Over 1,000 people died every day in the UK for 22 consecutive days


The government was accused last night of underestimating the number of deaths from coronaviruses after it emerged that more than 1,000 people died in the UK every day for 22 consecutive days.

The figures, which reflect deaths in hospitals, nursing homes and private homes, overshadow those announced by ministers at the time, which included only hospital deaths.

New analysis has shown that there were more than 1,000 deaths a day for 22 consecutive days – coinciding with Boris Johnson’s hospitalization for coronavirus.

Sir David King, a former government chief science advisor and chairman of the independent Sage group, told the Guardian that the divergence in numbers was “ an attempt to minimize the adversity the country faces ”.

Britain’s worst day during the crisis occurred on April 8, just before Easter, when a record 1,445 people died in 24 hours..

When Foreign Minister Dominic Raab intervened on behalf of Boris Johnson, hospitalized on April 9, to reveal the figures from the previous day, he announced that the death toll had increased by 881 – which means that the real count was about 64% higher than what the nation had said. at the time.

New analysis shows more than 1,000 deaths per day for 22 consecutive days

New analysis shows more than 1,000 deaths per day for 22 consecutive days

Government accused of downplaying coronavirus deaths after more than 1,000 people died in the UK every day for 22 consecutive days

Government accused of downplaying coronavirus deaths after more than 1,000 people died in the UK every day for 22 consecutive days

Similarly, just three days earlier, Raab described the increase in the number of deaths in the past 24 hours to 439, but official figures show that almost three times as many people have actually died from the virus.

Between April 2 and April 23, more than 1,000 people fell victim to the virus every day, but none of the Downing Street briefings at that time suggested that the number of daily deaths had reached four digits.

Critics argue that the government should have been clearer in explaining that the number of deaths per day were only estimates of actual figures, given the exclusion of thousands of people who died outside hospitals.

A change to include deaths in all settings, including those without the Covid-19 test, was not made until late April, with health officials insisting that collecting complete data was time-consuming and technically difficult.

In the two months that followed, the number of deaths per day fell considerably, sometimes reaching double the figures, now that the peak of the crisis had passed.

This has resulted in a loosening of certain foreclosure measures, with non-essential stores opening this week for the first time since March, but with a series of social distancing measures.

Yesterday, 173 deaths were announced, experts describing the virus as “firmly in retirement”.

When Foreign Minister Dominic Raab spoke for Boris Johnson, hospitalized on April 9, to reveal figures from the day before, in the photo, he announced that the death toll had increased by 881 - but the real tally was about 64% higher than that of the nation. was said at the time

When Foreign Minister Dominic Raab spoke for Boris Johnson, hospitalized on April 9, to reveal figures from the day before, in the photo, he announced that the death toll had increased by 881 – but the real tally was about 64% higher than that of the nation. was said at the time

Boris Johnson, pictured yesterday at a Hertfordshire school, was one of many ministers to have announced a daily death toll that turned out to be far below the actual figure.

Boris Johnson, pictured yesterday at a Hertfordshire school, was one of many ministers to have announced a daily death toll that turned out to be far below the actual figure.

Sir David King, pictured, former chief government science advisor and chairman of the independent Sage group, told the Guardian that the gap in the numbers was 'an attempt to minimize the adversity the country faced' '.

Sir David King, pictured, former chief government science advisor and chairman of the independent Sage group, told the Guardian that the gap in the numbers was ‘an attempt to minimize the adversity the country faced’ ‘.

Sir David King, who was the government’s chief scientist from 2000 to 2007, previously accused the government of blunders by trying to pursue a policy of “collective immunity” that would have kept the economy going.

He said; “They didn’t say we had to add all these other numbers, which would have been more honest to say.

“This is the most disastrous management of any serious challenge to government in 100 years.”

In an interview with Channel 4 News, he added: “The message that goes through when we reduce [the alert level] four to three in this way, we seem to win the battle, but the number of cases per day is still very high for the whole of England.

When asked if science was massaged to follow politics, he replied, “I really fear that is the case. I think we know that scientists opposed changing the alert number from four to three before and that politicians were pushing hard for this to happen.

“I really wonder if we’ve been following science from the start.”

He said the test and traceability system needs to be improved, arguing that only about 25-30% percent of cases are identified while “we have to be up there” with 85%.

