Risk of infection is probably higher now than at the start of lockdown?

[SeenBaun]

Seen a couple of threads about this on twitter. Obviously we don't have any reliable data about how many actual positive CV cases there are in the UK population versus before lockdown (rather than just those who have formally been tested positive) but it's bound to be higher now than on 23 March when the official number of active cases was around 6000. It's now around 190,000 and still rising daily.

So even if we assume there were 20 (just a number I've plucked out of the air)x 6000 cases at the start of lockdown there are still almost definitely more now, right? and each case is a risk of infection to the non-infected. The only way this isn't true is if lack of testing in March accounts for the difference between 6k and 190k. which seems a stretch.

Informally I've heard that numbers of new cases are rising again.

I do feel despair at the lockdown being perceived as having lifted and at the lack of strategy in testing and isolating.

Sorry if I'm covering ground that's been discussed here already, I don't go on here much and find it a bit overwhelming!

[IrenetheQuaint]

Totally agree, @nellodee - it's infuriating.

[Artesia]

*even if we assume there were 20 (just a number I've plucked out of the air)x 6000 cases at the start of lockdown there are still almost definitely more now, right? and each case is a risk of infection to the non-infected

Why not just pluck a bigger number out of thin air, then it will all look much better?

[feelingverylazytoday]

Surely now we need to start testing increasing numbers of symptomatic people
What if there aren't any? Are people supposed to invent symptoms just to meet targets?

[cathyandclare]

If there aren't any, that's great they don't need to hit the numbers- but they should build up to allowing anyone with symptoms to get a test.

[SeenBaun]

Agreed nellodee

[Bluntness100]

I’d love to know the progress of rhe trials for a cure, and how many people in hospital are receiving this. The last time they spoke about it it was about a thousand each in two trials, I think there is more going on than just two though

The graphs clearly show nearly as many people are now dying in care homes as in hospitals. The deaths in hospitals is dropping drastically. There is too much noise in the numbers to realistically draw any conclusions, as the death data is not all people who died the previous day, irs over a number of weeks due to post mortems, testing, notifying the family etc, so we can’t really see it.

As such it doesn’t directly correlate in terms of treatments admissions deaths etc. Even totals don’t work as you any successful treatments you can’t see when or if they made an impact and started to reduce rhe deaths.

However it will be people in hospitals who are under the clinical trials.not those in care homes I think. And initial results of those trials will be apparent to them. It must have been at least a month now

[Bluntness100]

If there aren't any, that's great they don't need to hit the numbers- but they should build up to allowing anyone with symptoms to get a test

Isn’t it about 15-20 percent of people who are tested have it? So it’s 80 odd percent who don’t. And earlier we only tested people with symptoms and were in hospital because of it .,,so the symptoms they but had were other respiratory illnesses Ie pneumonia,,flu etc that required hospitalisation. Not Covid.

[YeOldeTrout]

I am far from convinced that worldometer is reliable source. I mean, they try hard, but the data are difficult.

I get impression that community transmission is very low, but institutional & some workplace transmission is high. Institutions = some care homes.

[Sunshinegirl82]

Last I heard there were around 9000 patients taking part in the RECOVERY trial and they were aiming to continue recruiting 1000 patients a week.

[SeenBaun]

I am far from convinced that worldometer is reliable source. I mean, they try hard, but the data are difficult.

Yes, at the start of all this I started looking at it as it had the daily numbers earlier than other websites and have sort of stuck with it but not had the time to analyse the other available data sources. I'm not really able to watch the daily govt briefings; I prefer to have the datasets to look at myself anyway but have got left behind as due to this sodding outbreak I have no free time or head space to do anything properly!

[Bluntness100]

Sunshine girl thank you. That’s a big number. I’d love to know what level of success it’s having. It’s clearly having some, witty and valance were too optimistic last night a cure or vaccine would be found soon. They just aren’t talking yet.

[JimMaxwellantheshippingforcast]

There are studies which show the infection fatality rate (not the same as case fatality rate) is as low as 0.2%.

If this is the case almost 25% of the UK population has had it

[How2Help]

However it will be people in hospitals who are under the clinical trials.not those in care homes I think. And initial results of those trials will be apparent to them. It must have been at least a month now

I know of trials in primary care settings, so patients in the community under GPs. I believe the RECOVERY trial has initial data but I can’t remember if someone just told me the results or if I read published ones.

[Keepdistance]

Join zoe say 1% infected i think.

Problem with hospitalization is

• if you have millions of infected and infectious kids you wont know until they pass it on to older people.
  

Maybe you need to look at the hospitalisations in an age group.
So 20-40yo. As they are out working.

Basically with flights and travel round england you cannot assume anyone doesnt have it even in an area with supposed no cases.

I imagine london will keep having flares up due to flights and oublic transport.

[TheCountessofFitzdotterel]

'having flares up due to flights and oublic transport.'

It might, or it might turn out the susceptible people have already been infected.
We'll know pretty soon...

[feelingverylazytoday]

We'll know pretty soon ...
This is the really interesting phase, imo.
Good news from the care home sector, it looks like they have peaked as well, thankfully www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52631604

[Xenia]

Are we sure the tests at accurate? i think some people have negative tests who are positive etc and the disease seems to wax and wane over a long period for some. one nurse had 3 negatives and only when in hospital with a chest scan was it clear she had it and eventually the 4th scan came back positive. Also we don't know how long people are infectious nor if you can get the same again or a different strain the month after or 6 months after although you would expect the Chinese would know these things by now.

[jcyclops]

If 6,000 were infected and "R" was 3.0 then 234,000 new cases would be expected in 3 cycles.
If 190,000 are now infected and "R" is down to 0.7 then 291,270 new cases would be expected in 3 cycles.
So it is definitely reasonable to think the risk of infection is higher now than at the start of lockdown, but of course, we don't have really accurate figures for number of cases or "R".

[Sunshinegirl82]

If R is below 1 numbers will drop not increase.

[TheCountessofFitzdotterel]

I think it comes back to the fact that cases don't last forever, people recover!

[CloudsCanLookLikeSheep]

If 190,000 are now infected and "R" is down to 0.7 then 291,270 new cases would be expected in 3 cycles.

No, when R goes below 1 the number of new cases will decrease.

[jcyclops]

If 190,000 are now infected and "R" is down to 0.7 then 291,270 new cases would be expected in 3 cycles.
The number of NEW cases is dropping but:

At R=0.7
The 190,000 infect 0.7x190,000 = 133,000
These 133,000 infect 0.7x133,000 = 93,100
These 93,100 infect 0.7x93,100 = 65,170
Total new cases in 3 cycles = 133,000+93,100+65,170=291,270

[effingterrified]

Yes, OP, and this is why there's going to be a big second wave soon, making Dominic Cummings very happy.

[TheCountessofFitzdotterel]

But there aren't 190k infectious people. That's the number who have tested positive at some point and are still alive, not the number who will spread it this cycle.

[Sunshinegirl82]

But by the time the second and third groups develop symptoms and go on to infect others the majority of the original group of infections will have recovered.

My understanding is that when calculating the number of active infections you wouldn’t add the numbers together at the end. Patrick Valance said the “halving time” for infections is about 2 weeks at the moment.