Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 7

981 replies

Barracker · 28/04/2020 12:53

Welcome to thread 7 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.Flowers

OP posts:
Thread gallery
127
BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 10:24

Fundamental modelling rule:

Without sufficient reasonably accurate data, models are no more accurate than back of the envelope calculations
by experts in the field that is being modelled.

That's why Whitty, as CMO, calculating the "reasonable worst case" (80% x 67 million x max 1%)
would have been the one driving policy, not modellers (unless the government are complete fools)

whatsnext2 · 07/05/2020 10:37

On the subject of widening the testing, I do the covid tracker app and last week put down i had a tight chest (hay fever) but no other symptoms and the next day got an email requesting that I go for testing from them, and saying I needed to put myself as an ‘essential worker’ when booking myself in on the website. I didn’t do it- partly because I couldn’t be bothered with the 3 hours round trip but also because I didn’t want to add to proper ‘essential workers’ queuing time.

NewAccountForCorona · 07/05/2020 10:40

The mean age of those dying in Ireland is 82 (median is 84).

The median age of those who have tested positive is 49 (age range 0-106). hpse report

As the attached figure shows, from the age of 25 up, similar percentages of people are becoming infected. The over 65s is a wider range so looks higher - as an aside, I think they should be dividing figures up into 65-75 and 75 plus, if not more divisions Hmm

Under 25s may not be showing as many positives as they are more likely to be asymptomatic, and so won' t be tested, presumably.

Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 7
NewAccountForCorona · 07/05/2020 10:43

In fact, considering that they are concentrating testing in care homes and testing of older people in general, I'm surprised the percentage of positives isn't much higher in the over 65s.

cathyandclare · 07/05/2020 10:47

Whatsnext I think the testing on the app is so that the researchers get a clearer evidence-based view on which early symptoms indicate CV.

I was called in with a sore throat and went ( only 20 minutes for me, so much less hassle) because it could help with tracking and tracing and allocating testing.

The centre was quiet and well-organised. It appeared that supply was outstripping demand.

sleepwhenidie · 07/05/2020 10:52

I have a question about one of the graphs shown at the briefing yesterday (or might have been Tuesday)... it was an orange and blue graph and showed tests on patients in hospital, split between those testing positive on admission and those who were already inpatients. The tests on patients already in hospital was greater and increasing. It looked to me that this showed hospital to facilitate massive transmission, which isn’t surprising but am I understanding it correctly, that the patients already admitted were there for reasons other than covid but tested positive after admission? I still don’t really get whether all patients being admitted are tested or only those where cv is suspected. And what about longer term patients? Are they gradually testing all of them? Anyone know?

Sunshinegirl82 · 07/05/2020 11:06

My understanding is that all patients admitted to hospital are now tested regardless of whether they have symptoms or their reason for admission.

ShootsFruitAndLeaves · 07/05/2020 11:12

@NewAccountForCorona I don't think that raw counts of positive tests are useful really. % positive are more likely to be useful, but only if the testing is RANDOM

sleepwhenidie · 07/05/2020 11:46

sunshinegirl so would it be correct to say that the ‘inpatients recently diagnosed with covid’ contracted the virus whilst in hospital? (though presumably some may have asymptomatically had it at the time of admission for a different condition and not been tested then). If that’s the case it would be interesting to see those figures as a percentage of ‘non covid’ inpatients overall?

peridito · 07/05/2020 12:23

Does anyone know if there is any data re the sentinel testing that took place earlier on in a number (was it a 100 ?) GP surgeries ?

Though it wasn't random if I recall ,but of people with respiratory symptoms . I think I read that there was (supposedly ?) problems with the way some samples were packed and that this invalidated them .

ShootsFruitAndLeaves · 07/05/2020 14:12

So PHE has some money to spend on researching how Covid-19 affects people of all genders (this is code for 'men', for people that work in la-la land), and also BME.

See here

twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1257332511912460290

www.gov.uk/government/news/review-into-factors-impacting-health-outcomes-from-covid-19

and here

www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/highlight-notice-covid-19-and-ethnicity/24657

I am slightly perplexed at this because:

  • in fact ethnic minority populations are less likely to die of covid-19 because they have the advantage of being younger, which is very important
  • it's clear in general that poor, urban areas, which are disproportionately BME (but still mostly white) are hit harder than richer and rural areas (which are disproportionately white), but this largely implies a correlation between poverty and worse healthcare outcomes, and doesn't particularly speak to an ethnic issue.

