Britain today announced 674 more coronavirus deaths in hospitals, nursing homes and elsewhere, taking the UK's official death toll to 26,711, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson confirming the nation's peak of & # 39; e outbreak is.

NHS England declared 391 victims of COVID-19, while more were reported outside hospitals and in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Amid fears, thousands of victims were missing, ministerial ministers called in to take higher pressure to include COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes in the daily update.

Officials yesterday – the first day of the new recording scheme – added an additional 811 deaths to the & # 39; tally. The revised Count saw that Britain jumped to the third global COVID-19 death toll, and meant that the British daily death toll in April was nine times more.

But top statisticians claimed that the count was still thousands short because only Britons who had positive testing for the virus were included. One leading expert claimed that the true number would be more than 30,000.

In other developments to the crisis of coronavirus today:

• Boris Johnson is set to lock in that lockdown will remain until June, around the time he collects the cabinet to a & # 39; exit strategy & # 39; to unlock;
• A report has warned that London's transport network could be crippled if the UK loses lockdown measures after London's Transport for London rounds out 7,000 staff;
• Ministers have admitted that the government & # 39; probably & # 39; Matt Hancock’s goal will be to fail to run 100,000 tests per day, which it was expected would rain tomorrow;
• A poll found that two-thirds of the public believe the government acted too late in imposing & # 39; e lockdown;
• Fresh questions have been raised about the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) amid allegations that it has been influenced by politicians and senior officials;
• NHS fundraising hero Tom Moore has been promoted to colonel and honored with an RAF flypast to mark his 100th birthday;
• Top surgeons have warned thousands of people will die on COVID-19 if Britain's strict lockdown ceases at this stage.

NHS England revealed today the total number of deaths in hospitals in England had passed another milestone, reaching 20,137.

The & # 39; numbers of & # 39; e health shows that the actual count of England is 23,550, which means that at least 3,413 deaths occurred outside hospitals.

A 15-year-old was among the new 391 victims. Officials said they had an underlying health situation, but it is unclear what this was.

Of today's announced deaths, 140 occurred on Tuesday, April 28, and the remainder were spread over the seven weeks between March 12 and yesterday. April 8 remains the highlight of the outbreak, in which 863 people die.

Wales recorded 22 more deaths today, taking its total number of deaths to 908. Scotland announced a further 60 victims with its death toll to date 1,475. Northern Ireland has yet to declare its number today, but its official count yesterday was 338.

The number of people dying in hospitals in the UK seems to be declining and the government is coming under increasing pressure to reveal how it plans to move Britain out of its current lockdown.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson is expected to speak on the subject later this afternoon and tell the British he will not do anything that risks sending the virus – the R0 – higher and spreading it faster then a one-to-one ratio.

Tomorrow's chairman of the cabinet is expected to expect the prime minister to put an end to & # 39; e draconian restrictions that cripple the economy, and claim that allowing the killer disease again rampant would do even worse damage.

Mr. Johnson will & # 39; R & # 39; number – the reproductive frequency of the virus – at the heart of & # 39; strike, and says he will take no action that & # 39; t rise above it, meaning it is growing.

Sources from the & # 39; government have indicated that he will also defend calls to treat the public like & # 39; adults & # 39; by discussing ways in which the lockdown can be granted, and says it & # 39; is too early & # 39;

But Scottish Prime Minister Nicola Sturgeon, at a briefing today in Edinburgh, said she believed it was & # 39; too early & # 39; would be if the formal review happens next week to limit & # 39; in any meaningful way & # 39; to be lifted.

& # 39; The margins we have to make sure the virus does not recapture are really tight, & # 39; she said.

Ms Sturgeon sounded alarmed that people had already begun to fight the social distance rules – that traffic had increased 10 percent in some parts of Scotland last week.

Despite the hard line in public, frantic behind-the-scenes work has ended at a & # 39; development plan & # 39; to develop. Island communities with controllable transport links are set to be used to test ways to loosen restrictions when refurbishing community tests. The Isle of Wight will be among the first pilot sites.

However, officials have strongly made claims that regions such as Cornwall can be targeted with specific measures.

The appearance of Mr. Johnson at the press release tonight will be his first, since reloading on Downing Street since Monday, and will come less than 36 hours after his fiancée Carrie Symonds gave birth to her son. The prime minister has delayed his paternity until later in the year, in order to prevent the country from fighting the coronavirus outbreak.

His return comes as the Department of Health is set to miss Matt Hancock's goal of conducting 100,000 coronavirus tests per day by the end of this month.

