Covid-19 Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread

[Barracker]

I thought some of us might find it useful to have a Mumsnet thread specifically dedicated to tracking, discussing and analysing the national and global Covid-19 data.

Direct sources of data include:
The UK govt daily update
and
worldometer global data

Today's UK figures have not yet been released. Yesterday was as follows:

UK
March 14th 2020:
Cases: 1,140
Deaths: 21

This is similar to Italy's figures on the date February 28th/29th.
Their March 1st data= cases:1577 deaths:41

I'll add today's numbers when they are released.

We must be testing some with mild symptoms, or Prince Chas and Boris wouldn’t have been tested?

I think it's a reasonable assumption that important people are getting tested just in case. I bet the Queen and Prince Phillip have (regularly I'd guess) ven without symproms. And most of the cabinet.

But such negative tests must surely be a small percentage of the negatives

I presume daily deaths will include post mortem results.

On another note, does anyone know why today’s positive cases has dropped?

Pure speculation but I wondered the other day when the numbers were announced really late whether there had been a problem with getting the test results. I wonder if they’ve had a backlog and then caught up.

Good news from Spain and New York. Slow of growth and reduction in hospital admissions in NYC

I get we all look at it differently but there is no doubt.

That statement is just, well, wrong. "No doubt" is just such a preposterous thing to say, when this entire thread is full of articulate and intelligent posters presenting analysis, many of whom very much doubt your repeated assertions, Bluntness100. And there is no consensus amongst epidemiologists, even.

Perhaps listen to the evidence, try to understand the analysis, rather than appealing to the authority of your choice?

Upthread you said "Personally I’ve no clue, just go with what the scientists say", and I think that's an admirably honest statement. But I think you should consider that different scientists are saying very different things.

I started this thread exactly two weeks ago. It opened on March 14th at 21 deaths. I posted that I was reluctant to project deaths but that I would benchmark us against Italy to give a general idea of where we might be in two weeks time.

In a private text message to a friend on March 14th I projected that we would be above 1000 deaths in two weeks time. I just checked my messages. Today we are at 1028.

As before, I am uncomfortable making predictions, it feels wrong.
However, perhaps we can agree on something. You believe we will peak in a week, I assume you mean cases? I believe we will still be rising in a week.
If we see a shallower rise over the next week which then plateaus for another week,

Posted too soon...

...then I will be delighted to concede that you were correct, as I wish right now to be over this.

If we are not plateauing in a week, will you please allow room to consider that there very much is doubt over our trajectory, and be open to other, considered viewpoints?

Is that fair?

What is not clear from the total number tested is any doubling up eg tested more than once and also people who have subsequently been infected.
So someone in A&E having a severe asthma attack 3 weeks ago might have tested negative but may have been infected since.

Previously they have assumed a tested person is positive until the test results come back so delayed test results did cause a drop in positive numbers when finally reported in the early stages of the epidemic. That could have happened again.

I suppose, at present, we're tracking the Netherlands more closely than Italy.

This is the graph that plots the trajectory of each country, with all of us starting to be tracked at 10 deaths. It's not complicated, the data is simple, comparable, not manipulated. It's simply a count, day by day.

I think it's important to judge for ourselves what we see. What trajectory do you see?

Here is the link to the graph, if you need to zoom in, or see more details.

Nquartz, thanks - that link is 404d now
DuLANGDuLANGDuLANG that's exactly what I was looking for

I hadn’t appreciated that Spain was tracking worse than Italy. That’s an interesting/terrifying graph.

Personally I find figures easier to digest than graphs, which are too fiddly for me especially on a small phone screen. If anyone is still comparing the numbers from the UK and Italy two weeks apart please do share!

Hi, been following this post daily. Thanks for the figures. Can anyone explain why the UKs serious/critical numbers are fairly low compared to other countries, but the death rate so high?

I don't think the UK is submitting critical numbers consistently, Boredsheep.

Italy--- UK
12--- 8
17--- 10
21--- 21
29--- 35
34--- 55
52--- 71
79--- 103
107--- 144
148-- 177
197--- 233
233--- 281
366--- 335
463--- 422
631--- 578
827--- 759
1016--- 1019

That numbers chart is still on page 18 (posted 26th March at 20:30 if that's easier) of this thread, Utterly. Italy were at 1441 on 14th March and UK, as you know, at 1019 today. (PHE and worldometer still show that figure for UK).

Daily death toll with a 16 day lag

The graphs are taken from 10 deaths.

A lot of people are taking it from when they were even at exactly 233.

If taken from 10 you can argue that we are on the same track.

If taken from 233 you can't.

Interesting thread.

There is no way the UK will plateau in a week.

The reason we are comparing to Italy is not some ghoulish hope. Everyone is aghast at what has happened in Italy. Everyone is tracking in the vain hope we won't go that way. One death too soon is too many. This is is terrifying.

If anyone is still comparing the numbers from the UK and Italy two weeks apart please do share!

I am.

I have heard from front line clinicians (including on here) that people arriving at hospital when they are already incredibly sick. There likely is little time for them to be logged as in critical care before death occurs. Plus, only those who have a good chance of recovery will be ventilated (this is usual for critical care admissions, they are made very carefully, here’s a small 2016 study on how intensivists decide who or admits to the ICU eprints.kingston.ac.uk/33943/1/Vandrevala-T-33943-VoR.pdf ).

According to the report on the first 775 U.K. COVID ICU patients at I posted last night, the vast majority are still in critical care (with the less than 200 ‘resolved’ cases being more or less 50/50 discharge or die).

So I’m not sure useful or accurate our published critical care figures are?

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/28/coronavirus-intensive-care-uk-patients-50-per-cent-survival-rate

U.K. ICU 50 % survival rate (this is an article on the on the ICNARC report I posted a few pages back)

Very interesting thread, thank you.

The UK is now reporting deaths 'of those hospitalised', which some appear to be suggesting is a different measurement basis from previously. How does this compare to Italy or other countries? I know of two local people who reportedly died in a carehome after testing positive for Covid. It sounds like they would not be reported in the UK numbers?

+16 Days looks more accurate

+16 does look relatively accurate, thank you for keeping track of the figures. The uk figures have doubled in the last 2 days. I hope that’s an anomaly.