A government spokesperson insisted that ministers had always been “ transparent ” about reporting the deaths of Covid-19 and said it was “ wrong to suggest that we somehow try is to reduce the scale of this global pandemic. ”

A retrospective series of daily deaths was subsequently published by the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs.

It was recently revealed that April was the deadliest month on record in England and Wales, according to official statistics which reveal the true picture of the coronavirus crisis.

The number of people who died in April each year has remained relatively stable at around 40,000 or in the past 13 years, but has increased dramatically to 88,000 this year as the coronavirus epidemic raged across the Kingdom -United.

The number of people who died in April each year has remained relatively stable at around 40,000 or in the past 13 years, but has increased dramatically to 88,000 this year as the coronavirus epidemic raged across the Kingdom -United.

The Covid-19 pandemic doubled the death rate from all causes in England and Wales in April, according to data released today. 8,180 people died from direct coronavirus during the worst week, April 11 to 17

The Covid-19 pandemic doubled the death rate from all causes in England and Wales in April, according to data released today. 8,180 people died from direct coronavirus during the worst week, April 11 to 17

WHAT WERE THE MORTALEST MONTHS OF RECORD?

April 2020 is the month in which England and Wales have recorded more deaths from any cause than at any time since the start of the current records in 2006.

It was the only month with the 10 worst that was not in the dead of winter – eight of the 10 were in January and one in December.

The 10 months had the highest number of deaths:

  1. April 2020: 88,153 people died
  2. January 2018: 64,154
  3. January 2015: 60,891
  4. January 2017: 57,368
  5. January 2016: 56,706
  6. January 2009: 55,045
  7. January 2019: 53,910
  8. December 2008: 53,594
  9. January 2013: 52,898
  10. January 2008: 52,057

Data shows that 88,153 people died in both countries – more than double the number recorded last April (44,123) or before the epidemic became uncontrollable in February 2020 (43,653).

The figure, published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), shows that the arrival of Covid-19 on the British coast killed twice as many people as in a normal month.

In London, this effect was even worse, with surprising figures showing that the number of people who died in April was three times what it was the same month last year.

The statistics came as a grim analysis by the Financial Times claimed that Britain suffered the highest excess mortality rate of any comparable country during the coronavirus pandemic.

It showed that the 59,537 additional deaths recorded since the start of the epidemic amounted to 891 deaths per million people. This figure was higher than in any other country in Western Europe or the United States, with Italy at just under 800 per million.

Monthly data showed that in January this year, 56,706 people died in England and Wales, which was high but not unknown for the winter.

Next came 46,653 in February and 49,723 in March.

However, the month of April rocketed the figure from 88,153 to 0.15% of the total population.

Regionally, the largest increase in deaths between April last year and April this year occurred in London, where it increased 197% from 4,102 to 12,175.

It also more than doubled in the West Midlands, which is centered around Birmingham, from 4,527 to 9,932 (119%).

And in the North West, including Lancashire, Cumbria and Manchester, it increased 112% from 5,835 to 12,354.

Britain announces 173 more Covid-19 deaths with ‘withdrawing’ virus as health officials confirm epidemic decreases by 4% every day and crucial R levels remain below level dreaded of a

Britain announced 173 more coronavirus deaths yesterday, including a 12-year-old child, government scientists confirmed that the epidemic was on the decline, the number of new cases falling by 4% per day and the rate of R crucial staying below the dreaded level of one.

Issue 10’s Scientific Advisory Committee, SAGE, found that the reproductive rate – the average number of people infected with each Covid-19 patient – is still between 0.7 and 0.9, which means that the coronavirus is firmly behind after terrorizing Britain for months. It must stay below one or Britain will face another crisis.

Separate data released for the first time yesterday also claimed that the UK’s current growth rate – how the number of new daily cases evolves day by day – could be as low as minus 4%. If the rate becomes greater than zero, the disease may again become uncontrollable.

Health ministry officials say the death toll is now 42,461. But the count only includes laboratory-confirmed patients – unlike other overwhelming figures that take into account all suspected deaths and show that the actual number of victims has already exceeded 50,000.

