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.

You believe we will peak in a week, I assume you mean cases?

I think it’s cases, yes, I’m not sure, I’m only going with what imperial are saying the peak next weekend. But personally I’d assume it’s the next couple of weeks for the peak in cases. It has to be cases I think as people can be on ventilators for three weeks and more. We don’t have the data they do.

They are predicting 20 k deaths, but as said 5600 odd from corona, the others expected, so nearly six thousand “extra deaths” and flu gives us eight thousand extra deaths annually.

They have said we are most comparable to Wuhan. But even there we have moved away from in the last couple of days. The reality is it must be incredibly hard for any scientists to predict.

I’m as said only going with the scientific opinion. If someone on here wishes to state their credentials and why their opinion that imperial and sage is wrong, I’m happy to change my opinion.

As said though, I’m not going to take some random who is posting on mumsnets opinion over the scientists, screeching it’s overly optimistic and attacking .

I simply am not. You may as well lay off me, because that won’t change. I won’t stop posting what the scientists say. Post your credentials and why your opinion is more valid and why your opinion is better than sage and imperial and I will go with it

Past that, I’m going to go with the scientists. And I make no apology for it.

I think we need to be careful what we believe. I have a family member who is an A&E doctor in Watford.

His view is that most people who die supposedly of covid already were actually ill with other conditions which they would have succumbed to sooner than later.

"Speaking via video link, Professor Ferguson explained that while there was some uncertainty, if current measures work as expected, then intensive care demand would ‘peak in approximately two to three weeks and then decline thereafter’."

www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196477/j-ideas-neil-ferguson-tells-mps-lockdown/

Said on 26th March. Which puts it 9th-16th April according to Impirical

imperial are saying the peak next weekend

Next weekend is 4th-5th. They are predicting the week after.

I’d also add, and I’m not going to keep repeating this, I was asked if I’d concede I was wrong, I am making no predictions, other than to state o, personally more cautious than the scientists.

All I have done is post the imperial and sage advice to the government. And their predictions. They are not my predictions. I am not a scientist. I am not a government advisor. I am simply telling people the advice the government is getting from both sage and imperial and their predictions

If they have it wrong, they have it wrong. But please don’t think I’m posting my view. I’m not. I’m posting what is being presented to the government select committees.

That was @Bluntness100

Thank you for this thread.

Should we not be taking a day off and comparing to 15 days ago rather than 14, because of that day they changed the way of collecting stats - so now we are always a day behind? So instead of comparing 1019 to 1411, we should compare 1019 to 1266 (unless Italy is also publishing day old figures? But even then we'd have to take that day it got changed into account)

I think the reason the confirmed cases was slightly slower is that there were 2,000 less tests yesterday than the day before.

So, although I think the virus is dangerous for some people and we need to stop it spreading.

We also need to stop taking as gospel what 'NHS workers' say. Many of them are not.,I could also be a troll for all anyone knows. But I'm making a point.?

we just don't know what is going on with what condition people are in when admitted.

The other sad side of this is that some people are dying who need hospital treatment for other conditions because paramedics don't want to admit people because of the coronavirus. A 3 year old boy died because paramedics wouldn't take him to hospital because of the coronavirus

Using the figures released to make any conclusion is pointless unless you have much more data regarding the age, health status, location and many more factors.
Death rate for our unique population may not be comparable however the figures are manipulate.
Looking at the positive cases of which at least 75% are in hospital tells us that living in a city is likely to be the biggest risk factor for many reasons.
Air quality, financial status, age, job etc. These will all have an effect on your individual risk. We have a large number of elderly at risk patients who are cared for in care homes and sheltered accommodation even those cared for in their own homes have an army of careers going from one home to another. The details of each individual death is not being reported and I would suggest that this virus is ripping through this part of our society like a hurricane.
It is far too early to arrive at any conclusions and no amount of graph staring is going to change what is happening.

You're being really rude.

I won't post my credentials. This is an analytical thread, not a top trumps thread.

I will however post data.
For those who are interested in tracking the two countries comparatively starting from 10th death, here is the data.

A paper by UCL doesn't deal with the timing of the peak, but it does deal with excess deaths.

A quote from the press release www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2020/mar/new-estimates-excess-mortality-covid-19-suggest-stronger-suppression-measures-needed : "A mitigation strategy aimed at slowing the spread of coronavirus could lead to at least 35,000-70,000 excess deaths over one year, find researchers from UCL, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, the University of Cambridge, and Health Data Research UK."