On Tuesday, April 28, the last day for which data was available, 52,429 tests were performed – just half the goal.

Of the number done on Tuesday, some 28,539 were done at the dozens of drive-through centers across the country.

Daily available capacity is now around 77,000, but even if ministers can boost that number to 100,000 for tomorrow, it seems highly unlikely that they will be able to nearly double the number of double tests.

Justice Secretary Robert Buckland acknowledged from & # 39; tomorrow that the goal & # 39; probably & # 39; would be missed, because & # 39; he blamed the fact that the government started from a & # 39; low base & # 39; in terms of test capacity.

Experts hit the target as a & # 39; red herring & # 39; that has hindered the response to the outbreak.

NHS providers, who represent trust in health services, launched a scathing attack on Mr Hancock's handling of the situation, saying that the pressure to redirect the number to a & # 39; distraction & # 39; led to chaotic expansion of the regime.

Chris Hopson, CEO of NHS Providers, said members are becoming increasingly frustrated at the lack of clarity about how the test regime for the next phase will be developed.

The government has insisted that lockdown measures cannot be granted unless its five criteria, including manageable infection rates and test capacity, are met.

Mr. Hopson said: & # 39; Testing is one area where & # 39; despite all the work done by trust and the NHS, the health and care system as a whole has struggled to develop an effective, coordinated approach.

& # 39; While we consider the route beyond lockdown, what confidence leaders now need is clarity on the testing regime from here.

& # 39; Setting a goal for some tests before April 30 can have a galvanizing effect. But what's most important is an updated strategy to take us through the lockdown exit. & # 39;

Details and a timeline of an exit strategy is now the number one demand for Downing Street. Education Secretary Gavin Williamson began hinting yesterday that schools could emerge from lockdown in phases.

Mr. Williamson would not be drawn on a fixed date for when schools could resume but excluded the view that they open in & # 39; summer vacation.

He told MPs: & # 39; I expect schools to be opened in a phased manner. I also intend to give schools as much as possible. & # 39;

Schools, colleges and nurseries in the UK closed their doors to the majority of students, except the children of major workers, more than five weeks ago.

Education is a divergent issue, which means that administrations in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland can make their own decisions about bringing back schools.

But it will be a key focus of & # 39; lockdown exit strategy of & # 39; a UK government, to re-teach learning workers with children free to go back to their jobs and restart the economy.

There seems to be a growing consensus that schools should stagger the return of students to meet expected ongoing social distance rules.

Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish Prime Minister, has suggested that school classes should be adjusted to seat students at least two meters apart.

They also indicated that classes could be divided into several alternating groups, attending school on different days to maintain numbers. It is thought that a different approach could return to different year groups at different times.

To & # 39; address of & # 39; e committee on education selection, Mr. Williamson suggested that he be on the same page as Ms. Sturgeon.

& # 39; We recognize that the idea that schools all come back on day one with the full addition of students is not realistic or practical, & # 39; he said.

Despite the harsh public messages, there is evidence of broader movements taking place to increase more of the economy's economy. to get a blow.

DIY stores, fast food chains, cafes and garden centers have scaled up their activities, and councils have also been told by ministers to open tips for dismissal.

Ministers are working on a series of workplace manuals with details on how they can look once the lockdown is granted.

Business Secretary Alok Sharma has asked officials to offer advice on how a slow return to work could be safely managed for seven different types of workplaces, including offices, factories and construction sites.

Companies will be told to close canteens and other common spaces, as well as to mean new shift patterns to allow for social distance and reduce the pressure on public transport at peak times.

Office staff are likely encouraged to continue working from home, where possible.

Deputy Chief Medical Officer Jonathan Van-Tam said a partial opening of schools & # 39; in & # 39; was a mix & # 39; but it was & # 39; too early & # 39; to expect early action seen as the burden of social distance within them.

One Whitehall source said that the three weekly review of lockdown measures, thanks to May 7, would only modest changes exist.

& # 39; We are discussing whether we can undo the top button and make things in one or two places more comfortable for the economy, & # 39; added the source. & # 39; But any idea of ​​a comprehensive repeal is just plain wrong. & # 39;

The Scientific Advisory Group on Emergency & # 39; s Government will provide new evidence to ministers in the coming days, but it is expected to say that the lifting of much of & # 39; e restrictions immediately would lead to the onset of infection.

A source from & # 39; the government said that Mr Johnson & # 39; it will be very clear that we will not do anything that could risk this … because then you are back with the virus exponentially spread and the risk of a second lockdown & # 39 ;.

