Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 15

[BigChocFrenzy]

Welcome to thread 15 of the daily updates

Resource links:

Uk dashboard deaths, cases, hospitals, tests - 4 nations, LAs, English regions
Slides & data UK govt pressers
UK added daily by PHE & DHSC
PHE Surveillance report infections & watchlists every Thursday with sep. infographic
ONS England infection surveillance report
ONS UK death stats each Tuesday
ECDC rolling 14-day incidence EEA & UK
Daily ECDC country detail UK
Worldometer UK page
Plot FT graphs compare countries deaths, cases, raw / million pop
Covidly.com world summary & graphs
Plot COVID Graphs Our World in Data test positivity etc

We welcome factual, data driven, and civil discussions from all contributors 📈 📉 📊 👍

@Piggywaspushed

Have to set you on to my results which are so unjust!

... Sorry to hear that, piggy So much unfairness

Re. Blood donor seroprevalence, Post Viral Fatigue and ME/CFS are on the Blood Donor banned list, could it be a factor that people with Long Covid cannot donate blood, thus removing an increasing number of those with antibodies from the donor pool?

That's a very helpful thread Bigchoc.

I think many are operating under an assumption that if they've had it they're immune. I do think that affects behaviour.

It sounds like it's possible to re catch it, although mildly, thus repeat spreading it?

This was interesting re masks:

www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/08/how-to-measure-risk-airborne-coronavirus-your-office-classroom-bus-ride-cvd/

It feels expensive but would a generalised antibody test to all coronavirus help gauge susceptibility to a bad reaction to this one?

"I'm not sure I understand (2) - waning immunity being a contributing factor to reduced sero prevalence - I thought the two were, largely speaking, thought to be the same thing. I.e. we have been measuring 'immunity' i.e. likelihood of not catching CV, by measuring these antibodies? What else is our concept of immunity if not this?"

I might be wrong on this but I read it as seroprevalence is estimating how many people have been infected by measuring their covid 19 antibodies. There has been speculation that the antibodies might be temporary and the levels produced fall after 6 to 12 months.

The latter statement suggests that less people might be recorded as being infected because their antibody levels has already fallen to levels low enough to be non detectable on the test used. I daresay they can check this by periodically retesting people who previously have tested positive for antibodies.

@BigChocFrenzy

Very interesting article about T-cells stating what I suspected from my limited knowledge, and was becoming increasingly clear in recent weeks as some badly affected areas were returned very high antibody levels.

It increasingly seems as though antibody levels are indeed a reasonable Indication of viral spread, as they were initially thought to be, but which was cast into doubt (for me at least) by discussion of the impact of T-cells and how, potentially, highly significant numbers had this “natural” immunity with, say, a 5% antibody rate actually indicating a rate of infection that was many times higher than that.

@InMySpareTime

Re. Blood donor seroprevalence, Post Viral Fatigue and ME/CFS are on the Blood Donor banned list, could it be a factor that people with Long Covid cannot donate blood, thus removing an increasing number of those with antibodies from the donor pool?

I have had CFS 18 years.... and I give blood! I have never been asked if I have it or seen any literature when there given to me saying I shouldn't?

I got banned for it, phoned up and checked, and it's definitely on the banned list.

@InMySpareTime

I got banned for it, phoned up and checked, and it's definitely on the banned list.

Blimey! Noted!!!!

Definitely not on anything u get given when you're there.... I do always read it

Place marking!

Place marking as well

@NeurotrashWarrior

That's a very helpful thread Bigchoc.

I think many are operating under an assumption that if they've had it they're immune. I do think that affects behaviour.

It sounds like it's possible to re catch it, although mildly, thus repeat spreading it?

Although there is speculation about antibody protection waning over time, I don’t believe there has been a documented case of a patient with IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 later testing positive on an antigen test. Happy to be corrected if I am wrong.

Helpful posts @BigChocFrenzy and NeurotrashWarrior that basically says wearing a mask helps, and a better mask is more efficient. Worrying then as a shielded person, who is now paused, who has to go into a poorly ventilated classroom with no masks allowed.

I hope the mask wearing that has increased since March really hopes to reduce infection spread this coming autumn elsewhere.

I know yesterday's cases were shocking. However both ONS and ZOE suggest levelling off/ falling levels, could this be the effect of mask wearing ( introduced on the 31st??)

You need to stop. It clearly says on blood donation websites that people with ME/CFS cannot give blood. Our blood serum contains something yet unidentified which down regulates activity in cells. Plus there is so much unknown about the condition still - would you want to risk passing it on?

