Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 16

[BigChocFrenzy]

Welcome to thread 16 of the daily updates

Resource links:

Uk dashboard deaths, cases, hospitals, tests - 4 nations, English regions & LAs
MSAO Map of English cases
[[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/909430/Contain_framework_lower_tier_local_authority__14_August_2020.pdf
Slides & data UK govt pressers
UK added daily by PHE & DHSC
R estimates UK & English regions
PHE Surveillance report infections & watchlists every Thursday
ONS England infection surveillance reports
ONS UK death stats released each Tuesday
ECDC rolling 14-day incidence EEA & UK
Daily ECDC country detail UK
WHO dashboard
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 📈 📉 📊 👍

Most of the council and 2 out of the 3 Trafford MPs as well as local public health think it is 2 early

Interestingly, the linked article says that Brady - the only one who didn't - is the chairman of the 1922 committee

I’ve found my people

Also interesting, a new test site opened in Trafford yesterday: www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/new-coronavirus-testing-site-opens-18837130.

Checking in

North West LAs - based on largely complete data, so thru to 23rd Aug Trafford still lower than Salford. For 24-27th and bearing in mind very few cases confirmed for 27th so far, Trafford rate slightly higher but as cases from the last few days remain to feed through we cannot say for sure whether Salford is really lower.

Compliance will be a challenge among the young

this graph set published in the PHE weekly update published this afternoon starts to bear that out.

@boys3

North West LAs - based on largely complete data, so thru to 23rd Aug Trafford still lower than Salford. For 24-27th and bearing in mind very few cases confirmed for 27th so far, Trafford rate slightly higher but as cases from the last few days remain to feed through we cannot say for sure whether Salford is really lower.

I agree with this boys, and if we can't be sure which is lower ( and they are pretty close to each other really anyway), it really doesn't seem ok to me that one has extra restrictions lifted.

V interesting to hear about France. Would love to hear the Overseas picture on the ground from more local Mumsnetters if anyone is willing?

I am also France based and cautious about the increasing numbers. What is totally different at this time is that people in Europe are not dying in the numbers that they were in March to May. Yes, cases are rising but in a time when we were confined to within 1km of our houses, the death rates were staggering. People were not leaving their houses and very few people were being tested so the cases being recorded were largely hospital admissions.

I know there is a delay between diagnosis and death but I do think we need to start focusing on this.

In the UK, the excess deaths per week (which were 29% higher than the COVID reported deaths .. lots of possible reasons though this gap is not reflected to the same extend in other countries.. I digress.) Excess deaths per week have (with the exception of 14th August.. hopefully not the start of an upward trend) for the most part been lower than the five year average since the middle of June.. yes there is some correction to be expected due to people whose deaths were accelerated due to COVID.

We need to focus on hospitalisations to ensure those who need medical.care receive it on a timely basis and we need to ensure the death rate remains low.

@boys3

Compliance will be a challenge among the young

this graph set published in the PHE weekly update published this afternoon starts to bear that out.

Yes anyone who has had kids at school knows they are like petri dishes, every other virus spreads like wildfire so I see no reason why Covid should be different.

I'm already seeing posts on Facebook saying there isn't really a pandemic ....

On Attack Rates...
Rates per 100,000 on cumulative numbers of cases. I know this is used by the ECDC and elsewhere, the ‘attack rate’. It seems an important figure to gage comparisons and relative increase in cases, alongside positivity of Covid in number of tests.

I read an article in the US where in one state they were recommending a positivity rate of 20. Spain is 190! UK 24. Germany 22. France 79.

Are there any guidelines that we know of using both attack rate and positivity rate in order to gage levels of restrictions, and whether schools should open or close?

Is it worth showing attack rates for regions in order to ) form local levels of restrictions?

Phew found the new thread! Like others have said, I check daily and really appreciate the clear and wise words and data!

Yes anyone who has had kids at school knows they are like petri dishes, every other virus spreads like wildfire so I see no reason why Covid should be different.

Yet there has been study after study that suggests that young children do not spread Covid in the way they do other viruses. Why do you chose to ignore this?

Flu is a more serious illness for young children yet many parents choose not to get their child a flu vaccine.

We need to stop villifying the children and act responsibly as adults.

The damage we are doing to the mental health of our children is worrying and there will be serious long term consequences.

This is a data thread, school studies are discussed but facts, not opinions, please. Most studies involving children and schools seem to have flaws, notably being conducted at times when few children are at school. Children themselves have very low risk but whether they spread it is far more debatable.

Now that it seems more discretion is to be permitted I'd expect head teachers to be asking older children to wear masks. If you value your child's education then encourage the school to do so - maximum chance of keeping teachers free from infection and in school, offers more protection to those children who are at risk.

I dont really do international comparisons - but I think a number of countries had capitals that largely escaped the initial impact? Italy was certainly limited to one area at first. In comparison London was hit hard early on. Countries that are only now seeing the impact in major cities will find it more difficult to avoid rapid rises.

London hasnt hit herd immunity, even for young people. Our elderly people are, so far, doing a good job in avoiding them. The North West has seen some admissions of elderly people recently.

I've seen Facebook comments from the beginning about how the virus doesnt exist - BigChoc's "this is not flu" excess deaths graph has been reposted frequently.

I guess it would be good to have some idea of what restrictions should accompany what attack rates?

Regionally? Looking at numbers is not that helpful, rates per 100000 seems more useful.

What are the UK using for example - which threshold did Oldham etc have to reach?

@IceCreamSummer20 - the ECDC 14 day incidence is (depending on figures going up or down) twice the number of a 7-day incidence. So UK having issues with counts es over 20 on 7-day average = 40 on the ECDC 14-day average. Within the UK the local area watch list is largely anywhere over 30 (would be 60 on ECDC).