In particular, Indian (much more likely), Chinese (marginally) and white Other (ditto), Asian other (ditto) are more likely to be in £1k/week+ income group than white British people. In addition, 30% of white British earned less than £400/week, which is more than all individual Asian groups, and only black was worse off.

When I investigated this a week or so ago, I found clear evidence for black people being overrepresented in deaths, but not for Asians. Given that black people are the poorest group, this is not inherently surprising.

What I don't quite understand is why one would jump directly to the 'race' angle rather than more obvious poverty. It is not obviously helpful to poor white people dying of covid-19 to be told that the whole population of whites are less likely to die than the whole population of blacks.

Regarding how one would produce this evidence, I would note:

  1. the NHS dataset is truncated, as I mentioned previously
  2. very few very old people are of BME backgrounds. These people will die at home or in care homes of covid-induced 'old age'without covid-19 testing. This is seen in the thousands of excess deaths
  3. we do not have ethnic data on death certificates.
  4. we should.
  5. the NHS dataset is disproportionately young and therefore disproportionately BME. It is less than half of total excess deaths.
  6. We know the ethnicity of around 40% of deaths (90% of the 45% of deaths in the NHS). We therefore do not know the other 60%.
  7. Given that we do not know the other 60% we can't very easily study the ethnicity of the whole.
  8. We can probably examine care home deaths by local authority, and then compare the BMEness of those local authorities with the country as a whole.
  9. If there is little difference, it's probably reasonable to assume that the care home deaths are 97% white, as care home deaths are generally.
10. We should not use 'covid-19 deaths' as our count of care home deaths, because that would be nonsense, as clearly they are not held to the same standard of testing as NHS deaths. 11. We must count EXCESS deaths. 12. We therefore probably conclude that the tens of thousands of excess deaths are 97% white. 13. We then have the issue of counting the deaths at home. This is a bit difficult in that if we believe that certain BME groups are more likely to care for their elderly relatives and less likely to put them in homes, it follows that relatively more elderly BME people will die at home and relatively fewer in hospital, albeit relative to the already small number of very old BME people. 14. We come back to the problem that if we assume that the care home deaths are 97% white, then if the elderly population is less white than that, then it would follow that the 'at home' deaths are less white than the elderly population as a whole. 15. If we therefore chuck out what we did in #12, and say that people are dying in home and in care homes in proportion to the ethnicity and age profiles of those areas, then we will have: * 40% known deaths in NHS hospitals, essentially all the deaths up to 60, with most 80+ excluded, which we may decide to divide by 0.9 and assume the 'unknown' 10% are of the same characteristics (which doesn't necessarily follow, if 'unknown' varies by area, and ethnicity data is less likely to be collected in very white areas), to give us 45% * 55% which we are simply assuming died in proportion to the underlying population, because we are finding it difficult to work out the ethnicity of the home/care home deaths - which might not be accurate. 16. The problem with this is that it's likely that our hypothetical extended ethnic family granny has a significantly lower risk of covid-19 death than a hypothetical white granny in a care home in the same area.

The alternative, I would suggest, is:

  1. find the number of deaths by age and sex, aged under 60 (to exclude the large excess aka 'unlabelled' deaths in older groups, though there are already some between 50 and 60), and derive a risk function for each age 0 to 60 (i.e. a single number for aged 40, male, 35, female, etc.), so that you have for example 6% of deaths were males aged 60 dying, 5.8% males aged 59, etc.
  1. find the number of deaths under 60 by locality (the ONS publish these data for all ages, but we'd need a dataset for age up to 60).
  1. Find the population of each age, sex and ethnicity in the same local authority (this is published), as a % of the total population aged 60. E.g., if 5% of people aged under 60 in a LA are white males age 60, and there were 100 deaths in that LA, then we'd expect 5% 6% 100 = 0.3 deaths in that LA to be of white males aged 60. Equally we'd expect (as our null hypothesis), that if 5% of the population was Indian males aged 60, the same 0.3 deaths
  1. Sum this by ethnicity for all LAs and ages, and you will get a total of deaths that is identical to the number of deaths for the population across each ethnicity, and which you can compare to the NHS dataset by ethnicity, so that for example if the NHS dataset shows 200 black people dying, but your model shows only 100 black people should have died based on age + location, then there's 2x more deaths than expected.
BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 14:30

"how Covid-19 affects people of all genders"

"Gender" has no effect

I wish organisations would stop being so nloody coy about using the word "sex"
SEX, SEX, SEX
< drinks cold water >

BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 14:35

Yes, it is esssential when comparing risks between ethnic groups to compare people of the same sex and age group

Then we need to weight for income, but imo this could be a global weighting over the whole age range of each ethnic group

ShootsFruitAndLeaves · 07/05/2020 14:37

It is quite batshit. Men are twice as likely to die, presumably because of male genetics (Y chromosome, hormones, whatever), This is a binary thing affecting half the population. It's huge and absolute and not going to go away when you adjust for poverty, as the relative risk for black people might well do. It's absolute and grounded in biology.

