Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 3

[Barracker]

Welcome to thread 3 of the daily updates.

Resource links:
Worldometer UK page
Financial Times Daily updates and graphs
HSJ Coronavirus updates
Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Centre
NHS England stats, including breakdown by Hospital Trust
Covidly.com to filter graphs using selected data filters
ONS statistics for CV related deaths outside hospitals, released weekly each Tuesday

Thank you to all contributors for their factual, data driven, and civil discussions.

I think it's more the case that blanket rules make enforcement easier legally and politically

Very difficult to tell people in tower blocks that they must stay indoors 24/7
but that those living very rurally can continue to go out

Whatsnext it does feel like the big unknown. Germany is testing a lot but only people with symptoms. Hard to gauge the asymptomatic numbers.

The Covid 19 tracker app from Kings/Guys puts the symptomatic infection rate in hotspots at around 4-6% from what I saw on the news the other day. Assuming 50% of cases are asymptomatic then that would suggest an infection rate of around 10%.

That sounds more credible.

Germany has been testing a lot of health workers too, all along, without the Uk limit on this
and there are many drive-thru testing sites for the worried well

but I agree that there will be a disproportionate number tested because of symptoms,
even though much milder than would be tested in the UK

The selected group of 100,000 people will be the first afaik that will keep being tested specifically to track immunity and infection rates

Ds and I were walking today. I said to him I'm surprised they haven't thought of a simple thing like having to walk on the left (road to your right) like cars etc so people aren't having to pass each other whilst walking.
Could be the same on beaches, on paths in parks. Or even they could paint arrows and directions on parks of direction you can walk (like going to ikea!).

Oh yes that makes sense!

The "50%" Oxford figure is very hypothetical. They are saying that from the available data it is possible to model a number of scenarios, possibly where a lot of people have been infected but only a few get seriously ill, but also where only a small number were infected and quite a significant proportion get seriously ill.

I wish we had a better handle on the current prevalence. It's all such guesswork. I think the best calculations probably extrapolate from deaths using a formula derived from countries which tested widely and are further along their curve.

Anecdotally there seem to be a large number of high profile people who have it, which makes it seem as if it has really penetrated the population. Then again, many of them live in London, so there's that.

It's crackers that we're having to guess.

We don't have significant evidence afaik for what % are asymptomatic
Could it be 20%, 50%, 90% ?
Or what % won't catch it even after prolonged exposure

The infection rates on cruise ships suggest a lot of people don't catch it, but we don't know what applies to countries:

The Diamond Princess had about 3,700 passengers and crew on board;, with eventually about 700 people infected and 12 deaths

The spike in healthcare demand is what is thteatening countries
A ship can be given maximum help for each person;
for a country, there are obvious resource limits that could cause economic and social breakdown

I'd love to know how many of the 3,000 people on that ship who didn't catch the disease still haven't caught it

Some interesting charts on bbc website

Ok that wasn't helpful ha ha- was trying to post actual images sorry!

How do I post pictures of charts on here?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52133054

bear with...

If I'm reading that first graph right, we should theoretically peak between 12-19th April?

The infection rates on cruise ships suggest a lot of people don't catch it, but we don't know what applies to countries

I don’t think you can draw that conclusion. Given that no one has immunity, i think the more plausible explanation is that they isolated to their cabins before everyone was infected.

Deaths have dropped a bit today

From the sun:

It comes as the UK death toll past the 5,000 mark with 403 more deaths in England alone.

In Scotland, two further people have died – bringing the total number of deaths to 222.

The figures for the rest of the UK have not been released yet.

Twitter is saying 432. It's a huge drop.

The Sun has updated to 441 for the whole of the UK apparently the lowest increase in a week.

Is there any reason which might account for the huge drop? I know a lot of people will see this as a positive, but i'm just puzzled.

I've not seen today's figures yet, the numbers always seem to dip on a monday slightly then there is a large spike on Tuesday. Which would indicate theres just a gap in recording data from the weekend (I'm guessing from those who are tested post mortem)
Given the infection rates/new cases have been mostly steady (think there was a spike yesterday) I'm cautiously optimistic when there is a drop but I guess we wont know if it's a genuine drop or just following the same pattern until tomorrow.

Figures after the weekend are lower as they aren't able to do their usual verification/consent to the same level on a Sunday. Would expect tomorrow's figures to be higher.

Last Mondays figures were artificially low too (381 on Monday, 563 on Tuesday)

But even like for like 381 to 441 is "only" 12% rise. If lock down wasn't working it would be 150% so more like 1,100.

Last Mondays figures were artificially low too

So it's likely just a blip due to verification / checks, thank you. I thought there was a slight lag in reporting cases, so I presumed the weekend wouldn't have had that much of an impact.

On Saturday we get Friday's figures (weekdays tending to be better reported) on Sunday we get Saturday, on Monday we get Sunday. Personally I'd want to see some nice low weekday figures before I read anything into it.