All the data you are asking about is regularly tracked and made public in the UK. You can see the UK local case map here:
phe.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=47574f7a6e454dc6a42c5f6912ed7076. The data file you can access using the arrow that shows all MSOA cases, even 1 or 2 in the area:
coronavirus.data.gov.uk/cases.

The average population of an MSOA is 7200 and minimum 5000, so if you multiply by 14 you can get an approximate case rate per 100,000 at a very low level for your area. So under 3 cases in a 7-day period = 0 / 14 / 28 = ok. 3+ = progressively worse. Outbreaks are tracked closely, but realistically 3 can be just one family, so not much fuss is made for every spot of cases, it's community transmission that's the worry and leads to extra measures. The weekly borough stats are available in the surveillance reports here each Friday, so no need to calculate for yourself:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-covid-19-surveillance-reports.

Positivity is tracked closely by ONS along with randomised swab testing and is at the root of their estimates for total number of infections, the latest report is here but I think it's fortnightly so we're due an updated one soon: www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/englandandwales14august2020#incidence-rate-in-england.

@ChateauMargaux

I am also France based and cautious about the increasing numbers. What is totally different at this time is that people in Europe are not dying in the numbers that they were in March to May. Yes, cases are rising but in a time when we were confined to within 1km of our houses, the death rates were staggering. People were not leaving their houses and very few people were being tested so the cases being recorded were largely hospital admissions.

I know there is a delay between diagnosis and death but I do think we need to start focusing on this.

In the UK, the excess deaths per week (which were 29% higher than the COVID reported deaths .. lots of possible reasons though this gap is not reflected to the same extend in other countries.. I digress.) Excess deaths per week have (with the exception of 14th August.. hopefully not the start of an upward trend) for the most part been lower than the five year average since the middle of June.. yes there is some correction to be expected due to people whose deaths were accelerated due to COVID.

We need to focus on hospitalisations to ensure those who need medical.care receive it on a timely basis and we need to ensure the death rate remains low.

... As I calculated on the previous thread, cases in Germany now are probably only about 3% of what they were at peak: Germany currently has 1 million tests weekly at just under 1% positive, compared to peak deaths with 10% positive

This fits the v low daily deaths in Germany, which are still only in single fugure

Other European countries would have a similar tiny % now of the real number of cases they had at peak

At peak in the UK, the % positivity was very large, e.g. 50% positive in some test series from Wales
but is only about 1.5% currently

And also the much lower average infection age, e.g. currently about 35 in Germany, compared to age 50 at peak

other countries have reported a similar massive drop in infected age

@IceCreamSummer20

I guess it would be good to have some idea of what restrictions should accompany what attack rates?

Regionally? Looking at numbers is not that helpful, rates per 100000 seems more useful.

What are the UK using for example - which threshold did Oldham etc have to reach?

... It is important not to confuse criteria for the 7-day and 14-day incidence rates

"I read an article in the US where in one state they were recommending a positivity rate of

Countries have different criteria for local lockdowns

In Germany it is 7-day incidence of 50/100,000
For full local lockdowns, the UK seems to have a higher limit

@Boys Is this a 7-day limit of 75 / 100,000 for the UK, or not specified ?

It's worth noting that while 1.5% of those tested are using positive, it's more like 0.05% of the country testing positive in the randomised swabs. New infections per day gives part of the picture, but people currently infected gives risk of spread. That's estimated to be 28,300 in the UK right now, or one in every 1900 people.

I was just thinking how we can work out the number of undiagnosed cases. Say anyone is infectious enough to get a positive swab result for just 5 days (before day 5 of symptoms is recommended). At a rolling average of 1200 identified cases per day, 6000 will have been identified. That leaves 22,300 unidentified and potentially roaming around infectious, whether asymptomatic or selfishly untested with symptoms. A tiny proportion of people, but they are what's keeping this going. Some may be false positive swabs, but while we know there is spread it's not worth removing them from the figures.

Would be interesting to get thoughts on tweaking these assumptions - anyone?

Yes that is a good point @BigChocFrenzy apologies for the 7 day / 14 day confusion and thanks for making it clearer.

It does seem like the 14 day incidence is being one of the few collated regularly and fairly accurately. However the 7-day, with so much fast moving cases, may be most useful?

I also had thought that the WHO and others are recommending BOTH attack rate and positivity rate - as criteria for restrictions? Correct me if I am wrong. The positivity rate shows the amount positive due to testing - and a high rate shows a country is not testing enough - but does not show the case rate in a country or area and therefore is not a good measure on it’s own:

E.g. London is increasing cases - they might just be increasing the testing and staying under 3% - but cases rising exponentially.

In Germany it is 7-day incidence of 50/100,000
For full local lockdowns, the UK seems to have a higher limit

Interesting. Germany seems to be managing their cases better - 22/100,000 (14 day) - and perhaps that is because they are on top of their numbers better. And have clear criteria for local lockdowns.

What also worries me is that clusters vs community spread. Say there was a 7-day per 100,000 in UK and let’s just say lockdowns were >50. Hypothetical East Anglia:
50 - triggering a local lockdown - but most of these were clusters in a factory. These are easier to track and trace, and come down. But businesses and schools have to close, lots of disruption.
Hypethetical London:
40 - and therefore no local lockdown - but due to community spread (no known source) - but this would be a more dangerous scenario than East Anglia.

Sorry... just thinking about this a lot recently!

We have a LONG way to go with Covid19 and critically now no European country has managed to keep the cases ‘steady’. So our NUMBERS should really inform our management or partial lockdowns etc. We need to tie them in to each other.

...