Ross Clark

Ross Clark

Ross Clark is a leader writer and columnist who has written for The Spectator for three decades. He writes on Substack, at Ross on Why?

Does Manchester really need tougher restrictions?

Is Andy Burnham’s resistance to tier three a principled stand or just an attempt to extract more money from central government? While Burnham is insisting that he ‘won’t be rolled over’ for money — he is believed to have been offered between £75 million to £100 million if he agrees to the higher level of restrictions — communities secretary Robert Jenrick is insisting that the government is close to making a deal with Andy Burnham’s local authority. Meanwhile, what no one seems to have noticed — or at least are not letting on — is that cases in Manchester are now falling and are showing signs of levelling off in the other nine boroughs that make up Greater Manchester.

How deadly is Covid-19?

What percentage of people who are infected with Covid-19 will go on to die of the disease? The dramatic response to the pandemic on the part of almost all governments around the world has been based on the idea that Covid-19 is a far more lethal disease than seasonal flu, which is often quoted as having an infection fatality rate (IFR) of 0.1 per cent. The World Health Organisation (WHO) is often quoted as claiming that Covid-19 has an IFR of 3.2 per cent — a claim that goes back to a press conference in early March when it, in fact, said that the case fatality rate (CFR) at that stage was 3.2 per cent.  The CFR is the division of known deaths by known cases — the denominator omitting the many cases that have not been confirmed by diagnosis.

Test and trace has been a phenomenal waste of money

Test and trace, according to the leaked minutes of Sage’s meeting on 21 September, has had a ‘marginal’ impact on the infection rate of Covid-19. But let no one say it has not achieved anything. It has succeeded in the virtually impossible: making HS2 look relatively good value for money. Documents revealed to Sky News have shown that consultants from the Boston Consulting Group who have been working on the scheme have been paid day rates of up to £7,360 – which if annualised would work out at a salary of £1.5 million. It makes them the highest-paid public sector workers in the country, earning ten times as much as the Prime Minister.

What would we gain from a circuit break?

Could a two-week ‘circuit-breaker’ lockdown really ‘save’ nearly 8,000 lives, as is being widely reported this morning? Not according to one of the authors of the paper on which the claim is based. Matt Keeling, a mathematician at the University of Warwick, was questioned on BBC Radio 4's Today programme this morning about the paper — which predicts that there will be a further 19,900 deaths by the end of the year if no circuit breaker is introduced, falling to 12,100 if we do have a two-week lockdown. The crucial point is that the figures quoted above relate only to what may happen by the end of 2020. But neither time nor Covid will stop on 31 December.

The curious case of the man who caught Covid twice

Does catching the SARS-CoV-2 virus give us immunity from further infection by the virus or can we catch it a second time? The question has been given extra poignancy this week following Donald Trump’s tweet on Sunday, quickly censured by Twitter, claiming that he was immune. Before that row has had a chance to die down, a paper emerges in the Lancet Infectious Diseases reporting the possible reinfection of a 25-year-old man in Washoe County, Nevada. The timeline reported in the paper, by the university of Nevada, is as follows. The patient first developed symptoms – sore throat, cough, headache, nausea, diarrhoea – on 25 March. He tested positive for the virus at a community testing facility on 18 April. By 27 April, his symptoms had disappeared.

Brace yourselves for a double-dip Covid recession

It says much about the covid ‘traffic light’ system to be announced by the Prime Minister later that the three alert levels are expected to be labelled ‘medium’, ‘high’ and ‘very high’. It is a bit like condom sizes which start at ‘large’, move onto ‘extra large’ and ‘extra, extra large’. It is all very well talking about two week ‘circuit breakers’, but how do we ever get out of a system of restrictions which does not appear to recognise that we could ever be at low risk from covid infection?  People can live without going to pubs and clubs.

How likely are you to catch Covid on a plane?