In more pressure on PM to be cautious, top surgeons have warned thousands of people will die from Covid-19 if lockdown is lifted at this stage.

The Royal College of Surgeons said the NHS does not have a & # 39; punchbag & # 39; should be used to prevent damage to the economy.

The RCS said the lockdown at this stage could not be unlocked, because not enough health personnel are being tested and there is not enough PPE available for frontline medics.

Professor Neil Mortensen, President-elect of & # 39; e RCS told the Daily Telegraph: & # 39; Just because the NHS has not been overwhelmed so far does not mean that the government can use the health service as its economic punchbag.

& # 39; It has been a close thing, and to use Boris Johnson's own words & # 39; we started to wrestle it to the floor & # 39; but the virus is certainly not defeated. & # 39;

At & # 39; press conference of & # 39; On the night of last night, Secretary of State Dominic Raab noted a reported rise in virus cases in Germany, which has compounded his lockdown.

He said a similar uptick in & # 39; the UK & # 39; is a very real risk & # 39;

Boris is back!

And everything will be great!

That was the emphatic message sent to the country today, when the Prime Minister returned to the daily press conference of the UK Government after weeks of absence, while he himself fought the deadly disease.

He was breathless, I assume from the remaining side effects of the virus.

But it could also have been excitement to deliver so much enormous positive news.

BOOM! We are on the brink of coronavirus and at & # 39; e & # 39; downward slope & # 39;!

BOOM! The first stage of our battle with COVID-19 has been a triumph, in order to avoid the tragedy that prevents other parts of & # 39; defeated the world & 500,000 people did not die!

BOOM! The disintegrating economy will & # 39; strongly bounce back & # 39;!

BOOM! This week there will be a & # 39; comprehensive road map & # 39; to be released to show how we will get out of a lockdown!

When Julie Andrews was full, Boris assured us that although it was more than through a huge alpine tunnel, to come, we will see sunlight and meadows will see!

Oh, and he wanted us to know & # 39; we throw everything on it, heart & soul, night & day & # 39;!

Wow, this all sounds fantastic.

It also sounded like full and utter bullsh * t.

A few weeks ago, I compared President Trump to Comical Ali, Saddam Hussein & # 39; s ridiculous & # 39; Minister of Information & # 39; in & # 39; war in Iraq, that & # 39; not that American & # 39; enter & # 39; themselves & # 39; killed in their hundreds & # 39; at the gates of Baghdad – so TV viewers could hear US weapons loudly destroy Iraqi troops in the background.

I don't think it would be possible for any world leader in this crisis to sound more insane than Trump, whose antics on his own daily introductions have become an unedifying masterclass in the way a pandemic is not treatable.

But Boris managed to make Trump almost believable, and his sycophantic loyalists on social media made up for it.

& # 39; That's our man! & # 39; They fired when & # 39; t Boris informed us in no unclear terms that we would get this virus, just like he did Brexit.

But the virus is not like Brexit.

It's not a political ideology that can't be open to debate, or an argument that can be won with buffoonery, bluster and Churchillian soundbites.

COVID-19 doesn't even know who Boris Johnson is, let alone care for his love for Cicero, the ability to speak fluent Latin, to make private life enthusiastic, or distrust in the European Union.

If Boris fans, the vast majority of them with unions jack flags and Brexit slogans in their profiles, spend the whole day abusing me on Twitter for challenging their hero's coronavirus strategy, then they do, for & # 39; t for them, any criticism by the government about this crisis is a re-run of the viciously poisonous and partisan Brexit campaign.

(Ironically, they all kept me then & # 39; I demanded that the result of the referendum be celebrated, despite myself still voting)

But Brexit has never looked more irrelevant to this war, not least around EU member states running for their own individual self-reliant heights the moment it started.

And none of Boris Johnson's political skills that won him the December referendum and election works as they did before the virus hit.

The reason for this was in one simple card that did not appear on the screen after he was done talking.

With the name & # 39; Global Death Comparison & # 39;, it appeared that the UK is now the trend to the second worst country in the world for coronavirus deaths.

This follows the massive peak of yesterday in our official death toll following the shameful security of the government's record of deaths outside hospitals in nursing homes and community.

The reported number of UK deaths is now 26,711.

But Financial Times journalists have captured all available data from the Office of National Statistics and estimate the true total including all & # 39; excessive deaths & # 39; is now over 48,000.

Whatever the exact number, it is a wonderful and terrible one.

It means that a football stadium full of people has already died in this country, and people are still dying in their hundreds every day.

Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief scientific officer, is on record, saying that a final death toll of 20,000 is a & # 39; good result & # 39; would have been.

