Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 7

[Barracker]

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.

@indistinct

Is it anything to do with under what date the numbers are recorded? Date of specimen v date of result perhaps?

hopeful your graph made me think about my friend who is a dr. Shes been tested by the nhs and also as part of a research study.

I wonder if the figures recognise when someone is in both groups.

@Sunshinegirl82 I'm sure that's it, the graph is showing 'by specimen date', whereas the daily reports will be positive tests that have reported since yesterday, where of course the specimen itself may be any age.

@Sunshinegirl82 I don’t think so. Think both of the 4,649 and ~1,700 figures are newly reported cases for yesterday rega

After yesterday, the cases in two weeks time will be horrendous. Our hospital is filling the beds we emptied with surgeries now so the crisis we anticipated but didn’t come, really will come soon and it will be horrendous. We have 600 staff off sick in our Trust so lack of staff and beds will see a terrible situation develop very soon

Sorry for half finished message ... but I’d noted the specimen date point and assumed that the “newly reported” colouring regardless of specimen date would mean that the figure was included in the UK total cases for the day. To be honest, this is just 1 of many questions about discrepancies between data sets and reports but it just seemed so glaring as it was from the same source on the same webpage.

The c-19 app is working with PHE to investigate the protective effect of hormones such as oestrogen covid.joinzoe.com/post/oestrogen-covid

@cloud1183 - yes!

There's some horrible threads on MN, with posters moaning about "empty hospitals" and "staff doing nothing" and "only covid work is going on" - I can't even face replying to them.

Testing benchmark:

edition.cnn.com/2020/04/25/world/georgia-us-germany-coronavirus-lockdown-ger-intl/index.html

While it's useful to look at how widely a country is testing per capita,
the WHO says there is a better benchmark to measure whether a country is testing adequately.

Dr. Mike Ryan, Executive Director of the WHO's Health Emergencies Programs, said recently that

a good benchmark is to have at least 10 negative cases for every one positive case confirmed.

The UK is now testing well in excess of 10 people per positive case. Although were clearly nowhere near at the peak.

I hadn’t realised until I stumbled across this that cases were being presented at lower-tier LA level.

A couple of things surprised me:

1. London’s cases per head of population is very similar to much of the rest of the country. I had presumed they would be noticeably higher, especially the inner boroughs;

2. There is remarkable homogeneity across the country, totally unlike Italy. The great majority have been 100 and 400 cases per 100,000; whereas there are a few with lower numbers - notably but not exclusively the West Country - nowhere has had negligible numbers. Also, the worst affected places are not massively above 400, with only one, Barrow, above 600;

3. The far north of England is worst affected. I had known Cumbria had been badly affected, but not that this area was worse than the major conurbations. As mentioned above, Barrow stands out with more than 800 per 100,000... Lancaster, South Lakeland, Gateshead and Sunderland are other fat northern districts whose numbers stand out. In other areas Ashfield (Derbyshire) and Kings Lynn (Norfolk) have particularly high numbers.

coronavirus.data.gov.uk/region#category=ltlas&map=rate

I would want to see numbers being tested/% positive, recency, and criteria for testing before making much use of those numbers.

I would want to see numbers being tested/% positive, recency, and criteria for testing before making much use of those numbers.

Absolutely... The UK’s % will have plummeted over the past few days as more testing has been rolled out (albeit that we’ve struggled to hit the 100,000 target)... doesn’t mean the situation’s
dramatically improved.

But if they were effectively contact tracing they would be getting more hits per test.
As in test all the other kids if it's in a school.

If we assume actually 20k new infected a day we are leaving a lot of people wandering around infecting others..

If i were gov ibmight let it continue this slow burn (ie schools closed) and people wfh so most people infected are those choosibg to take their chances hopefully the younger ones.

I would use up the r0 getting more shops open (with ppe and spacing).
Nothing else brings half a town into connection like a school.

Ive not watched the conferences but feel there has been too much focus on the handwashing as with schools people seem to be focused on that as the risk (which it is ) but the main risk is being in the same enclosed room (even distanced). And the link showing about it going in the air when toilets flushed. We have 2toilets per 60 kids.

Also re the study on the boy who managed not to infect anyone. I read about coronavirus nl 63 which also uses ace2. And

• Ivg helped as a treatment
• People often had coinfection and in those cases the viral load was less (just like that boy...). Children more likely to have abother infection. But obviously that means results for how infectious they are would differ.
• It is also thought to cause kawasaki
• Kawasaki usually under 5 but obviously with normal coronaviruses most kids will have been exposed before 5yo.

There was a study on hospitals in China, whuch found that the highest amount of virus was in the toilets

Faecal transfer of virus is reportedly possible and may be a more significant risk than realised in hospitals, schools, supermarkets

UK flu comparisons

There seem to be 2 different annual deaths quoted for flu in the UK:
either 600 or 20,000 - 30,000

That made me suspect that 600 might be the average picked up by ONS as registered CODs,
but that maths modelling might be used to estimate hidden total flu deaths of 20-30k,
using parameters such as total deaths over the flu period and doctors visits

Question:
==> Does anyone have a reference about how the UK estimates annual flu deaths, or even a statement that it does so and that 600 or whatever are the actual registered flu deaths ?