Why mix biology with sociology?

ShootsFruitAndLeaves · 07/05/2020 14:47

Yes, it is esssential when comparing risks between ethnic groups to compare people of the same sex and age group

This is generally done - ethnic minorities in aggregate are less likely to die because they are much less likely to be old, so only by adjusting this out (which is quite easily done), can you compare.

The problem is that e.g. the IFS study I links to above assumes that risk is associated with the number of positive tests, which to me is nonsense. I am reminded of the description of London in the early 20th century as resembling an open-air cathedral, where people were arrested for minor offences such as drunkenness, wanton and furious cycling and so on. In such a context, you may have the same number of crimes detected as today, but it doesn't follow that they are of the same type. It's vanishingly improbable that in an area where 20% of the population of is infected, you will have 20x the number of positive tests as somewhere where 1% are infected. Clearly there would not be sufficient resources in the former to test everyone, and you would only test those who were very ill.

There is a problem with relating death risk to the area as a whole in that the area as a whole already includes the (supposed) higher risk (ethnic) population. However this is far from insurmountable, in that you can feed your results back into your model, such that if a group is found to have 2x the risk of death and another group 1/2 the risk of death, then you can adjust the population by that, to fine-tune your estimates.

And it would be fine-tuning in that in most places, most people are white.

BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 16:17

Contingency plans to slam on the lockdown brakes again ..... dependent on reliable mass testing

Germany will allow all shops, restaurants, hotels to open shortly, with social distancing

The 16 German states agreed with Merkel to draw up a plan
to reimpose measures for any administrative district
(these average 200,000 pop)
that reports 50 new cases per 100,000 inhabitants within a week.

Those restrictions could also be applied just to a single facility such as a nursing home.

The aim is to avoid reimposing a shutdown nationwide

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/05/06/business/bc-eu-virus-outbreak-germany.html

Puzzledandpissedoff · 07/05/2020 16:36

I like the sound of that, BigChoc - sensible measures to control any flare-ups but without burning down the whole darned forest

BTW does anyone know why the daily UK figures are so late? It was the same yesterday and although I'm probably being silly it always makes me twitch

BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 16:39

Russia had 11,231 new cases yesterday
Looks bleak.

I'm very dubious about only 1,625 COVID deaths from over 177k cases

  • with Putin in charge Probably a chaotic kleptocracy can't / won't register most of the COVID deaths

.... not helped by the spate of Russian doctors falling out of windows after posting concerns about COVID patients

Russian health service is not particularly good

and the country has major health problems

  • high alcoholism,
v lowlife expectancy for Europe, only 65 for men, 76 for women

Huge geographical area, but also several large cities and severe poverty & inequalty
So I'd expect a much higher than average IFR, unless there is some climate / ethnic / other peculiarity

BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 16:57

puzzled Some calculations:

If the UK averages nearly 6,000 cases daily, say 40,000 per week ==> about 60 per 100,000
So the UK as a whole is currently over Merkel's limit to shutdown again

imo, the UK needs to get well below 3,000 for a week before thinking about opening more shops or restaurants,
or meeting more people outside the household.

atm, it looks OK to relax measures for outside, since these seem v low risk

So e.g. remove limits on sunbathing, household picnics, outdoor exercise, driving for exercise, etc
so long as social distancing is maintained

BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 16:58

That's well below 3,000 daily for a week

OrangeBlossomsinthesun · 07/05/2020 17:07

Does the UK have 6000 daily cases? Wow. In Spain there are about 850 I think (I'm not sure, not been keeping in the last day or two) and we still have a much stricter lockdown than the Uk, even with some recent loosening. Blimey.

BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 17:25

Average new cases has been around 5k, but looks to have increased to nearly 6k the last few days with the recently increased testing

Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 7
BigChocFrenzy · 07/05/2020 17:29

Spain looks roughly 3,000 new cases daily
Does look to be decreasing more quickly than the UK cases, but difficult to tell with UK testing

Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 7
OrangeBlossomsinthesun · 07/05/2020 18:07

Sorry, I got mixed up with rise in cases and number of cases.