Issue 10's Scientific Advisory Committee, SAGE, found that the reproductive rate - the average number of people infected with each Covid-19 patient - is still between 0.7 and 0.9, which means that the coronavirus is firmly behind after terrorizing Britain for months. It must stay below one or Britain will face another crisis. Separate data released for the first time yesterday also claimed that the UK's current growth rate - how the number of new daily cases evolves day by day - could be as low as minus 4%. If the rate becomes greater than zero, the disease could again get out of control

Issue 10’s Scientific Advisory Committee, SAGE, found that the reproductive rate – the average number of people infected with each Covid-19 patient – is still between 0.7 and 0.9, which means that the coronavirus is firmly behind after terrorizing Britain for months. It must stay below one or Britain will face another crisis. Separate data released for the first time yesterday also claimed that the UK’s current growth rate – how the number of new daily cases evolves day by day – could be as low as minus 4%. If the rate becomes greater than zero, the disease could again get out of control

HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE REALLY DEAD?

Ministry of Health: 42,461

The latest count of deaths from the Ministry of Health for all contexts is 42,461.

Daily data does not represent the number of Covid-19 patients who died in the past 24 hours, but only the number of deaths reported and registered with the authorities.

It also only takes into account patients who tested positive for the virus, as opposed to deaths suspected of being due to the coronavirus.

Individual health organizations: 32,710

The Department of Health has a different deadline for reporting deaths, which means that daily updates from Scotland and Northern Ireland are still out of sync. Wales is not affected, however.

NHS England revealed today that it has recorded 28,221 laboratory-confirmed deaths across the country. But the figure only applies to hospitals – which means deaths in nursing homes are excluded from this count.

Scotland recorded 2,470 deaths from coronavirus among patients who tested positive for the virus, followed by 1,475 in Wales and 544 in Northern Ireland. These tolls include deaths in all contexts.

National statistical organizations: 52,664

Data compiled by statistical agencies in each of the countries of origin shows that 52,664 people died of confirmed or suspected Covid-19 across the UK in late May.

The actual number of victims will be even higher because the count only takes into account the deaths that occurred until June 7 in Scotland and June 5 in the rest of Great Britain, which means that it is expired until to 10 days.

The National Statistics Office confirmed yesterday that on May 29, 47,820 people in England and Wales had died with Covid-19 confirmed or suspected.

The number of coronavirus deaths was 774 on the same day in Northern Ireland, according to the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA).

National Records Scotland – which collects statistics north of the border – said 4,070 people had died across the country as of June 7.

Their accounts are always 10 days behind the Ministry of Health (DH) because they wait until as many deaths as possible for each date have been counted, to avoid having to revise their statistics.

Excessive deaths: 64,402

The total number of excess deaths has now exceeded 64,000.

Excessive deaths are considered an accurate measure of the number of people killed by the pandemic because they include a wider range of victims.

In addition to including people who died with Covid-19 without being tested, the data also shows how many people died because their medical treatment was postponed, for example, or who are not or have not couldn’t get to the hospital when they were seriously ill.

Data from England and Wales show that there were 58,693 additional deaths between March 21 and June 5, as well as 4,769 in Scotland between March 23 and June 7 and 940 in Ireland from North between March 21 and June 5.

The number of daily victims of Covid-19 announced represents a drop of 14% compared to 202 recorded this week last week and is the lowest figure recorded on a Friday since March 20, three days before the imposition of the draconian lock to stop the spread of the disease.

Nicola Sturgeon claimed coronavirus was “ firmly in retreat ” and Boris Johnson hinted at an imminent change to the strict two-meter social distancing rule after British threat level Covid-19 has been significantly reduced from four to three.

And the director general of University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust – the largest hospital organization in England – revealed that there were no Covid-19 patients in his intensive care for the first time since the start of the pandemic. , adding that the British infected with a coronavirus do not look as sick as they did ”.

Government scientists released growth rate data for the first time yesterday. So far, SAGE has only provided details on the rate of R – the average number of people to whom an infected person is likely to transmit the virus.

For the United Kingdom as a whole, the current growth rate is minus 4 percent to minus 2 percent and the estimate of the number of reproductions, called R, remains from 0.7 to 0.9.

The growth rate reflects the speed with which the number of infections is changing day by day and, as the number of infections decreases, is another way of tracking the virus.

If the growth rate is greater than zero, and therefore positive, then the disease will develop, and if the growth rate is less than zero, then the disease will decrease.