I found that this for the USA:

How CDC Estimates the Burden of Seasonal Influenza in the U.S.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/how-cdc-estimates.htm

CDC uses a mathematical model to estimate the numbers of influenza illnesses, medical visits, hospitalizations, and deaths in the United States,(1-4)
as well as, the impact of influenza vaccination on these numbers.

The methods used to calculate the burden of influenza have been described previously (1-2).

More recently, the same model was adopted to estimate influenza-associated deaths in the United States.

This methodology has been used to retroactively calculate influenza burden, including deaths, going back to 2010

I don’t know if this gives any of the answers?

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/839350/Surveillance_of_influenza_and_other_respiratory_viruses_in_the_UK_2018_to_2019-FINAL.pdf

Well i guess limiting schools to 10 kids a class wold reduce
Q for toilets
And they could stagger them so 5min apart.
Toilets that shut the lid as you flush might be a good design?

Surely though highest risk in the air but once its finshec flushing its all round the toilet room.
I cant see all kids hand washing after the loo let alone their whole hand 20s.
If half days they could possinly shut most toilets (impracticle)
I remember my mum saying about self cleaning loos in park areas

I think what a lot of people are missing is that as an adult you can reduce risks
Step back from people
Hand sanitise
Wear masks
Avoid people coughing
Wash hands
Change clothes when you get home
Not pick your nose /touch face or eyes
Wear goggles
Not touch objects /doorhandles
Not use the toilets

The chances of a child being able to be infected is equal to an adult.
The inability to do the above means they are much more likely to getit in a world whereadults are being careful.
I think they showed larger families more at risk as more people to be shedding at once.

Sorry, probably more helpful if I tag you! @BigChocFrenzy

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/839350/Surveillance_of_influenza_and_other_respiratory_viruses_in_the_UK_2018_to_2019-FINAL.pdf

Many thanks, Sunshine 🍫
I think that answers my questions

For England:
Page 24 lists deaths as a few hundred annually over the last few years
and then
Page 51 lists estimated deaths for those samyears as up to nearly 30,000 via the FLUMOMO^ algorithm

Could slaughterhouses also have a higher risk of COVID infections ?

This has been an issue in the USA, with Trump making an emergency federal order that they must be kept open
Earlier reports of infections in some European plants too

Then yesterday in Germany, infections centered at 2 plants have activated Merkel's agreed lockdown criteria, for those 2 towns:
they exceeded 50 new cases / 100,000 pop within a week.

All workers in slaughterhouses throughout those 2 states are to be tested, probably to be extended

There was also a spike in 6 care homes and a geriatric hospital which exceeded the limit

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8301469/German-towns-bring-lockdown-coronavirus-spike.html

We need a clone of Merkel over here she is so sensible .
Here we had a person on school thread saying similar to oh well we had cases of ill care home sta ff but obviously everyone had to still come in, we couldnt do anything...
We are just not pinching off the supply of infection.
Once we open up again if every person infects 3 others again n did someone say tha t person has infected 300?
Anyway re the meat -interesting as i did wonder wh y everywhere says cook meat thoroughly..

Also think generally public arent really thinking about how well cv survives on their frozen food in the fre ezer. Annoyingly i never cleaned our frozen food so it's all contaminated s o obviously have to wash hands after getting stuff out.

Maybe redesigning restauants to being booths partitioned off. But think eu probably has more outside seating than uk. Hopefully beer gardens with marquee etc.

I cant see when swimming pools and soft plays etc will be able to open. Now in some ways thats more a pity than schools as you can home school well but no swimming for a year will be sad.

Bouncy castles and stuff outside you could get kids to use hand sanitizer after but unless you only have one family on at once.

Yes @BigChocFrenzy meat processing facilities v high risk it seems, have you read this:

erinbromage.wixsite.com/covid19/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them

Loads of very useful explanation everyone should know these facts!

Well i guess limiting schools to 10 kids a class wold reduce

DS's school already has 10 kids a class under lockdown conditions.

Very interesting link, strawberryJam

"Any environment that is enclosed, with poor air circulation and high density of people, spells trouble."

.... made me so glad I retired 1 Feb:
R&D openplan Petrie Dish over the entire floor, sealed windows,
for 100 people to brainstorm and then group together over workstations

"We know that you can detect considerable amounts of viral RNA in fecal material, but none in urine.
We don’t have data either way to show whether it is or if it isn’t infectious.
It may just be non-infectious viral fragments (best outcome).
But Until we do know, put the seat down and then flush! Or use avoidance behavior as described. "

.... Aargh ! I'll only use my loo at home until COVID is gone