Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 17

[BigChocFrenzy]

Welcome to thread 17 of the daily updates

Resource links:

Uk dashboard deaths, cases, hospitals, tests - 4 nations, English regions & LAs
MSAO Map of English cases
Cases Tracker England Local Government
ONS MSAO Map English deaths
CovidMessenger live update by council district in England
Scot gov Daily data
Scotland TravellingTabby LAs, care homes, hospitals, tests, t&t
PH Wales LAs, tests, ONS deaths
NI Dashboard
UK govt pressers Slides & data
NHS t&t England & UK testing Weekly stats
R estimates UK & English regions
PHE Surveillance report infections & watchlists each Thursday
ONS England infection surveillance report each Friday
Datasets for ONS surveillance reports
ONS Roundup deaths, infections & economic reports
ECDC rolling 14-day incidence EEA & UK
Worldometer UK page
Our World in Data test positivity etc, DIY graphs
FT DIY graphs compare deaths, cases, raw / million pop
Covidly.com world summary & graphs

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

[quote BigChocFrenzy]Some people are attracted by the idea of testing absolutely everyone, but it's not feasible

A good analysis of why Operation Moonshot would be a really bad £100 bn idea:

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1304016643174133760.html[/quote]
I agree.

It's very hard to balance the economic costs but from link above you posted about test and trace and compliance due to wages it would be better to spend it funding those having to isolate with a case than testing those who haven't got symptoms.

I think it would be interesting to see the balance sheets - so costings Of government paying wages against cost of mass continuous testing.

I know there are payments available for isolation if you have symptoms but I'm sure this was regionally rather than nationally?

Although the occasional vent here is fine and it is probably a good place to request fact-based reassurance

However, any data or facts posted need to be correct, not the product of anxiety

“There is great damage done to the integrity and trustworthiness of statistics when they’re under the control of the spin doctors,”

Agree 100%

That's why I prefer reading this thread and facts. I dont mind hypothesis about what it may mean because people will often then have links to show others have said the same or dispute it.

But you need numbers as raw facts and data to gain trust of the people you are expecting to change their lifestyle based on those.

On this thread a poster states that she's received a shielding letter (12 weeks) again - a pretty good indication of what the NHS is predicting then! Not in a lockdown area.

Shielding again? www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/4019768-shielding-again

Thanks for your thoughts re a "sister" thread, @BigChocFrenzy. Personally I feel that a "Worried about" title would draw quite a bit of non-evidence based hysteria and, equally, scathing put downs.

I think a WA thread would attract some of the rather nastier posters, must be honest.

After all my gung ho ness last week, cases in Lincoln seem to be really rather spiking.

A spike in C Beds has been put down entirely to a teen party.

Do we think the thread is moving towards speculation 9she speculates!) because of lack of clear information, and a lot of anecdata and speculation form the government themselves? That's the way I feel at the moment.

I think people on this thread are brilliant at finding the data and facts that otherwise seem to be being somewhat hidden, dare I say even suppressed.

I agree re 'Worried About' title. How about just a 'discussion' sister thread? It is useful to have the discussion around the analysis and to be able to ask questions/hypothesise but the data can get buried. Sometime these threads can move so fast! Thank you so much to everyone for your hugely valued input - I'd be lost without these threads!

I think it's needs to be led by someone with a pretty good grasp of the data though, because that is the only truth we have.

Or at least to attract people with a good grasp of the data!

Apologies I am about to derail the thread but Tbf I JT someone knowledgeable on here might know.

Having struggled to get a home test for my son it’s finally arrived but they have sent me three tests! I definitely only entered for one person ( did wonder as I got two identical emails).

I am not able to send them back apparently so am wondering can I keep them and use them the next time we need a test? They have individual numbers etc that I know you enter when you do the test. Seems a waste otherwise!

@BighouseLittlemouse - expiry date should be written on the packet and should be about 6 months. If you're adding personal details only after it's done then keep or supply to the next friend needing one. No point wasting.

Are there 3 of you in the house though and they're expecting all 3 to test for some reason?

I would be interested in your thoughts on this thread, I hope because it's a government link it's relevant

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/4020343-Unlicensed-Vaccine-Consultation-Warning

I've attached a screenshot

Morfin at 1st glance it doesn't sound good.

But i would need to understand it more.

It is clear that any vaccine will be fast tracked. That doesn't mean it will go not go through proper testing. In the UK we are world leading in the area so I would think the vaccine would be proven to be safe 1st.

It is clear to get a mass rollout in as short a period of time as possible we are going yo have to get many people available to give vaccine.

I don't know what training / qualifications are currently needed to administer vaccines but I imagine pharmacists for example may be a source for getting the vaccine.