This BBC article explains when the ban started. The virus mentioned is no longer linked to ME but the risk and ban remains.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11465723

"I don’t believe there has been a documented case of a patient with IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 later testing positive on an antigen test"

Let us consider the small % of the population who have confirmed cases
e.g. 316k of the UK's 67 million is < 0.5%
BUT
a far smaller % have had antigen tests as distinct from swab tests

Dashboard has only 6,315 positives from Pillar 3 and 4,109 from Pillar 4 so < 10,000 in 67 million

then presumably a delay of 1 /3 / 6 months ? before antibodies fall enough for anyone could catch it a 2nd time

and it would then - hopefully - be v mild, so they might not get tested anyway

We may see cases this winter, but imo too early yet for more than a few individual cases, which responsible doctors would be wary of publicising

Sorry, I should have said pillar 3&4 are daily totals - as I can't find cumulative figures for them - but still v small % of the population

@boys3 and a shout out for all those LAs that contributed zero cases to the figures published today. There is a longer list of those with just a single case.

I live in Devon and we feature a few times in the zero list. I think lots of us down here will be relieved as since holiday makers have been coming back we have expected a surge. It has been very busy, probably due to a mixture of weather and people not going abroad as well as the normal July/August visitors. It all seems very relaxed but lots of sanitizer dispensers everywhere and most people wearing masks. Hope it continues.

People arriving today won't be impressed as it is raining and very overcast, I wonder if people doing more indoor stuff will make a difference.

I know some people in holiday areas weren't happy about the visitors coming back but personally I like seeing things more back to normal but do hope the low numbers continue. I feel sorry for areas still having high numbers and restrictions.

Regardless of the rules about CFS I'd assume people who've been badly ill with Covid would be unlikely to donate blood for a while until they're feeling properly well again - meaning that estimating how many people have antibodies from a sample of blood donors may be a slight underestimate. Though I think I'd be more concerned that blood donors are a self selecting group - I'd assume more public spirited than average (so more inclined to follow government advice re distancing) And we also know that BAME groups are underrepresented among blood donors, and overrepresented among positive tests (hugely so, in the case of Asian - Pakistan groups) - which both suggest to me that you'd expect to see a higher rate of antibodies in the population overall than among blood donors. I don't think the emergence of donors over 70 will have made that much difference - but annoying that they can't check for this with their study - would seem easy enough to compare the results with and without the over 70s included. Seems more likely that the rates of detectable antibodies are genuinely falling.

Also, the exclusion on those aged 70+ was lifted from week 26,
which doesn't seem to correlate with the drop in the charts

However, it would still be VERY good news IF the T cell hypothesis of immunity is true

because - even though they can still be infectious -
there would be an increasing % of the population who will only have mild cases and won't proceed to the more severe symptoms
i.e. they won't need hospitalisation

It is the comparatively large (wrt common known viruses) % of COVID cases requiring O2, hospitalisation and ICU that have led to this becoming a crisis with lockdowns etc, to avoid health services being overwhelmed

A lot of people becoming mildly ill and staying off work for a week or so is disruptive to the economy,
but not nearly as damaging as local lockdowns or high death numbers this winter would be

Of course, mask wearing and SD needs to continue, because this unknown % with T cell support can still infect the vulnerable without

I have given blood regularly (except for the last 6 months as I have a 12m ban for failing an iron test). It always seems to be full of young and middle aged people when I'm there - very few over 70s so I doubt they make that much difference.

CFS has unknown causes so the safest thing to do is not give blood, unfortunately. Those recovered from Covid should be donating plasma if they can but I'm sure I've seen an anecdotal report that said they are finding plasma donors have declining antibodies, I'll try to find it. The blood donor pattern in London (biggest area so less affected by random fluctuations) is a pattern that suggests declining antibodies too. I suspect many 70+ donors would think better of going to give blood, especially in London where they are likely to know people who were infected.

This may explain why Hackney is finally showing a decline. www.mylondon.news/news/east-london-news/london-coronavirus-how-health-officials-18772605?fbclid=IwAR0c8lwniq1PgDPdRsvhNRi8nihWefIMwlJMoCWZ5eVmG4K2tsjLnM11q94

boys3 posted a graph on the last thread that showed a decline in the level of infection in low incidence areas approximately a week after mask wearing was made compulsory. Since infections normally show up around a week later that does appear to suggest masks help. In high incidence areas the rate of infection levelled off.

I'm wearing a mask and the Hackney report above makes me glad I started doing so when it was optional.