It is an approximation of the change in the number of infections each day, and the size of the growth rate indicates the speed of change. It takes into account a variety of data sources, including government-run Covid-19 surveillance test programs.

For example, a growth rate of 5% is faster than a growth rate of 1%, while a disease with a growth rate of minus 4% will decrease faster than a disease with a growth rate of minus 1%.

Estimates of R – which are at least three weeks late – do not indicate how quickly an epidemic evolves and different diseases with the same R can cause epidemics to develop at very different speeds.

Growth rates provide information different from estimates of R, suggesting the size and speed of change, while the R value only provides data on the direction of change.

To calculate R, information on the time it takes for a set of people in an infected group to infect a new set of people in the next group is needed.

However, the growth rate is estimated using a range of data similar to R, but it does not depend on “generation time” and therefore requires fewer assumptions to estimate.

Neither of the two measures – R or growth rate – is better than the other, but each provides useful information for monitoring the spread of a disease. Experts say that everyone should be considered along with other measures of the spread of the disease.

Professor Keith Neal, a specialist in infectious diseases at the University of Nottingham, said: “It is good that R stays below 1 and the growth rate is negative. As the number of cases decreases, everyone’s risk decreases.

But he added that it remains unclear how many of the cases included in these calculations are acquired in nursing homes or hospitals – a surveillance sample taken by the Office for National Statistics released yesterday suggests that 3,800 people were affected by the virus in the community in England. .

Data from the Department of Health released yesterday showed that 169,600 tests had been done the day before, a figure that included antibody tests for the front line NHS and caregivers.

But the bosses again refused to say how many people were tested, which means the exact number of Britons who have been swabbed for the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been a mystery since May 22.

SAGE files: closing UK borders would have ‘little value’ to stop Covid-19 crisis and immunity passports would not work without widespread routine testing, says latest batch of scientific articles

Scientists have prevented the government from closing the UK’s borders because it would have had “ surprisingly little value ” to stop the spread of Covid-19, secret advice documents released yesterday revealed.

One of the scientific reports presented to ministers in May to help them weather the crisis said that restricting air travel would have virtually no effect because the damage was already done.

However, if the borders had been locked at the start of the pandemic, this could have prevented a full-blown crisis, as seen in Australia and New Zealand.

Another study found that giving immunity passports to survivors of Covid-19 – a move touted by Health Secretary Matt Hancock in April – would only be safe if these people were also tested for antibodies every month.

The government was also informed in early May that the mandatory wearing of masks could help contain the crisis by preventing asymptomatic people from spreading the disease.

Forty documents were published yesterday by the Government Office for Science, headed by Sir Patrick Vallance, chief scientific adviser for England.

They are among dozens in a slice of documents presented to SAGE, the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, in the past few months to help ministers get through the crisis.

And the reports detail all the scientific advice that is presented to policy makers who dictate when and how the country emerges from the lockdown.

The latest batch of SAGE documents, which are being published to demonstrate greater transparency on the part of the government, comes after 173 additional deaths have been confirmed.

There are now a total of 42,461 people who died after being tested positive for coronavirus in the UK, but many others who have not been tested have not yet been counted.

Here, MailOnline takes a look at some of today’s most notable articles:

UK missed opportunity to control epidemic by closing borders

Two separate reports advised the government not to close its borders in April and May because the damage had already been done in February and March.

One of the studies was a 2006 article modeling the effect of restricting incoming flights in the event of a highly infectious influenza pandemic.

Health Protection Agency researchers – which ceased operations in 2013 – have found that “ restrictions on air travel were surprisingly unhelpful in delaying epidemics, unless almost all travel stopped very shortly after the detection of epidemics. ”

One of the studies was a 2006 article modeling the effect of restricting incoming flights in the event of a highly infectious influenza pandemic. he found that a blanket ban that saw 99.9% of flights failed at the start of the epidemic would have ended the pandemic significantly

One of the studies was a 2006 article modeling the effect of restricting incoming flights in the event of a highly infectious influenza pandemic. he found that a blanket ban that saw 99.9% of flights failed at the start of the epidemic would have ended the pandemic significantly

SAGE then delivered a separate document to the government in early May, reiterating that there was “little scientific justification” for imposing border restrictions.

Scientists estimated that less than 0.5% of new infections were imported to the UK in April and May.