It depends whether these changes are designed to release a unproven vaccine or to fast track a safe vaccine.

Can I just ask someone - as I'm getting very confused this morning - when we talk cases and rates, in general it's cases per 100,000 over a 7 day period and not per day?

Several graphs etc I've been looking at don't seem to actually say.

Today the zoe covid tracker app estimates 59.6 people per 100,000 in my local area but covid messenger is telling me rolling 7 day average of 16 up to 5th Sept (which is per population which is roughly 150,000 so just over 10 per 100,000). So that seems a big discrepancy. Is that because zoe is based on symptoms so outbreaks of other illness could artificially inflate the numbers? Whereas covid messenger is actual coronavirus test results?

I've been up 4 times in the night with the little one (going through the nightmare phase) so not at my best.

It depends whether these changes are designed to release a unproven vaccine or to fast track a safe vaccine

The unlicensed is purely a technical question about if it's appropriate to provide a vaccine which the UK are happy is appropriate and safe but isn't yet licensed, because licensing is a European wide competence - and is only relevant if the vaccine is available but not licensed by the European Medicines people in December.

The people who can administer is also mostly a technical thing around law rather than any particular relaxation in standards, administering a vaccine is not a highly skilled thing, so it seems entirely appropriate to expand it. There seems little reason why a paramedic for example would not be entirely competent in giving a vaccine.

There may well be something in detail that is more worrying, but the general points of unlicensed and expanding access are not obviously negative.

I think much of the vaccine changes sounds fair enough - other professionals administering it. However it is not specific enough. Which workers? And why specifically unlicensed - what does that mean?

I listened to a great programme about vaccines on Radio 4 recently, well worth a listen. It was very informative about how these vaccines may work, and the fast tracking and what that meant. It made me feel quite reassured about the UK process.

mobile.twitter.com/livvyswann/status/1299136146425995264

thread about a publication in the BMJ regarding covid-19 and the effect of the illness on children.
quite reassuring.

@Mrex as it happens there are three but don’t think they are aware of this! Previously when I’ve had to do a test for me they have only sent one. I did wonder when they sent the duplicate emails if it had somehow duplicated in the system.

Thanks will definitely keep and reuse then

@BigChocFrenzy

One case is not an outbreak, but 2 cases officially are I don't know if PHE keeps a running total of school outbreaks

It would be more useful to keep track of the number of more variables:

1. schools closed
2. forms / years sent home
3. number of pupils tested positive
4. number of staff positive

Of course keeping in mind the total number of schools, students and active teachers

The government research is continuing through this term so I expect the results/ report will be out nearer Xmas.

More than 1/2 million downloads of the Protect Scotland app, since it went live yesterday.

More than 1/2 million downloads of the Protect Scotland app, since it went live yesterday
As a volunteer responder I have the early access release of the NHS Covid app. It seems quite simple and has some useful features but I can't find any information on when it might be rolled out.

@MRex

Given that this is a data thread, can we just be crystal clear please in agreement that one case in a school with no onward transmission is not by any definition an outbreak. Anyone who thinks it is can join the "422/588/ however many schools are affected" group, but shouldn't be posting on a thread about facts and data as though that figure relates to transmission in schools.

Anyone with a valid data link about multiple cases in specific schools where transmission is even a possibility, is very welcome to supply their info for discussion, because everyone else has an interest in facts, causes and real risks.

Oh right. I don't agree that these figures are of no interest. As someone who was shielding and is ECV, I'm very interested in how many schools are having people rocking up with infections.

Prior to the children going back, there was a lot of misinformation along the lines of

• children do not catch the disease
• children cannot transmit the disease
• schools will be safer than home etc.

So the children are going back with crowded transport, crowded corridors etc.

Now we are being told that infections are rising faster in the 10-19 group than any other. It is more the case in older teenagers, but from Chris Whitty's graphs last week, the tweens and younger teens are catching covid as well. And of course the 11/2 year olds and 17/18 year olds maybe catching the same crowded buses to secondary school, maybe several schools together.

Infections could very easily spread, we wouldn't know about it till too late.

I think there should be a running table of instances of infections in English schools and that ECV kids families and teachers should be protected if there is infection in the school. NOT 2 cases plus, unless we really want to take out the vulnerable, thanks.

I'd be really interested to understand how you think this isn't a real risk?

Oh and the transcript with I think graphs attached is here

I think the point is that it's much safer to deal in verified data from official sources. I think the BRTUS Fb group does have useful info culled from local press reports but some of its members sound hyper anxious and/or not of a very balanced and evidence-based outlook. Some, not all. I also think it could be hijacked by more extreme views.

Yes, the only helpful thing about it is the pooled collection of local press reports.