The paper makes a point that some on this thread and others have made: "The COVID-19 pandemic may cause excess mortality in the population both because of deaths among those infected, and because people who are not infected are experiencing social and economic upheaval; meanwhile the ability of health services to provide high quality of care for both infected and uninfected patients is threatened. This net effect of mortality on the population is thus not only a matter of modelling an infectious disease but modelling a wider societal impact."

All I have done is post the imperial and sage advice to the government.

Evidentally you haven't Bluntness100. You need to find and actually read the source material.

I see you quoting facts that just are not true several times.

For a thread about statistics and data, you must check your sources before posting them. This thread is only here for cold, hard data. Not 'I read someone else who wrote this and interpreted it my way'.

That's just not OK.

Please take your un-checked "facts" elsewhere.

This thread is for data, not opinions. Certainly not rudeness.

I hugely appreciate it and hope it can continue to gather evidence. Differing evidence does not equal difference of opinion.

I have a question. The number of deaths of people diagnosed with cv is increasing each day this week. Do we know whether the number of all deaths is increasing each day as well? Or could it be, partly at least, that the number of deaths each day this week is relatively stable (or fluctuating) but people who are dying are more likely to test positive for cv as time goes by, as cv becomes more prevalent in the population? (Not sure I have explained this very well.)

Or I suppose, a relevant question might be: is the number of deaths from respiratory problems increasing each day this week?

(I realise this would not explain the figures in Italy - or at least I assume it wouldn't)

Should we not be taking a day off and comparing to 15 days ago rather than 14, because of that day they changed the way of collecting stats - so now we are always a day behind?

The day we changed the timing of the reporting would have self-corrected the following day. No deaths went un-recorded. They were just, sort of, reordered.

But no, the days behind don't slide in that way. However over the last 5 or 6 days, we have been tracking Italy at more of a +16 rate than a +14 as we were initially.

Getting back to the data discussion, Utterlybutterly8 you asked for the numbers rather than the graph. I think what can be seen is that we raced ahead in the early part after 10th death and were actually accelerating faster than Italy, then we slowed, and now, we are very similar to their total, 16 days after 10th death.

This is why on the graph, we are steeper than Italy at first, and now sitting directly on top of their trajectory line.

NEW: Saturday 28 March update of coronavirus mortality trajectories

• UK passes Italy, 2nd only to Spain for deaths at this stage of outbreak

The Italian daily press conference with the head of the Protezione Civile and the other bods said this evening that Italy's peak is now expected in some areas within the next 10 days and others up to 14 days from now. So I wouldn't imagine the UK's peak to be before that.

lab24.ilsole24ore.com/coronavirus/
There are lots of graphs and analysis of figures here regarding the Italian numbers. It's updated daily.

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.

It doesn’t make any difference - we were on the same track (two weeks apart) from the first death up until 233 deaths. After that point, our death rate continued to rise but at a slower rate than Italy’s. Which I hope suggests we will have a slower and smaller peak than Italy.

Thanks pocketem
But as pp said. It makes your stomach lurch.

I am just pointing out that epidemiology is an extremely complex science/maths. I’ve seen several sets of figures where people are moving the numbers around to prove their own opinions.
Statistics are very unreliable when you only have a small amount of data available. In three years time the whole picture will be much more accurate and can be used in future planning.
Predicting the path we are taking may be reassuring for some of you but a little subversive if you are trying to criticise the scientists who are tracking this virus. They may get it all wrong but Mother Nature has a habit of rendering statistics useless.
I am just trying to reassure any lurkers that statistics are not to be trusted at this early stage.

Thanks fate. Statistics is not my strong suit. I know all the deaths were reported - it's just that day they changed the times so that now the stats we get today are actually from yesterday up to 5pm, and if Italy's are from today I didn't think the 14 day thing could be comparable any longer. But yes,.the 16 day track seems to make sense.

The number of deaths of people diagnosed with cv is increasing each day this week. Do we know whether the number of all deaths is increasing each day as well?

Interesting point.

I don't know if there is a live data feed for all (non corona related) deaths per day.

I know the ONS publish statistics on death rates, but that's always a year later. And it's broken down monthly, not daily. I'm not sure if daily death rate announcements are only made for this corona pandemic.

Does anyone know?

Is there any relevance in population?

I understand we have quite a large population compared to most European countries.

Iirc about 10m more than Spain and 20m more than Italy?

Just checked.

We have 7m more people than Italy and 21m more than Spain.

That actually makes Spain's death rate even more terrifying - percentage of population wise as well as number of death.

itsgettingweird one of the rows on the worldometer table shows deaths per million of population, to allow for exactly your point.