Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 2

[Barracker]

A follow on thread from here

Please try to keep it data driven, factual and civil.

www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-uk-deaths-england-uk-cases-update-today-a9438366.html UK death toll now 1808

That's what I am looking at too @RU562341

So I assume Nicola was talking about the lag and why there was such a jump

That makes sense, thank you!

Today’s deaths are heartbreaking. Fingers crossed it’s just because of a bunch of delayed reports from previous weeks all being published at once.

Are the latest figures the ones including deaths outside of hospital? They said they were going to start doing this today

It's so frustrating trying to read these figures. It's a huge jump BUT it may or may not be as big as it looks, depending on delayed tests and if they included community deaths.
Thoughts and condolences to all the family and friends of those lost.

Thank you for that analysis about Portsmouth, Dulang! I have family there.

@Madhairday I thought they had over 1,000 deaths more than us at this point?

I feel so sick of the phrase 'tracking Itay' - people are obsessed!

Yes I think it is highly unlikely we will be as bad as Italy

I'd also like to see a regional breakdown.
They report Scotland, Wales, England and NI separately- I would like to see the numbers for London, too, as they are on a different track to the rest of England at the moment.

Why is it an obsession? This thread is about analysis of numbers, not indulging obsessions about things. One of the posters here has been posting daily graphs from the FT which clearly show the track and another posting a spreadsheet comparing deaths since +10, in which we are 16 days behind Italy and have been consistently for a while. Not obsession, just trying to make sense of the figures in the best way we can.

Thank you for that analysis about Portsmouth, Dulang! I have family there.

Not really an analysis, just a collection! I think Hampshire just happens to be a busy place with lots of international shipping (inc ferries in Portsmouth and cruise ships in Southampton, for example) and has the bad luck of being near some early cases. Looks like they at least attempted to contain it (without much support from government at that point) and did a bit of early testing.
Probably a bit of second home migration going down as well (big difference between rich and poor in Hampshire, as is common in most UK coastal towns).

As tsgettingweird said, basically:

Hampshire was top of the league tables (so to speak!) for cases for a long time. It's a very accessible area. Lots of commuters into and out of London. People coming from IOw. Airports doing trips to ski resorts. Much older generation in areas of affluence who go on cruises as Southampton accessible. Ferries in and our for ski drive holidays.

I’m guessing IOW are included in the same top tier statistics as Portsmouth? I looked up the number of ICU beds on the island the other day (due to family!) and it’s tiny. Especially considering there is a prison on the island too.

The track was against France starting at 50 deaths
You can always make numbers look the way you want them. Start them on the 10th death and we look like we track Italy. Start them on the 50th and we track France

DuLANG the cases of Winchester school pupils were suspected before the 13th March. I was working in Winchester 9-11th just down the road and were very aware of this fact. I washed my hands a lot those 3 days!

@madhairday

it just feels as if that phrase is overused and has been for weeks.

'Tracking Italy' 'Two weeks behind Italy'.

As PP said it's very unlikely we will end up as bad as Italy.

If 20,000 deaths is a 'good' outcome from this then we sadly need to accept climbing numbers.

so far I have seen 3 different numbers for the UK, and one report says that "a new set of statistics has been introduced". I'm going to wait for an official statement.

This is the FT graph from yesterday. Today's will be starker. I don't like the term 'tracking Italy' either. I do not want to track Italy. Or France. I want this all to be over. But we're trying to analyse statistics as best we can and so use terms which make sense of it.

@inlawsimnotsure @Horehound

I was the first to mention Italy today, so I am going to respond. Today, because of previous comments I nearly thought twice about posting. But then I remembered that since @Barracker started this thread we have been considering other countries, mainly because government figures mentioned them!

Now other countries are unfortunately starting to get higher figures they are also being looked at, compared and discussed. This is all part of what we have been doing from the start.

I am fed up of reading comments about being ‘obsessed’ etc. If you don’t like it then fair enough, but it’s not going to stop people talking about it on a numbers, graphs and analysis thread. Especially when, as @Madhairday has just said, it is matching up with the 16day graph.

I'll post the update when I have the cases.

There isn't an obsession with tracking Italy, or France or anyone inlawsimnotsure.
Observations are being made because to an extent, the behaviour of the virus is somewhat predictable. The more you can see how it has grown in the past, the more you know what to anticipate in the future. The longer we follow one country's pattern, the likelier it is that we will continue to, until a specific set of events make us diverge.

We're sitting right on top of Italy's trajectory, 16 days behind them, and have been fairly consistently for quite a while now. We're also similar to France, but obviously not as far behind.

The thread is full of people who find themselves preferring to anticipate the next week or two realistically. Part of this means looking at Italy, and comparing it to the UK.

Not everyone wants to know this kind of information. Knowing what's in store is uncomfortable.

I honestly think people who don't want to analyse the data, and that's entirely a personal choice, should simply hide threads like this.

Figure is just hospitalised deaths. So 1789 - 1408 is 381 in 24 hours from hospitalised cases.

worldometer shows 400 but no idea where this comes from.

Can someone repost the Italy comparison chart (+16days) with the updated figures? Thank you in advance. This thread and it's content is the only way I can get my head around, it's so helpful.

Here’s a breakdown by region in the UK. These are deaths confirmed within a 24 hour period and are only those who were hospitalised. The ONS statistics of community deaths are separate.

Very sad news with the numbers today. Especially as that’s just the hospitalised cases.

Nquartz - I’m British, living in France and married to a native.

Firstly (and I could be wrong) but I have a feeling China's figures are far from accurate so the basis of that graph is tricky.

I was in France a few days before they shut down and life seemed very normal - very busy restaurants and ski slopes, whereas although our 'lockdown' was later we had started social distancing before then.

It is unlikely we will end up as bad as Italy BUT to reach the 'best outcome' of 20,000 deaths in total, we will at some point reach and exceed their current death toll.

My colleagues in China (not Wuhan to be fair) are back in the office and have been eeking back to normal for a few weeks. So there is hope, and personally for me - that's all we bloody have!

Myfriendanxiety- we don't know if today includes community deaths or not yet, and, if so, how many are included or how far back that goes. I do believe that the jump is probably quite steep, but prefer to wait for a source to confirm and hopefully clarify.