Problems with COVID figures

[Northernsoulgirl45]

So the Govt are unable to provide figures for COVID infections today . A cynical person would think it is because the figures are bad.
Thoughts appreciated

@SengaStrawberry

I agree on the zero Covid policy, but that still means living with the risk of the virus. That’s not going to make it disappear.

Nothing will make it disappear.

We need the daily figures. It's the biggest global issue just now, I am hiding the figures from my younger children but as an adult I am entitled to information.

Those who find the news overwhelming need to switch off (I do sometimes) not ask for different news.

@Bombergirl

Ah Carl H, the well know denier of Covid and twister of facts. I know who he is too well. I’ve seen him many times on tv and he’s the only scientist I have no faith in (i trust others who have differing views!)

To 31 July

49,000 Ons

PHE’s was 45,000

Also agree. He published a terrible paper a couple of years ago that I had to review for work. It was in a journal where you can invite your acolytes to do the peer reviews. Strangely, the reviews were all sycophantic and had completely failed to note that his statistical methods were likely to be highly unreliable. The findings were somewhat controversial and ended up all over the news and following on from that, the paper was subsequently been used as evidence in a government report. I think he just enjoys being 'controversial'

Pointless exercise releasing the figures , we will never know the true infection rate or death rate.
Mixture of not enough tests / more tests now and under reporting at the beginning , especially from care homes.

@jasjas1973

AnaadiNitya I am not dismissing that article but it is not peer reviewed, it provides no evidence of your assertions and as far as i can see, no other organisation backs it up, you appear to be claiming that SAGE/Govt have been operating on false data?

Hancock ordered a review 4 weeks ago, plenty of time to have decided that the figures are unreliable, if not enough time to produce correct ones.

Yes you did, you accused me of passing on gossip and you dismissed me with your ‘riiiiiiight’ & ‘lol’

Pathetic.

Real data is not informing Gov policy. Sorry if you can’t get your brain around that.

On the 25th of July at a rolling day average of 677, it was suggested that we would see a 40% decrease if everyone wore masks - which they are! That hasn’t happened either as the rolling day average on the 3rd of August was 820 new cases - when it should have been around 400. You literally can not go in a shop it put petrol in your car with out a mask. Where is the drop the Gov was saying going to happen?

This gov have no idea what they are doing. They are not going to put their hands up and admit to this monumental fuck up are they.

Linking data on confirmed positive cases (identified through testing by NHS and PHE laboratories and commercial partners) to the NHS Demographic Batch Service: when a patient dies, the NHS central register of patients is notified (this is not limited to deaths in hospitals). The list of all lab-confirmed cases is checked against the NHS central register each day, to check if any of the patients have died

This is on the link. It was an excerpt of what was on the PHE explaining how they collected their findings - surprise surprise that page is now closed - due to technical difficulties..

You can’t do local lockdowns to squash local outbreaks without regularly updated case data and you can’t act on that data unless it’s openly published for all to see.

And it helps more vulnerable people make decisions. I’m in London and in my fifties, I’m happy to pop out to the shops frequently, eat outside in a cafe, (all with masks and social distancing where appropriate), maybe have Sunday lunch with the DC in a beer garden. If I were in Oldham I’d think twice about non-essential trips. My DF’s local area has very low numbers but his nearest big town is a whisker away from lockdown - he’s staying well clear, and I’m relieved to know that his cleaner/housekeeper lives in a different big town.

AnaadiNitya Sorry but i wrote 2 out of the 3 things you mention BEFORE you posted that link..... i than read your link and their POV is the only article i can find on rubbishing the PHE figures,
I have never read the PHE website on how data is collected but that excerpt does not say they then use that death (however caused) as part of the daily CV figures but even if they did, seriously how many people who caught and then recovered from CV then go on to die in a car accident weeks later?

So, surely after 4 weeks that review Hancock told us would happen would have some early findings? i suspect there is no review going on at all.

Blaming PHE would be a very convenient scapegoat for quite a few things this Govt has done..or not done, they also don't seem to be above blaming anyone but themselves.

On masks, we agree, there won't be a drop, i believe mask wearing results in a 1% fall in infections, mask wearing just allows less SD in shops, so perhaps more spend?

@jasjas1973

AnaadiNitya Sorry but i wrote 2 out of the 3 things you mention BEFORE you posted that link..... i than read your link and their POV is the only article i can find on rubbishing the PHE figures, I have never read the PHE website on how data is collected but that excerpt does not say they then use that death (however caused) as part of the daily CV figures but even if they did, seriously how many people who caught and then recovered from CV then go on to die in a car accident weeks later?

So, surely after 4 weeks that review Hancock told us would happen would have some early findings? i suspect there is no review going on at all.

Blaming PHE would be a very convenient scapegoat for quite a few things this Govt has done..or not done, they also don't seem to be above blaming anyone but themselves.

On masks, we agree, there won't be a drop, i believe mask wearing results in a 1% fall in infections, mask wearing just allows less SD in shops, so perhaps more spend?

Susan Hopkins, PHE incident director has made a public statement that in England it counts all those who have died who had a positive COVID test at any point in order to ‘ensure the data is complete as possible’

The clue is in ‘at any point’

Out of their own mouths.

Cancer patient deaths
RTA
Any other reason you could have died but had had COVID in the past - the death was/is being recorded as a COVID death. Even if that’s what wasn’t killed you.

I’ll be seriously surprised if any review is done. I think PHE will just fade away in to the background.