It did so by examining the Department of the Interior’s data on incoming flights and predicting how many of these passengers were likely to be infectious due to poor epidemics in their country of origin.

SAGE said that current buffering techniques were too slow and that temperature controls were not too specific to justify their implementation at airports and borders.

However, the group said restrictions may need to be put in place in the event that global air transport returns to normal and other countries experience a second wave.

He recommended a quarantine of 14 days, which is currently being implemented by the Ministry of the Interior, despite a huge backlash.

People who get an “immunity passport” should be systematically tested

If immunity passports were issued to allow key workers to return to work, a new monthly test would be essential, the scientists said.

Researchers from Imperial College London presented an article on Covid-19 immunity at SAGE in April.

The team found no data available on the duration of the antibody response after infection with SARS CoV-2, beyond approximately two weeks after recovery.

Researchers from Imperial College London presented an article on Covid-19 immunity at SAGE in April. The team found no data available on the duration of antibody response after SARS CoV-2 infection, beyond approximately two weeks after recovery.

Researchers from Imperial College London presented an article on Covid-19 immunity at SAGE in April. The team found no data available on the duration of antibody response after SARS CoV-2 infection, beyond approximately two weeks after recovery.

According to the literature for other coronaviruses, mild infections can cause weak antibody responses that decrease only a few months after infection, they warned.

For this reason, SAGE has been informed that Matt Hancock’s idea of ​​so-called immunity passports should be accompanied by a routine antibody test.

Such passports, where people hold documented evidence of their immunity due to a past infection, were presented as a possible way to facilitate locking in April.

But the idea seems to have been dropped because scientists cannot determine exactly how long antibodies protect survivors, and current antibody tests have so far proved to be too imprecise for widespread use.

Face masks work and may help prevent asymptomatic spread

A report published on May 4 revealed that the mandatory wearing of a mask could prevent a major coronavirus infection in the United Kingdom.

Analysis of DELVE – the data assessment and learning group for viral epidemics – indicated that if everyone wore them, it could prevent 40-80% of transmissions.

The multidisciplinary group, convened by the Royal Society, based its estimates on the fact that between four out of 10 patients and eight out of 10 Covid-19 patients show no sign of infection but remain highly infectious.

He also highlighted the fact that droplets from the mouths of infected people play a major role in spreading the virus, through coughing, sneezing and even just speaking.

DELVE has found that homemade coatings can catch between 50% and 70% of viral bacteria dispersed in the air, while surgical coatings can stop almost 90%.

The group compared epidemics in countries where wearing a mask is compulsory compared to countries where it is not and found a huge disparity.

But despite strong evidence of their use since May, the British government last week made compulsory masks mandatory in public transport and hospitals.

The British are urged to wear them in shops and crowded places, but this is not applied.

At least nine out of 10 nursing homes will suffer from coronavirus outbreaks

Researchers from the University of Manchester warned in April that at least 90% of nursing homes would report at least one case of Covid-19.

Only 20% of nursing homes had experienced outbreaks at the time of the researchers’ modeling.

They warned that staff were importing the disease without their knowledge, stressing the need to rigorously test them.

Writing in the study, they said, “Staff interact with households and the community and thus the infection can be transmitted to and from care homes in this way.

It is confirmed that more than 11,000 people have died in nursing homes as a direct result of Covid-19 and that many others have died of the virus without being diagnosed, which means that they are so far not counted in official deaths

It is confirmed that more than 11,000 people have died in nursing homes as a direct result of Covid-19 and that many others have died of the virus without being diagnosed, which means that they are so far not counted in official deaths

“Estimates of the expectation of a high attack rate in nursing homes remain very likely.

“ A natural conclusion is that in the absence of a change in disease transmission in the future, we would expect that at least 90% of nursing homes would report at least one case in the long term if the current reporting trends continue (approximately 20% currently report). ”

NHS hospitals returned 25,000 people to nursing homes during the peak of the UK Covid-19 crisis without testing them for coronavirus.

Le déménagement a été ordonné de libérer des lits pour une augmentation anticipée du nombre de patients gravement malades.

Le personnel ne faisait pas non plus systématiquement l’objet de tests de dépistage de la maladie, ce qui a entraîné la mort de Covid-19 en Angleterre et au pays de Galles de plus de 15 000 résidents de maisons de soins.

