Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 6

[Barracker]

Welcome to thread 6 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.

Thanks for that explanation Must.

Clare and quarantine that's what I think will happen.

That's really interesting sunshine. But would it still be a yearly booster?

I think it will depend on the outcome of the trials. I wouldn’t be surprised if a booster is necessary but perhaps it wouldn’t need to be as often as annually? Maybe every 5 or 10 years?

The base virus they use for the vaccine had already been developed and was sitting there waiting which is why they were able to move so quickly. It was only the “jacket” that needed to be developed from scratch.

They used the same technology in developing a vaccine for MERS which apparently did well in trials. I’m keeping my fingers firmly crossed.

I think it's also worth bearing in mind that the WHO are not saying that there is evidence that you can be reinfected despite having antibodies. Their point is that we just don't know how long protection lasts for or what level of antibodies is needed for immunity because it's a new disease. They're cautioning against immunity passports rather than saying that antibodies don't give protection.

@Reallybadidea

Yes, as usual that information has been badly reported. People read it and think no immunity is possible which isn’t what they are saying at all.

I know there are now reliable antibody tests in Belgium and Germany. I was trying to find information on progress in the UK and only found a report from the Daily Mail ( I know) about an antibody test from an Oxford group.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8257233/Government-orders-50million-game-changing-immunity-tests.html

Is this just click bait or has anyone else seen antibody testing progress? It seems like ( along with vaccine development) it's one way out of this.

Only time will tell on long term immunity. Isn’t there a lot of speculation that the ‘reinfections’ were more likely false negatives tests? There’s certainly mounting evidence to show that people feel the effects of this virus for much longer than 1-2 weeks, even with mild symptoms. It could be that we often remain infected for quite a long period? Whether we are infectious for all of that time is another question.

Yes Reallybadidea, a v important point, thanks.

Good summary here with links to research on antibodies :
www.wired.com/story/new-covid-19-antibody-study-results-are-in-are-they-right/

I am a current resident of Salford and I would say that your analysis of its population is not quite as accurate these days. There is a significant Somali population in Eccles now and very large influx of younger eastern Europeans. In my flats I tend to assume any new younger white people I meet will be eastern European as many are.
There have always been more middle class areas around Salford ( at least in the 33 years I have lived here) and anecdotally I feel these are growing and expanding especially since the developments at the Quays. It isn't just the Quays itself that is gentrified.
Of course there are areas that have greater levels of poverty too. There is actually a massive difference between areas that can be right next to each other too.
I would say though that some other areas of Manchester such as Chetham Hill and Moston are much more deprived.
I'm not sure why our figures are so much higher unless all those dying at Salford Royal ( which I can see from my window as I type - it feels very strange to think what must be going on there as it looks so calm and empty from the outside) are counted as Salford deaths. It is likely that many patients are from outside Salford itself as it is such a major hospital.

Does anyone know if deaths are recorded at the hospital where people die or is their home address referenced? Apologies, I think this might have come up before in the context of maps/boroughs.

I'd be interested to know that too sleepwhenidle

Is this just click bait or has anyone else seen antibody testing progress? It seems like ( along with vaccine development) it's one way out of this.

I think it’s importance is overblown. Imperial have estimated that c.4% have been infected in the UK... When you compare with NY study and our respective level of deaths per population, 4% is consistent with this.

This means it will only “help” relatively few people....even if the figure is more like 10%. And areas in the SW will be stuck as they are probably far lower.

All this will do is fuel the desire for large numbers of people to actively seek to get CV so they get the “immunity pass” which is a perfectly rational, if individualistic, choice for the majority of people who aren’t in a vulnerable group. I can almost guarantee there will be CV parties, with the associated high risk of massive rise in cases that would make a second wave inevitable and quite probably far worse than the first.

There will also doubtless be a black market which would be very difficult to police and undermine the whole thing.

We need to be very careful of the unintended consequences of this.

I think where they die. When my mum died I had to go to the registry office in the area where the hospital was, which wasn't the same as the one she lived in.

derbygerbil agree that immunity passports are a minefield.

That’s interesting timeforachange, means that maps according to borough could be pretty skewed where a big hospital is close to a border....

@whatsnext2

It’s a good article and highlights the caveats that need to be applied and the dangers of over-interpreting.

Key points is that NYC death rate is now at 0.19%

www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page

with the associated antibody test in NY showing an antibody rate of 20%, it indicates that the Santa Clara study is underestimating death rate.

We had the same experience as @mustbetimeforachange

When my dad died he had been transferred to a specialist hospital in London which was around 45 minutes to an hour away from my parents house. We had to register the death at the registry office in London.

"I think it’s importance is overblown. Imperial have estimated that c.4% have been infected in the UK... When you compare with NY study and our respective level of deaths per population, 4% is consistent with this"
The IC based their model on the first case being end of January - it is looking like this is incorrect and there were cases before then. However testing didn't really start until much later. It is the best we have at the moment but we can't take it as gospel. Obviously if the virus was more widespread for longer then the CFR (death rate per infection) will be different, so one can't use that as a backwards proof

@sleepwhenidie

Indeed, especially as antibodies don’t necessarily mean you can’t re-catch it (though I’m thinking that’s probably unlikely to be in significant numbers given how antibodies and viruses tend to operate).

I think there's a lot of cross reactivity in antibody tests so the 20% may not be accurate?

@whatsnext2

I agree, which is why I suggested it could be a fair bit higher (10% figure was just illustrative). Whether it’s 4%, 10% or even 20%, the problems
of immunity certificates remain, especially as the antibodies won’t be evenly spread.

I think there's a lot of cross reactivity in antibody tests so the 20% may not be accurate?

I agree, we can’t place too much store on the 20%. My point was that if NYC already had a death rate of 0.19% (which is still rising quite fast) then even if the antibody test is way out, the Santa Clara model appears to have understated the CV mortality rate.

"whether you focus more resources on a vaccine or medications that relieve symptoms is the crux."

WIth this scale of pendemic costing literally trillions, money is no object

I don't know if the same people would be required to work on either, so qualified staff may be a limiting factor in some places

Countries and institutions are working on both in parallel, working on everything in parallel
We see this with e.g. Bill Gates' Foundation funding work on all possible vaccine lines in parallel, instead of in sequence

"WIth this scale of pandemic costing literally trillions, money is no object"
Money is always important, it is naïve to believe otherwise. There is always a cost/benefit analysis, which is why NICE vetos certain drugs and treatments normally.