That we are now in areas with poor results, and it will clearly be a very, very poor result.

The big question is why?

And the constantly demonstrable answer is that the UK's very strategy to fight this virus has been a failure from start to finish.

We were outrageously slow and suicidal in our reaction to the outbreak.

We were scandalously prepared, especially when it came to personal protective equipment for pounds for health workers and securing adequate coronavirus testing as soon as the severity of the crisis became clear.

We were scandalously late to order a lockdown.

We were scandalously complicated in sending infected elderly hospital patients back to nursing homes without testing them.

And we have been scandalously inconsistent in implementing policy U-turn to policy U-turn.

When I saw the briefing today, I saw a prime minister who does not know all this, but desperately trying to avoid any guilt or responsibility.

"I took great care!" He explained, which is great – if you are him.

But what about the terrible lack of care he has shown to the oldest and most vulnerable members of our society?

Thanks to the embarrassing failure to test patients before sending them back to the homes, the country's 11,000 nursing homes have become terrible hotbeds of infection and death, both for residents and health care workers.

People's Secretary Matt Hancock said earlier this week that nursing homes have always been a & # 39; start of this crisis & # 39; priority & # 39;

But this is demonstrable, in order for caregivers to testify.

As late as mid-March, the government's advice was that there was little risk of infecting someone in a nursing home, which explains why they were so lax with PPE as tests for nursing homes.

Professor Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer, dismissed questions about our death toll by saying that we should wait until the very end before he is so judgmental. & # 39; Let's not go into who & # 39; s won & lost, & # 39; he said, & # 39; this epidemic has a long way to go. & # 39;

However, Boris Johnson had literally just said that we & # 39; re over the height & # 39 ;.

What is it, Professor?

And seen every move by & # 39; the government is apparently & # 39; driven by science & # 39 ;; Please forgive us if we do not insist at this time on some difficult questions about the scientific decisions that will lead us to have such a disastrous death toll.

Especially when "science" has changed so radically, so often.

We continued a policy of & # 39; link immunity & # 39; as confirmed by Sir Patrick Vallance, many weeks until our & # 39; experts & # 39; suddenly realized that it was a total disaster that would kill 500,000 people.

We haven't been to most countries for several weeks, in order to & # 39; the & # 39; experts & # 39; said we don't encourage crowds and crowds at events like the Cheltenham Festival and great football matches with fans from other places like Madrid who were, incredibly, IN LOCKDOWN THEMSELVES.

Then we have that enabled too, and now we can't even begin to lockdown because so many have died of the virus.

The same 'experts' told us on March 13 that we will no longer be testing outside serious hospital cases.

Then we did a U-turn on that and made mass testing a top priority – and have had to play catch-up ever since. Nevertheless, the advice of the & # 39; World Health Organization has taken months & # 39; TEST, TEST, TEST & # 39; west.

Today is another U-turn: we are insured for weeks by the & # 39; experts & # 39 ;, there is no need to wear face masks. Indeed, Matt Hancock said just 48 hours ago that the evidence of the need to carry them was & # 39; weak & # 39 ;.

And unlike 90% of the world, we have refused to impose strict control or quarantine measures at our airports, to & # 39; t & # 39; science & # 39; said we don't need to, but are apparently planning to do it eventually.

Now, Boris Johnson said we should probably be asked to wear them, to & # 39; epidemiological & # 39; the reasons. That, science also changed on that.

All beggars question: why the hell should we continue to trust & # 39; experts & # 39; and their & # 39; science & # 39 ;?

Or our Prime Minister who does not seem to trust them?

I'm not saying this lightly, but to & # 39; t these & # 39; experts & # 39; have led us in a very different way to that of almost any other country in the world and the consequences have been catastrophic and undoubtedly costing many lives.

And because they still guide all our decisions.

Boris Johnson wants us to think he handled this crisis as well as expected.

But he didn't.

The WHO declared COVID-10 on January 30 a & # 39; public health emergency & # 39 ;, but Boris was distracted the next day by & # 39; Brexit done & # 39; available to give any proper attention.

He then spent much of February working with his girlfriend Carrie, sorting out his divorce, and preparing to announce her pregnancy and her engagement.

As a result, he missed the first five COBRA meetings on coronavirus, and after finally hosting on March 2, he informed us all that he had been in a hospital with coronavirus patients in it and & # 39; shook so many hands if possible. & # 39; This was four days after Italy recorded its 79th death and most of Northern Italy was in lockdown.

Not surprisingly, Boris went on to catch the virus and almost died, taking him another few weeks out of the war.

