Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 5

[Barracker]

Welcome to thread 5 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
Google mobility stats

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

Right yes, well that doesn't surprise me. I think our death toll will be similar if not higher than Italy's. Sadly the number of deaths just seem to be a function of how many people catch it (and their age and fitness I suppose). Unless the system is totally overwhelmed so even those with a good chance of surrival aren't addmitted to ICU or people in great numbers are not making it to hospital. I think the rest is playing around the edges.

@Teabaseddiet i think i know what you mean but i have the uk as ahead unfortately than italy not by much if must be said. I added up the daily figures from the reddit site from lockdown to date and then took away any deaths up to that date. Maths is not my forte though.
I hope it is the start of a downturn though.

Today’s death number was a lot better thank last Sunday’s. I think this is very positive.

I thought it was positive too.

I think our death rate is high and will be one of the, if not the highest, in Europe. But rather than looking at the government, we should be looking closer to home. We have one of the highest obesity rates in Europe, if not the highest. Obesity causes lots of other conditions.

Also, is nobody shocked at the shielded numbers? 1.5 MILLION people with conditions so bad they have to stay in for 3 months? I am not sure any of those conditions are self-inflicted, but we have to seriously look at ourselves as a nation when that many people are so desperately vulnerable. I have no idea what the comparable figures are in other countries but it is astonishingly high in the UK and that's only the most vulnerable, without the people who are "merely" asthmatics, or obese, or pregnant, or have recovered from cancer.

There is something very badly wrong when so many people have such severe conditions.

There is something very badly wrong when so many people have such severe conditions.

My maths makes that 2.3% of the population, which doesn't seem very high.

Well, one way of looking at puffin is that many of those shielded people wouldn't be alive to be shielded without healthcare. Many of them will be in the older age groups.

1.5 million people out of 65 million or so doesn't seem that high to me, tbh.

The numbers today are very good indeed.

There is a precipitous fall in deaths in London - down by at least 1/3 from the peak, perhaps almost half.

The North (both NW & NE/Yorks) is yet to show significant falls.

Sorry old graph above for NW England. Replaced here.

Regarding the '31 March issue', looking at it regionally, see the attached graph for E of England, there's a steep rise 23 March to 28 March, which seems plausible enough, and then the data for 29/30 March seem heavily inflated, then 31 March is down to 25 March levels, 1 April still that low, and then from 2 April something of a plateau.

For London it's more straightforward as a huge dip on 31 March (only), likewise the Midlands, for the NE & Yorkshire a ludicrous dip again only on 1 day. For the NW the pattern is 33,35,60,60,30,82,80,81, so again a big dip but also odd patterns around that day.

For the SE 34,25,62,63,36,59,53, so similarly to the NW and E of England there's a big boost in deaths for the 29th and 30th, a big fall on the 31st and then resumption in service after that.

SW England is a couple of weeks behind the rest of England and the number of deaths at this point were very low, but still a drop on the 31st of March.

Spreadsheet here:

gofile.io/?c=tShowr

Also, is nobody shocked at the shielded numbers? 1.5 MILLION people with conditions so bad they have to stay in for 3 months? I am not sure any of those conditions are self-inflicted, but we have to seriously look at ourselves as a nation when that many people are so desperately vulnerable.

My understanding is that the 1.5m is only the most
vulnerable of the vulnerable... When you include all older people along with those with less serious pre-existing conditions you get a much, much larger number. If you add to that number people who are living with older people, or those with pre-existing conditions, you’ve got a significant portion of the population. The adage that it should be “business as usual” whilst we “protect the vulnerable” doesn’t really work.

@puffinandkoala careful here with casting assumptions about conditions that lead to shielding. This includes cancer, cystic fibrosis, neurological disorders and many other inherited conditions. These are not lifestyle choices and I am grateful for the variety of people that make up the UK.

SW England is a couple of weeks behind the rest of England and the number of deaths at this point were very low, but still a drop on the 31st of March.

I don’t think it’s “behind” as such.... there’s no reason to think transmission continued unabated for 2 weeks into the lockdown. There’ll just be fewer numbers, in this wave at least.

For “pre-existing” I meant “underlying” conditions...

Just done a bit of quick research. Those “at risk” of CV are broadly defined as those entitled to the flu jab. Apparently that covers 25 million people. If we exclude the 10 million children under 12 from that (on the basis that most aren’t deemed vulnerable to CV but nonetheless eligible for the flu jab), that’s 15 million vulnerable people! Include those who live with them and you’re looking at, say, 20-25 million who are directly impacted by virtue of their age, condition or living arrangements.

