Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 10

[BigChocFrenzy]

Welcome to thread 10 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

We welcome factual, data driven, and civil discussions from all contributors 💐

I didn't follow the thread much yesterday, has the bbc one been linked?

@Cherryghost

General slow downward trend but last couple of days have been higher. As each day’s reported results relate to tests carried out over the past fortnight or so, comparing daily can lead to false conclusions... best look over a 7 day period. Page 1 of the thread provide pages where you can peruse details.

www.bbc.com/news/health-53021942

A rolling 7-day average smooths out blips and lets us see trends

I was about to ask about the regional figures too, so thanks for clarifying!

So the regional figures spreadsheet shows all Pillar 1 confirmed cases - that is, those with symptoms, including key workers. Whereas Pillar 2 is mass surveillance testing of key workers, and therefore confirmed Pillar 2 cases are presumably much more likely to be asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic (as are those tested randomly by the ONS).

Say if I'm wrong - I have simplified slightly to get the situation straight in my mind.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/878121/coronavirus-covid-19-testing-strategy.pdf

@BigChocFrenzy

"healthy woman"

We should give total figures for women or men in each age group, not just the "healthy"

If the intention of lower figures is to coax people back to work .... the vast majority of working age with underlying conditions will have to continue working
and they mostly have decades of life expectancy

(and of course women in that age group may be pregnant, which counts as "vulnerable" too)

I think the article does, unless I’m misunderstanding it.

Not sure there is an agenda to coax people back to work either in the article.

[quote IrenetheQuaint]I was about to ask about the regional figures too, so thanks for clarifying!

So the regional figures spreadsheet shows all Pillar 1 confirmed cases - that is, those with symptoms, including key workers. Whereas Pillar 2 is mass surveillance testing of key workers, and therefore confirmed Pillar 2 cases are presumably much more likely to be asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic (as are those tested randomly by the ONS).

Say if I'm wrong - I have simplified slightly to get the situation straight in my mind.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/878121/coronavirus-covid-19-testing-strategy.pdf[/quote]
That's not quite how I understood it. Pillar 1 are tests processed by nhs/phe and includes people in hospital and critical keyworkers tested as part of their job (so hospital staff, potentially care home staff and residents). Pillar 2 are tests processed by commercial labs and mainly covers the test centres the general public access if they have symptoms (as anyone with symptoms can get tested now) and posted tests I think. Some keyworkers will be covered here. Pillar 3 is antibody testing and pillar 4 is the ons surveillance testing (so will catch some asymptomatic people). Conversely I think the majority of deaths come from pillar 1 tests (as the sickest people will be tested under this scheme) with fewer from pillar 2

Approx 2/3 of our positive tests are pillar 2 with the majority of remaining being pillar 1 (pillar 4 postives only consists of a handful cases).

Sorry my sentences got jumbled at the end there. I think the scope of pillar 2 testing has changed significantly since that document was published Irene, it largely covers symptomatic members of the public.

Whatsnext I don't see the need for the frequent references on so many threads to risks just for "healthy" younger people

There are about 15 million of the vulnerable due to health conditions, obesity etc
as well as 2 million shielded
They mostly have decades of life expectancy and all need to be considered

Age is absolutely dominant anyway, so it makes far more sense to refer to age group risks

Risk of dying from COVID, if infected, increases at 11–12% each year

==> risk doubles every 6–7 years
==> risk multiplies x ~ 8 every 20 years

==> a 50-year-old has ~ 8 x the risk of a 30-year-old

Very rarely would any combination of health conditions in a youngish person increase risk x 8
Shielding status needs to better reflect domination of age as risk factor

==> an 80-year-old has x ~ 500 times the risk of dying as a 20-year-old

A man has ~ 2 x the risk compared with a woman of the same age.

v v few teachers aged under 45 face the same risk as a 60-year teacher
imo,
early retirement at 60 should be enabled & encouraged in all WOH jobs,
with UBI for those without pension schemes that allow this

• would be more attractive for those on NMW, but they average worse health too

Whatever measures are brought back to reopen schools ft
e.g. increase the number of teachers
==> bringing back retired (>55 yr-old) teachers doesn't look wise.

Early retirement has been very pushed back on in schools, although many still do it.

There is no way anything like a significant number of ex teachers will flood back. There is a reason for the ex!

Add to this the significant number of current teachers who have re evaluated their lives over the last couple of months and are planning exit strategies.

If nothing else all of this should be highlighting huge issues in retention.

@BigChocFrenzy

Whatsnext I don't see the need for the frequent references on so many threads to risks just for "healthy" younger people

You’ve lost me. On searching I see one other thread on this that I wasn’t aware of.

There are the same few posters who have repeatedly posted about the numbers / risks for "healthy" people.
They don't start threads on it

Possibly it's because being in a minority already, my radar is tuned to repeated othering

latest figures - 1514 positive tests

pbs.twimg.com/media/EaeXvMVWAAEPEbF?format=jpg&name=small

Only 1% of tests were positive

• but I wish we could see how many people were tested / how many tests per person

Is that 1514 positive tests or new cases? The info I can't see seems confused.

If it's new cases it's rather worrying as it appears to be flatlining rather than falling in the last week or so. If it's tests it could reflect people being retested for some reason.

Have people read this, useful article on 1m vs 2m, how the length of time you spend near someone is as important as the proximity, etc:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-52522460

The daily positive tests seem to be stuck at around 1500 a day, don't they?

Thanks for the clarification on the pillars, @Littlebelina - really helpful. I don't quite understand why the Pillar 2 confirmed cases can't be included on the spreadsheet...

The test and trace was introduced just over two weeks ago and everyone with symptoms was instructed to get a test. I would imagine that we might therefore be capturing more of the infected people now (which is good).

The positive results coming through now could have been taken at any point over the last two weeks as it takes a while for the results to be announced.

The difficulty with comparing the Positive test data is that there have been lots of changes to the eligibility and approach with testing so it’s very hard to compare like with like now.

Zoe app and the ONS survey both indicate the number of cases in the community are decreasing. I think the daily positive test data on its own isn’t hugely meaningful to be honest.

daily positive test were declining nicely, they have stopped declining (7 day rolling average went up marginally). It's not necessarily a problem if they are mild cases who dont need hospital care, just illustrates why care is still needed.

Zoe ap and ONS data are, I think, still from the period when tests were declining, the question is whether they show the same figures when they cover this last week.

Brazil is an anomaly:
median age only 31, but deaths / million more like a typical Western country with an aging population
The main cause is atrocious leadership by Bolsonaro

Neighbouring Peru also has high deaths, but they are suffering from a simultaneous outbreak of Dengue Fever and their health service can't cope with 2 major epidemics at once (very few countries could)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/14/brazil-coronavirus-spanish-flu

As the catastrophe deepens there is growing anger at the conduct of president Jair Bolsonaro, whose jumbled and dysfunctional handling of a pandemic he has called a “fantasy” has made Boris Johnson’s widely panned responsee^ look sober and efficient.

@alreadytaken but we don’t know when the tests reported today were actually taken. We also don’t know if the number of infected people are increasing or if we are just capturing more people due to the change in testing requirements and test and trace. The daily figures on all data is fairly meaningless.