He was only rescued by the brilliance of & # 39; NHS personnel, of whom more than a hundred are now on & # 39; a front line died, because they were not well protected by the man who did not rescue them.

& # 39; I had wonderful care & # 39 ;, & # 39; he said today.

And that's great – for him.

But the cold hard truth is that Boris Johnson didn't care enough for this virus then & # 39; it really mattered, and that made Britain one of & # 39; the worst deaths of & # 39; created a world of coronavirus.

For him to claim any success now is a cruel offense.

The stats don't lie, especially if the stats are similar.

A top Google executive specializing in artificial intelligence joined the government's science experts at a top-level meeting, it was revealed today.

Demis Hassabis, the founder and CEO of & # 39; DeepMind operation of & # 39; e tech giant, attended a Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) meeting last month.

His presence at Sir Patrick Vallance's invitation comes at a time when membership of the body remains largely a secret on security grounds, despite pleas for greater transparency.

His presence at the & # 39; meeting will raise questions about how many private companies are involved in developing public policy and the response of & # 39; a UK on & # 39; a pandemic.

Google is already believed to be working with the NHS on launching a contact tracking app in May.

A DeepMinds spokeswoman told the Guardian: & # 39; Demis was one of several scientists who didn & # 39; t ask to contribute his thoughts on the & # 39; a government on Covid-19. & # 39;

DeepMind in London was launched in 2014 by Google owner Alphabet for £ 400 million.

Three years later, it was involved in a data protection breach involving a pilot project for smartphone apps with the Royal Free Hospital of London. But last year, it got ahead of it to gain access to five years of sensitive data on NHS patients.

The internet giant was handed hospital admissions from thousands of patients in the UK, including medical history, diagnoses, treatment dates and ethnic origin, increasing concerns about the privacy of & # 39; data.

It came about & # 39; it was revealed that scientific advisers of governments fear that ministers will visit the & # 39; buck & # 39; by commenting on the UK's coronavirus response by constantly insisting that decisions be guided by expert advice.

Members of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) are thought to be concerned ministers have gone too far in always referring to guidance, to & # 39; t it eventually & # 39; political decisions & # 39; are & # 39; t the approach of & # 39; e eruption thickness.

Many senior figures in Whitehall now have one eye on the inevitable public inquiry into the & # 39; government's handling of & # 39; e current crisis.

That probe is likely to focus heavily on the substance of the advice given to ministers when it was made available to them, how the government responded to it and when die.

The & # 39; early government response to & # 39; An outbreak is facing increased scrutiny, asking critics why Boris Johnson failed to set a lockdown by March 23, despite experts warning the disastrous consequences of not suppressing a disease.

Professor Graham Medley, a SAGE member and chairman of & # 39; s modeling sub-committee, told The Guardian that it always ended up being a & # 39; political decision & # 39; was about how to respond.

Senior Ministers have repeatedly stated during the severe crisis that every action has been driven and informed by expert advice.

But there are some concerns that ministers are simply trying to change the blame if things go wrong.

Prof Medley said that & # 39; public insistence of ministers that they follow the advice & # 39; sometimes a little past the mark & ​​# 39 ;.

Asked if there was an element of politicians & # 39; past the dollar & # 39 ;, Prof Medley apparently replied: & # 39; Yes & # 39 ;.

SAGE is mandated by ministers to provide impartial answers and evidence to important questions. Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty and Chief Scientific Advisor Sir Patrick Vallance both attend the group.

But the secrecy surrounding the group, with its membership and evidence not routinely published, has sparked controversy.

That controversy has only grown in recent days after the top Johnson of Domin Johnson Cummings had attended SAGE meetings.

Number 10 claimed this was so he could be informed of the latest scientific thinking, but some sources have claimed that he was & # 39; more than a caretaker & # 39 ;, prompting critics to ask how impartial the SAGE opinion was is.

However, some at SAGE believe the presence of & # 39; Mr. Cummings was actually helpful, because & # 39; it meant that important points could be passed on to & # 39; e Prime Minister.

The relative lack of public information regarding SAGE's coronavirus work means that it is difficult to fully assess the dynamics between the commission and prime ministers.

However, one paper from a SAGE subcommittee on March 2 said it was & # 39; very likely & # 39; that there is already & # 39; continuous transfer & # 39; was of & # 39; disease in & # 39; t United Kingdom.

It warned that without restrictions, about 80 percent of the population could be infected.

It also estimates that the death rate could be up to one percent, which would equal 500,000 deaths.

The government later moved on to the delay and reduced phases of its response to the coronavirus.