Scotland and Northern Ireland only count COVID deaths if they die within 28 days of a positive test. It looks like we will be adopting that method. Using this method will probably drop the death rate by 10% which tbh is more in line with the stats the ONS have been showing for months.

Right, i ve had more of a dig around and you are correct on the PHE so i owe you an apology.
PHE do count the way you suggest, they also do not count anyone who dies from CV-19 but has not had a test, which in the early days of Cv and with few test kits would have a large number.

Given people do die of CV after 28 days, the article i read suggests PHE have overestimated by 2000.

So over estimates in one direction, under in another, as of july 10th, ONS say 48k Cv deaths, PHE 40k deaths (or 38k)

So given this, the way PHE count deaths does not really alter the UK death toll nor explains it very poor response.

The way PHE records figures may not impact significantly on the overall number of deaths recorded (I said the same upthread) but it does mean that the daily figures released are pretty much meaningless when it comes to trying to assess whether number of deaths is trending up or down.

The real number of daily Covid deaths is now likely to be somewhere in the region of around 20 per day assuming the ONS observation that 60% of Covid related deaths occur in hospitals is true.

To keep an eye on trends the key data is currently hospital reported deaths (6 today) and hospitalisations (down 15% on last week).

Number of cases are also important but at the moment there is a distinct regional variation with lots of areas having very low numbers of cases and a small number or areas having more cases and doing more testing. As a result you really need to drill down into the cases data for it to be meaningful.

Bbc have published this today www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53722711

PHE have reduced death figure by 5000 as they've changed the reporting to only those who die within 28 days of a positive test

@TorysSuckRevokeArticle50

Bbc have published this today www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53722711

PHE have reduced death figure by 5000 as they've changed the reporting to only those who die within 28 days of a positive test

Why though? If someone caught covid, was ventilated for six weeks and then dies that's because of Covid. Why shouldn't it be recorded as such? What will they be counted as?

That's just inaccurate counting in the opposite direction

Its what Scotland and Wales have been doing the whole time, and their figures were used as a stick to beat England with

The latest episode of More Or Less is back thank god and has addressed most of the issues on this thread clearly.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08ncr88

Meanwhile the total of all Covid deaths not just those with a test (PHE’s) went up.

Only our gov could over report and under report at the same time.

“ Separate figures published by the UK’s statistics agencies show there have been 56,800 deaths registered in the UK where Covid-19 was mentioned on the death certificate. The government also said that in the 24-hour period up to 9am on Wednesday, there had been a further 1,009 lab-confirmed cases. Overall, a total of 313,798 cases have been confirmed.”

The logical part of my brain does thing though..., how likely is it that a tenth of people who tested positive for coronavirus died of something else within mere months without it contributing at all.

A tenth?

That’s unlucky and a huge coincidence.

Two very healthy thirty something friends had in on April and are still suffering complications.

@AnaadiNitya

New infections mean absolutely nothing. More testing than ever is being done do it she’s sense that more new infections are being ‘found’

The only thing that’s matters are hospital admissions are they lowest they have been and the ONS is saying there are less than 20 deaths a day.

The PHE figures are fucked. There are over estimating deaths and the process they go through to get the figures is astonishing.

I don’t think the government are hiding anything, they are just so incompetent they have no fucking clue what they are doing

Absolute tosh! Of course they mean EVERYTHING.

It means that for ever person infected they have infected three more. Considering the figures are rising and now 1000+ is alarming!
Basically [unless the virus is less potent] the virus is still infecting regardless of the testing! Testing only exposes it!
A truly ridiculous comment.
Regarding hospital admissions it is good that they are down but people can die at home! Maybe the virus isn't as potent ,who knows?
Also people that have caught it seem to be 20's and 30 year olds that are known to have an easier time of it. The press have reported cases are mostly in this age range down to pubs.
I would be also pretty alarmed at the shoddy work with test and trace and the fact that only 70% of contacts are reported to be traced. Its a ticking time bomb in England imo.

(A tenth of those who tested positive and died not all who tested positive to clarify)

This thread just goes to show how clueless some people confidently assert there views. Expecting some name changes. England has lined up its reporting with the rest of the UK and most of Europe barring Spain who only report deaths registered in the previous 36 hours. The initial method England used was probably correct fwiw but no one seemed bothered that everyone else used a cut off.

If it makes our stats fall in line with other countries, then I understand the point of that.

Absolute tosh! Of course they mean EVERYTHING
( regarding new cases)

No really they don’t. Hospital figure matter.

There are 583 Coronavirus patients in hospital in England, a week ago that was 727. Hospital admissions look stable.

Caution, not panic is required

The testing kits are not 100% accurate either yet they will not release the the failure rate.

Its a ticking time bomb in England imo

Deary me 🙄

Idiots like these men
www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/people/seven-holidaymakers-allegedly-test-positive-covid-19-after-returning-spain-and-piling-straight-milton-keynes-pubs-2939955
Unlikely to be hit hard themselves but imagine who they could infect.

@littleowl1 Your website is amazing - so much work! Well done!

@TorysSuckRevokeArticle50

Bbc have published this today www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53722711

PHE have reduced death figure by 5000 as they've changed the reporting to only those who die within 28 days of a positive test

And additionally, 60 days (and further).

i was trying to link to More or Less yesterday morning, sadly i had no internet

@MrsPerrywinkle We are all amateurs, we make errors and don't have access to Govt data.... BUT does anyone really think that having a cut off of 28 days and only including those who test positive is accurate?

Look at the excess deaths and the ONS infection figures.