It is little surprise to see the International Air Transport Association (IATA) claiming that the risk of catching Covid-19 on a plane is incredibly low. No industry has been as devastated by the pandemic as the airline industry and there is desperation to get planes flying again. But is IATA’s claim that just 44 out of 1.2 billion airline passengers this year has caught the virus during a flight remotely feasible? Absolutely not. What IATA really means is that it has only been able to identify 44 cases of transmission recorded in academic studies. It would be absurd to deduce from this that there had been no other cases of transmission other than those which have happened to be captured in academic studies.

Are Covid infection rates levelling off?

Two days ago, the Prime Minister told us we are at a critical point in the Covid-19 crisis as a second wave threatened to engulf us. He warned of a second national lockdown. Yesterday, in spite of evidence from Imperial College of a declining R number, Matt Hancock introduced new restrictions in Liverpool and Teeside. But is the government behind the curve, failing to notice that the second wave is already fizzling out? As I have argued here before, the daily numbers of confirmed cases are not a reliable indicator of the path of the epidemic.

The mystery over Covid infection numbers

This morning’s so-called 'React study' — an attempt by Imperial College to estimate the prevalence of current Covid-19 infection in Britain — has aroused much interest thanks to its suggestion of a sharp fall in the R number. Its central estimate for R is 1.06, but it applies a range of between 0.74 to 1.46, with a 63 per cent chance that R is above the critical level of 1.  It was a rare piece of good news to lead BBC news bulletins — as well it might given that it was the previous report from the React study three weeks ago that led to the government introducing the rule of six.

How can we be sure local lockdowns are working?

So, the numbers of new Covid infections in the UK failed to register a fourth consecutive fall and instead rose to a new record of 7,143. This does not mean that the disease is spreading as rapidly as it did in the spring when far fewer tests were being undertaken, but the rise has nevertheless led morning news bulletins. Week on week, daily new infections have risen by 45.3 per cent: 42,608 in the week ending 29 September compared with 29,323 a week earlier. This is consistent with a doubling every 10 days or so. There are a few observations that have been less-well reported. Firstly, Monday’s sharp rise was exaggerated by an especially sharp rise in Scotland, where newly recorded cases nearly quadrupled from 222 on Monday to 806 on Tuesday.

Is the second wave slowing?

New confirmed cases of Covid-19 have been rising now since early July — steadily at first and then sharply since early September. But is there any sign of an increase in deaths?    The latest weekly figures from the Office for National Statistics for deaths in England and Wales, released this morning, do record an increase in deaths where Covid-19 is mentioned on the death certificate. In week 38 (ending 18 September) there were 139 such deaths — 40 more than the previous week. To put that into perspective, they accounted for 1.5 per cent of all deaths. They continue to be dwarfed by deaths in which ‘influenza and pneumonia’ is mentioned as a cause — which accounted for 14 per cent of all deaths.

Quantifying the cost of lockdown

We have had plenty of anecdotes about people failing to be diagnosed with serious diseases during lockdown. This is thanks to either to hospitals cancelling appointments, GP surgeries stopping face-to-face meetings or people picking up the message that they should protect the NHS by trying not to use it.  It seems clear that the rush to lockdown had significant unintended consequences for healthcare But what about quantifying the problem? The National Institute for Health Research has attempted to do just this.

Why the rise in Covid cases could soon flatten off

The tighter Covid restrictions introduced this week, along with larger fines for people who gather in groups of more than six or fail to self-isolate, followed a press presentation in which Sir Patrick Vallance and Professor Chris Whitty produced a graph showing new infections doubling every seven days until mid-October, when there would be 50,000 cases a day. Though Sir Patrick said it was 'not a prediction', it was widely treated as such. But are cases really doubling every seven days? The daily figures for new confirmed cases are not the best guide to this, as they do not even nearly capture all infections. Moreover, they are partly a function of how many tests are being performed and where they are being performed.