But the messages remained about the importance of hand washing, even as other European nations began to put in place more draconian measures.

The UK's approach was already under fire, after the World Health Organization said testing was key to tackling & # 39; e spread of & # 39; s disease, but Britain's tests were underwhelming.

Meanwhile, Mr Johnson was accused of a premier & # 39; part time & # 39; after spending an extended period at Chevening and failing to attend four of & # 39; s first five Cobra coronavirus meetings.

It was in & # 39; mid-March that the government appeared to change its approach of one attempting to slow the spread and & # 39; link immunity & # 39; to one of aggressive & # 39; a disease.

On March 13, Sir Patrick said that the & # 39; aim was to reach the peak of & # 39; reduce the outbreak and also & # 39; because the vast majority of people get a slight illness, build some kind of herd immunity & # 39 ;.

The government has always rejected the suggestion that it followed a strategy of & # 39; herd immunity & # 39 ;.

The WHO had declared a coronavirus a pandemic on March 11, but important meetings were still ongoing in the United Kingdom.

Thousands of people attended Cheltenham Festival between March 10-13, while Athletico Madrid fans turned off at Liverpool for a Champion & # 39; s League game on March 11.

On March 12, the government began to step up its approach to encourage the elderly not to go on a cruise, suggesting that more measures were in the works.

The main point of change is widely believed to be the publication of modeling on March 16 by Professor Neil Ferguson, which suggested that a mitigating approach could result in 250,000 deaths and the NHS being overwhelmed.

Professor Ferguson told The Guardian that the way forward was for ministers: & # 39; While policy can be guided by scientific advice, it does not mean that scientific advisers determine policy. & # 39;

The government believed that all action had to be taken at the right time, in order to alert them to potential social distance & # 39; fatigue.

In essence, they argued that people will eventually become tired of restrictions, so the timing should be just to get the maximum benefit from them.

But behavioral scientists in one of Sage's subcommittees apparently never mentioned in & # 39; official reports & # 39; fatigue & # 39; around & # 39; it & # 39; is not a concept that exists in behavioral science & # 39; and ministers who had the choice to use it were & # 39; useless & # 39 ;.

In conversations in Whitehall, more and more came when a state of lockdown would be imposed.

The Cabinet was split over timing and the seriousness of & # 39; measures amid fears of some long shutdown to & # 39; an economy could do.

Finally, lockdown was introduced by Mr Johnson on March 23 before the government's own attachment to social distance was put under the spotlight, with both Prime Minister and Health Secretary Matt Hancock both testing positive for the disease on March 27.

A Downing Street spokeswoman dismissed criticism for its approach, saying, & # 39; This is an unusual global pandemic and we have taken the right steps at the right time to combat it, led by the best scientific advice. & # 39;

On the heels of an early announcement that coronavirus patients given Gilead & # 39; s Ebola drug remdesivir performed better than those who did not receive the treatment, the company's CEO, Daniel O & # 39, considered ; Day, the results a reason for hope at a time when it is badly needed, & # 39; in an open letter received by Fox News.

& # 39; Positive data & # 39; of an NIH trial by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of Remdesivir boosted the stock market by 530 points Wednesday.

Although the pre-brand trade was halted for Gilead, the announcement was no doubt a fortune for O & # 39; Day & # 39; s business.

After the revelation of Dr. Anthony Fauci that participants of NIH tests taking remdesivir had shorter recovery times and were 30 percent less likely to die from coronavirus, the New York Times reported that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was planning to authorize drug use to treat the virus already on you day.

It comes as cases of coronavirus in & # 39; American excitement exceed one million and deaths from & # 39; Trump & # 39; s & # 39; Best Case Scenario & # 39; of 60,000 deaths in the country.

So far, there are no proven treatments for coronavirus, but the results of remdesivir indicate that it may soon be.

& # 39; There is still more work to be done and remdesivir has not been approved, but all of us in Gilead are humbled by what these promising results can mean for patients, & # 39; wrote O & # 39; Day.

Outcomes for members of the & # 39; trial of & # 39; e NIH of more than 1,090 people who were treated with remdesivir were better off by a wide enough margin that Dr Fauci insinuated those who had not received a placebo to get the drug now.

& # 39; You have an obligation to the people in & # 39; e-placebo group immediately so they can have access (to the possible treatment), & # 39; said Fauci in a White House meeting.

Remdesivir is an antiviral medication that Gilead originally developed to treat ebola, but disturbed it in trials.

