reason stated. Of course if not familiar with this it is easy to misinterpret.

1 hour ago, andydclements said:

I thought you don't die of COVID-19, you die of things like the pneumonia brought on by it, or heart failure brought on by it. They can name it on the death certificate but that needs the person to certify that the other thing wouldn't have occurred without COVID-19 which requires a lot of supposition.

Exactly this. It is usual to include all contributory factors.

The definitions of deaths from COVID are very tightly defined to allow comparison with other countries and so that figures released are reliable and representative. There are no conspiracies, fear mongering - just defined data.

Statistics » COVID-19 Daily Deaths (england.nhs.uk)

[SFO]

3 hours ago, gregs24 said:

I have no problems understanding exactly what the crystal clear figures on COVID cases in hospital mean and that some are in hospital with things as well as COVID. But where are those 1300 people a day being admitted now (up from 700 per day 2 weeks ago) going when they arrive?

From The Telegraph 

The growing prevalence of omicron in the community also means that there are far more people likely to test positive on entering hospital, compared to during previous waves. 

Overall, nearly 30 per cent of people currently in hospital with Covid are “incidental” cases - 1,813 out of 6,245 - the highest it has been since the NHS started releasing the figures in the summer.

The number of incidental Covid cases has been rising in recent weeks because omicron is far more infectious than delta, meaning that many people will be entering hospital unknowingly infected.

In the previous week, December 7 to December 14 - when the vast majority of hospitalisations were still delta - some 59 per cent of the 289 weekly rise was primarily Covid.

Experts said it was important to treat the current hospital data with caution, while Sir John Bell, regius professor of medicine at Oxford University, said: “This is not the same disease we were seeing a year ago.

“The horrific scenes that we saw a year ago – intensive care units being full, lots of people dying prematurely – that is now history in my view and I think…that’s likely to continue."

Chris Hopson, the chief executive of NHS Providers, which represents hospitals, said it was important not to over-interpret the recent rises in hospitalisations. 

“What our guys are saying is that incidental cases are making around 25 to 30 per cent of cases that are arriving, but that will vary from place to place," he said.

“In London, you would expect to see higher levels and lower in somewhere like the South West, where community infections are lower.

“They are seeing an increase in the number of hospital admissions, but it's not precipitous. It's not going up in an exponential way. As the number of cases in the community rises, there are significant levels of incidental cases. 

“So what our chief executives are saying is just be careful about over-interpreting the data. But we mustn't forget that having those people in hospital causes complications because of infection control measures.

“You can’t judge NHS pressure solely on Covid caseload, as hospital and ambulance services are under significant amounts of pressure and are struggling with high numbers of staff absences.”

Latest data released on Tuesday shows the number of people now in hospital in England has risen to 9,546, although the full breakdown of how many of these are incidental cases has not yet been released.

More cases of incidental Covid compared to previous waves

Doctors also said they were seeing far more cases of incidental Covid compared to previous waves. 

Dr Raghib Ali, a consultant in acute medicine at Oxford University Hospitals, said: “There is certainly a smaller proportion of people ending up with Covid pneumonia in intensive care. 

“Probably half the cases I’ve seen are incidentals. You’ve got completely incidental cases, someone coming in with a broken leg, who also tests positive for Covid, then a third category of older people who have comorbidities. Maybe they’ve had a fall or chest pain and also test positive and it's unclear if the virus is having some sort of impact.

“We’re also seeing more incidentals than previous waves because people were scared to come in, so there were not so many patients around to also test positive. 

“And when the prevalence of a virus with relatively mild symptoms is high in the community then you will see higher incidentals.”

The figures are similar to those seen in omicron hotspots such as Gauteng in South Africa, where up to 52 per cent of Covid admissions were people who were admitted for other conditions but also tested positive for Covid.  

Fears of continuing pressure on the NHS

However, experts warned that the extra admissions were still putting pressure on the health service, and nurses were struggling to isolate patients in wards. 

[Barrykearley]

Oh look the silly old daily telegraph, CEO Chris from the NHS are almost as stupid as Barry from Worcestershire 😳

[Barrykearley]

5 hours ago, SFO said:

We’re also seeing more incidentals than previous waves because people were scared to come in, so there were not so many patients around to also test positive. 

Oh look and Dr Ali can see the problems when folks are too scared to attend hospitals. He cites “incidentals” so they are the ones whom are positive but are actually there for something else. Back to an earlier point about late presentation cancer patients - they will be the true victims of the covid policies and scare whipping mps, media and scientists.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59823652
 

the bbc report they are to set up some covid hubs - best they crack on with that before the sack the thousands of health care professionals whom haven’t been good boys and girls and had the jab they have been ordered to have without their consent.