Belgium shows the problem with Boris’s Covid strategy

If there is one country which has influenced the government’s toughening of Covid restrictions over the past fortnight it is Belgium. It was Sophie Wilmes’ government which, faced with a resurgence of Covid cases in late July, came up with the idea of placing a limit on the size of social gatherings – five rather than the six which Boris Johnson went on to impose in England six weeks later. It was the Belgian government, too, which came up with the idea of setting a curfew for pubs – 11pm rather than the 10pm which will come into effect in England, Scotland and Wales today. At the same time, Belgium extended the compulsion to wear a mask to most public places. So did those measures do the trick in Belgium? Not quite.

Could we see Covid anti-virals before a vaccine?

In a strategy that now appears to be one of outright suppression, the government has put huge stock in the approval of a vaccine before too long. But could the answer turn out to be not a vaccine but an anti-viral drug? Research by a team from Bristol University and published in the journal Science today has discovered a possible basis for a drug that could prevent the SARS-Cov-2 virus entering the human body.  While studying the spike protein that facilitates spread of the virus, the team, led by Imre Berger and Christiane Schaffitzel, unexpectedly found molecules of linoleic acid in a pocket of the protein.

There is no Covid consensus

Today, 32 scientists, economists and other academics have written to the Prime Minister demanding a change in policy on Covid-19, saying that attempting to suppress the virus is ‘increasingly infeasible’. They have instead demanded that vulnerable groups should be protected from the disease while younger people should be allowed to get on with their lives.  Many of the signatories will be familiar to Spectator readers. They include the bad boys and girls of Covid — scientists who have argued consistently against lockdown and the more doom-laden narratives.

Five questions for Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance

The chief medical officer, professor Chris Whitty, and chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, made a statement this morning on the latest data surrounding Covid-19, laying the groundwork for new restrictions that the government is expected to announce tomorrow. It wasn’t a press conference with questions, so they could not be challenged on what they presented — but there were plenty of questions to ask. Here are five: 1. Why present only one Covid 'scenario' - with extreme assumptions? Sir Patrick presented a graph showing a frightening exponential rise in cases to 49,000 a day by mid-October — if cases continued to double every seven days. He emphasised that it wasn’t a prediction, yet only presented one scenario.

The growing evidence for T cell Covid immunity

Back in May I wrote about a study by La Jolla Institute for Immunology, which raised the possibility that exposure to coronaviruses which cause the common cold could offer some degree of immunity to Covid-19. Scientists involved in the research had discovered a reaction to Sars-CoV-2 – the virus which causes Covid-19 – in the T cells of people who had not been infected with the virus, but at the time they weren’t sure whether it was a strong enough reaction to offer any effective immunity. Since then, however, more and more evidence has emerged of T cell immune responses against Sars-CoV-2 which have been provoked by exposure to other coronaviruses, such as the common cold.

Rise in cases not (yet) affecting the over-70s

Perhaps the most reliable test of Covid-19 levels is carried out by the Office for National Statistics, which every week releases the results of random samples. The results, just published, show a striking divergence in age. Another significant rise amongst the young but, importantly, almost no rise amongst the over-70s who are those who made up the vast majority of deaths so far. For this week’s issue, out this morning, 208,730 people in England were swabbed in the mouth and throat. From this, it estimates that between 49,900 and 75,200 people are currently infected with the virus — with a central estimate of 59,800. This would equate to around one in 900 people — 0.12 per cent of the population — being infected.

How Extinction Rebellion shot itself in the foot

It was easy to criticise Westminster for caving into Extinction Rebellion’s demands for a ‘citizen’s assembly’ on climate change when it agreed to convene just such a body at the end of last year. By appeasing the group’s law-breaking, so the argument went, parliament was emboldening XR and other direct action groups to block streets, spraypaint buildings, smash windows and so on.  But the exercise, which has just concluded in a handful of recommendations to government, has served one purpose: it has proved that the public’s views on climate change and what to do about it are nowhere near that of Extinction Rebellion.