Early petri dish and animal studies showed that it could recover the coronavirus, and smaller studies were promising enough to require the NIH to request a large, & # 39; gold standard & # 39; trial of & # 39; drug launch.

& # 39; The results of & # 39; A worldwide, placebo-controlled trial conducted by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) is positive, & # 39; wrote O & # 39; Day.

& # 39; They show that patients with COVID-19 who did not receive remdesivir recover more rapidly than similar patients who did not receive placebo. & # 39;

In connection with his company's previous attempts to use the drug to treat Ebola, he added: & # 39; After years of research and hard work on remdesivir, there is relief and gratitude today that our efforts so worth the effort. & # 39;

In the White House meeting, Dr Fauci explained that remdesivir seems to block an enzyme that requires coronavirus to attack human cells and hijack their machine to make more copies of themselves.

& # 39; We have a drug that can block the virus, & # 39; he said.

& # 39; This will be the standard of care. & # 39;

One of & # 39; s doctors who administer the drug to patients in & # 39; an NIH trial reflected both Dr Fauci's and O's Day's optimism about Good Morning America.

& # 39; Eight weeks we have now taken care of patients … we have gotten patients better, but we are now looking for a medication that will get them better and faster and is home to their families, & # 39; said Dr Aneesh Mehta of & # 39; Emory University, one of & # 39; institutions that & # 39; t participate in & # 39; e study.

& # 39; Now, we have the first glimmer of hope of something that can do that. & # 39;

Dr Mehta added that data from the & # 39; NIH study are still preliminary, and Dr Fauci acknowledged that the early results did not & # 39; knock out & # 39; despite his sensual presentation of them.

A remdesivir study of 237 patients with coronavirus done in China, also published yesterday, returned disappointing results.

People who did not receive the drug did not recover rapidly and were not at lower risk of death compared to those who received a placebo.

The trial was stopped short of its scheduled end date because the researchers had difficulty recruiting participants.

Remdesivir seems to work better if given early – as suggested by the NIH trial, such as the SIMPLE trial that Gilead runs – so one theory is that Chinese patients received the drug too early.

Although encouraging the results of these early threads, experts around the world are cautious that the studies should be done and interpreted thoroughly and carefully.

It comes after research showed that remdesivir, created by California-based Gilead Sciences, helped patients to rely on oxygen to leave in two weeks.

Fauci added that the trial was evidence & # 39; that a drug can block this virus & # 39; and compare the finding with the arrival of & # 39; the first antiretrovirals that & # 39; worked against HIV in the 1980s, though at first with modest success.

This would make remesivir of the third drug approved under the EUA by the FDA after the agency approved anti-malaria drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. The drug is often used to treat Ebola patients.

Remdesivir has been one of & # 39; s top proponents of existing drugs that & # 39; are being investigated for coronavirus treatment, although the & # 39; e World Health Organization last week suggested it was unable to help patients recover in a trial of more than 200 people.

Gilead defended the trial, saying it believed the leaked data was a & # 39; mischaracterization & # 39; of & # 39; results were.

On Wednesday, Gilead said he had the study produced & # 39; positive data & # 39; for the treatment of coronavirus patients.

Half of the 397 patients, who were ill enough to need extra oxygen but not placed on ventilators, improved within 10 days of a five-day treatment course and those who did not. on a 10-day regimen, were better by the eleventh day.

More than half of patients were discharged from the hospital within two weeks, Gilead announced in a press release.

The announcement of promising provisional results from remdesivir sent the Dow up by more than 500 points, though Gilead's own shares were halted for trading, in order not to announce results of the trial.

The NIH also studies remdesivir in a randomized controlled trial of 400 patients, which means that about half of the group would take antiviral Ebola, and the others would receive a placebo drug.

Gilead's trial did not have a placebo arm, which makes it impossible to know whether the drug helped patients or improved them on their own.

In a statement, Gilead Sciences said it was & # 39; aware of positive data that & # 39; s coming from & # 39; it from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which Dr Fauci turns.

& # 39; We understand that the trial has met its primary endpoint and that NIAID will provide detailed information at an upcoming briefing, & # 39; read the statement.

The NIAID said patients on & # 39; drug had a 31 percent faster time to recover than those on a placebo.

Fauci said although the results do not & # 39; knock out 100 percent & # 39; were, it was an important proof of concept.

& # 39; The data shows that remdesivir has a clear cut, significant, positive effect in reducing & # 39; e time for recovery, & # 39; he told reporters at the White House.

& # 39; This is very optimistic, mortality counted for better words in & # 39; a sentence of minor deaths in a REM-designated group. Eight percent versus eleven percent in the placebo group.