14 000 Britanniques pourraient mourir chaque jour dans le pire hiver de Grande-Bretagne

Un document soumis à SAGE le 25 avril par l’Imperial College de Londres a examiné comment Covid-19 affecterait le pays pendant l’hiver.

Même avec un «bon respect» de l’éloignement social, l’équipe a prédit que 14 000 personnes mourraient chaque jour en janvier et février prochains.

La modélisation suppose que 75% des foyers se conforment à la politique de quarantaine des ménages de 14 jours, et que l’éloignement social général réduit les contacts en dehors du ménage et du lieu de travail de 90% et les contacts en milieu de travail de 50%.

Le scénario de `` bonne conformité '' suppose que 75% des foyers respectent la politique de quarantaine des ménages de 14 jours et que l'éloignement social général réduit les contacts en dehors du ménage et du lieu de travail de 90% et les contacts en milieu de travail de 50%. Le scénario de «mauvaise conformité» suppose que la fermeture des écoles augmente les contacts familiaux de 100% (plutôt que 50% pour le centre) et les contacts sociaux en dehors du ménage de 50% plutôt que de 25%. Il suppose également que l'éloignement social général ne réduit les contacts en dehors du ménage et du lieu de travail que de 66% (au lieu de 75% pour le centre)

Le scénario de “ bonne conformité ” suppose que 75% des foyers respectent la politique de quarantaine des ménages de 14 jours et que l’éloignement social général réduit les contacts en dehors du ménage et du lieu de travail de 90% et les contacts en milieu de travail de 50%. Le scénario de «mauvaise conformité» suppose que la fermeture des écoles augmente les contacts familiaux de 100% (plutôt que 50% pour le centre) et les contacts sociaux en dehors du ménage de 50% plutôt que de 25%. Il suppose également que l’éloignement social général ne réduit les contacts en dehors du ménage et du lieu de travail que de 66% (au lieu de 75% pour le centre)

Le service de santé se prépare à son pire hiver jamais enregistré, alors qu’il devra lutter contre un afflux de patients atteints de grippe saisonnière et de Covid-19.

De nouvelles mesures de contrôle des infections et une distanciation sociale signifieront qu’il ne peut fonctionner qu’à une capacité d’environ 60%, selon les patrons du NHS.

Et dix millions de personnes pourraient être bloquées sur des listes d’attente d’ici la fin de l’année en raison des blocages causés par la pandémie, rendant le traitement plus difficile à obtenir.

L’isolement de l’ensemble du ménage – rejeté comme une tactique contenant Covid au début de la crise – aurait fait reculer la courbe épidémique de 1,5 mois.

Isoler des ménages entiers aurait entraîné 40% de décès en moins

L’Université de Lancaster a exhorté le gouvernement à reconsidérer sa position sur l’isolement des ménages entiers dans un document soumis le 15 mars.

L’idée de dire à des familles entières d’isoler pendant 14 jours a été rejetée par le gouvernement au début de la crise en raison des craintes d’une faible conformité.

La mesure aurait obligé des ménages entiers à ne pas quitter leur domicile pendant deux semaines, même s’ils ne présentaient aucun symptôme, si l’un d’entre eux était positif.

Les ministres sont allés dans une direction différente et ont encouragé la personne symptomatique à s’isoler seule dans sa chambre.

Comment l'épidémie du Royaume-Uni se serait développée si 50% se conformaient à «l'isolement de l'ensemble du ménage» (jaune), contre 100% des personnes (rose). Le bleu montre comment l'épidémie de Grande-Bretagne s'est réellement déroulée

Comment l’épidémie du Royaume-Uni se serait développée si 50% se conformaient à «l’isolement de l’ensemble du ménage» (jaune), contre 100% des personnes (rose). Le bleu montre comment l’épidémie de Grande-Bretagne s’est réellement déroulée

Mais les chercheurs ont constaté que même si seulement la moitié des familles respectaient l’isolement de l’ensemble du ménage, cela suffirait à réduire la taille de l’épidémie de 40%.

Cela aurait également repoussé la courbe d’environ un mois et demi, a suggéré la modélisation.

En écrivant dans l’étude, les scientifiques ont déclaré qu’ils recommandaient que la mesure «soit considérée comme une intervention pour gérer la propagation de Covid-19 au Royaume-Uni».

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here