15 million vulnerable people

• it's more than even Social Darwinism to claim they are all expendable and "would have died anyway"

However, nearly all the dead, young or old, come from this group and that's how they are too often "othered" after they die

Someone on another CV thread was saying that losing everyone over 70 would be a large financial benefit for the country

• the poster was saying this would be sad but that the economy is more important than the vulnerable.

Behind as in the pandemic was in its earlier stages when the lockdown started. Hence yes, fewer deaths. Had the whole country locked down a week or two earlier, it would be similar in other areas

QuarantineQueen, Cathyandclare, NewAccount

Sorry, I can't find German stats on COVID death rate specifically for ventilators,
or how long people are on them, other than "longer than for other diseases"

What I do have:
since the first available statistics on 9 April, the death rate for ICU as a whole has always been 30%

The % on a ventilator has reduced slightly from 78% on 9 April to 75% today

Thanks Bigchoc! I had a google and couldn't find it either. I suppose the key question is whether the ones on CPAP have been discharged and everyone else is still on ventilators- I hope not because it would be good to hear positive ventilation stories.

Maybe it just takes time...

SEX (gets everyone's attention !)

Males continue to have a much higher death rate than females, even in the higher age groups,
once we normalise for the higher % of women of those ages

e.g. in Germany, women are:

63% of 80-89 age group
78% of 90-99
85% 0f 100+

15 million vulnerable people - it's more than even Social Darwinism to claim they are all expendable and "would have died anyway"

Indeed, the interpretation of “underlying conditions” as being “weeks left to live” is appalling and a million miles from the truth.

I looked at the cases though and they are stil coming through around 5k a day so not really any reason for deaths to drop off.
The reason we have more hospital beds is that so many have died.

There is also misunderstanding of stats in calculating years left for the elderly

e.g. if the average age of death from COVID is 80 and the average of death in the country is 81,
that does NOT mean they died only 1 year early:

Someone who reaches age 80 in the UK has an average life expectancy of 10 years for a women, 9 for a man

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandlifeexpectancies/articles/lifeexpectancycalculator/2019-06-07

Few of these people would expect to "die anyway within the next year",
even most of those in the "higher risk" category:

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/new-guidance-lists-overweight-people-17936652

UK govt list of those at increased risk

•	People aged 70 or older (regardless of medical conditions)
•	Those under 70 with an underlying health condition listed below (ie anyone instructed to get a flu jab as an adult each year on medical grounds) chronic (long-term) respiratory diseases, such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema or bronchitis
•	chronic heart disease, such as heart failure
•	chronic kidney disease
•	chronic liver disease, such as hepatitis
•	chronic neurological conditions, such as Parkinson’s disease, motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis (MS), a learning disability or cerebral palsy diabetes
•	problems with your spleen – for example, sickle cell disease or if you have had your spleen removed
•	a weakened immune system as the result of conditions such as HIV and AIDS, or medicines such as steroid tablets or chemotherapy
•	being seriously overweight (a BMI of 40 or above)
•	those who are pregnant

even higher risk
• People who have received an organ transplant and remain on ongoing immunosuppression medication
• People with cancer who are undergoing active chemotherapy or radiotherapy
• People with cancers of the blood or bone marrow such as leukaemia who are at any stage of treatment
• People with severe chest conditions such as cystic fibrosis or severe asthma (requiring hospital admissions or courses of steroid tablets)
• People with severe diseases of body systems, such as severe kidney disease (dialysis)

The final list is not complete, because these are examples, not the complete list, of those who "may be at particular risk due to complex health problems", to quote the guidelines.

In particular, those who have to take medication that surpresses the immune system for any condition (not just those who have had an organ transplant) have, IME of those being shielded that I know, been included

Nice bit of anecdata for you.

I'm on the shielded list & in my mid-forties.

Prior to this I had a normal life. Working, parenting, socialising, exercising.

I was not going to die in the next year anyway.

Sorry - back to data - but even referencing that view makes my eye start to twitch.

Keepdistance,

I think the positive tests are staying high as we are doing more testing of healthier people (mainly NHS workers).

Unless you believe the lockdown has failed (which I don’t), there will now be fewer cases in the community.