& # 39; So bottom line. You will hear more details about this, this will be submitted in a peer reviewed journal, and will be peer reviewed. & # 39;

He added that the trial was proof & # 39; a drug can block this virus & # 39; and compare the finding with the arrival of & # 39; the first antiretrovirals that & # 39; worked against HIV in the 1980s, though at first with modest success.

For the Phase 3 trial announced Wednesday, Gilead treated 397 seriously ill patients with his antiviral medication.

The company's press release Wednesday did not specify the locations of & # 39; patients. However, in March, it announced the initiation of two trials of the drug, one of which would be 400 patients studying in & # 39; Hubei Province of China, where & # 39; first appeared coronavirus.

The ages and genders of those patients were not disclosed.

The company tried two different treatment regimens for severely ill coronavirus patients – a five-day and 10-day course – but did not include a control arm of patients who did not receive the drug.

COVID-19 is considered & # 39; heavy & # 39; if a patient is in the hospital and requires additional oxygen.

Among those who were treated for five days, 60 percent could go home by day 14.

In the 10-day group, 52 percent were fired within two weeks.

Complete recovery was achieved on the same timeline by 53.8 percent of the & # 39; treatment group of 10 days, and by 64.5 percent of & # 39; e people in the group of five days of treatment.

& # 39; These data are encouraging, to indicate that patients who received a shorter, 5-day course of remdesivir experienced similar clinical improvement than patients who did not receive a 10-day course. treatment received, & # 39; said Dr. Aruna Subramanian, a Stanford infectious disease professor who helped guide the study.

Gilead expands on & # 39; study by testing & # 39; a drug in a further 5,600 patients at 180 locations for the next stage of his SIMPLE trial.

It will be tested around & # 39; including in & # 39; e FS, the United Kingdom, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan Korea, the Netherlands, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Taiwan.

These tests will include patients who do not need mechanical ventilation to survive, and will compare the two treatment regimens (five- and 10-day courses) with those that do not receive the standard of care support.

Gilead said it expects to report results on the first 600 patients not involved by the end of May.

& # 39; Although additional data is still needed, these results help to gain a clearer understanding of how therapy with remdesivir can be optimized, as proven to be safe and effective. & # 39;

That is not to say that there were no patients who walked poorly.

Seven percent of patients with coronaviruses outside Italy were treated. It is unclear how many patients were treated in Italy versus outside the hard-hit nation.

Timing also mattered.

People who were treated early – within 10 days of their first symptoms – fared better, with 62 percent being discharged from the hospital within 14 days.

But the results of the trial suggest that the drug can still be beneficial, even if relatively late. About half of those who did not receive remdesivir for 10 or more days after they developed symptoms were also released from the hospital on day 14.

In general, the drug appeared safe in & # 39; e trial, despite the duration of & # 39; treatment course.

More than 10 percent of patients treated with the antiviral became ill, and six percent of the & # 39; five-day treatment group and 10.7 percent of & # 39; e 10-day treatment group were in acute respiratory failure (also a complication of & # 39; infection itself).

The greatest risk posed to the coronavirus patients treated with remdesivir was liver damage.

Lab work showed enzyme buildup in 7.3 percent of patients. the risk of liver damage was large enough that three percent were removed from the trial.

Dow jumps 550 points after Gilead & # 39; positive data & # 39; reported for its experimental coronavirus treatment

DOW JUMPS 53O POINTS OF GILEAD TRANSPORTED & # 39; POSITIVE DATA & # 39; FROM THE EXPERIMENTAL CORONAVIR TREATMENT

By Keith Griffith for DailyMail.com

US stock indexes jumped Wednesday after Gilead Sciences said its experimental antiviral drug met the main goal of a trial that's not tested in COVID-19 patients.

At closing, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was down by 532.31 points, or 2.21 percent, at 24,633.86. The S&P 500 was up more than two percent and Nasdaq composite more than three percent.

Markets have kept a close eye on any signs of when Americans can be back to work, and immediately rose as the result of an effective treatment for the virus that has shaken the economy.

Trading in shares in Gilead was halted during the trade prior to & # 39; the market, in order to & # 39; t issue the company its press release.

Gilead's share shot on the news, with 6.75 percent in midday trading.

Meanwhile, new data showed that the US economy contracted at its sharpest pace since the Great Recession in the first quarter, ending with the longest expansion in history.

Data from the & # 39; Commerce Department said gross domestic product fell at an annual rate of 4.8 percent in & # 39; e period from January to March, while economists expect a 4 percent contraction in a Reuters survey.