Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 20

[BigChocFrenzy]

Welcome to thread 20 of the daily updates

Resource links:

Uk dashboard deaths, cases, hospitals, tests - 4 nations, English regions & LAs
Imperial UK weekly LAs, cases / 100k, table, map, hotspots
Modelling real number of infections February to date
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
Zoe Uk data
UK govt pressers Slides & data
ICNRC Intensive Care National Audit & Research reports
NHS t&t England & UK testing Weekly stats
R estimates UK & English regions
PHE Surveillance reports & LA Local Watchlist Maps by LSOA
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 GB test positivity etc, DIY country graphs
FT DIY graphs compare deaths, cases, raw / million pop
Alama Personal COVID risk assessment
Local Mobility Reports for countries
UK Highstreet Tracker for cities & large towns Footfall, spend index, workers, visitors, economic recovery

⏭ Our STUDIES Corner ⏮

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

Request to posters giving a link:
Please do so in full, so people can see in advance what they are clicking
Also at least a brief title so we know what the link is about

2 links added to OP:
. Footfall for council areas
. City / town high street recovery metrics

text added
to PHE reports link, to include "maps by LSAO"

1 link removed:
. Covidly.com

Thanks for new thread and a very impressive list of links we are gathering along the way! X

cheers

Thanks for such reasonable threads as always, much needed

Oh and I answered @TheSunIsStillShining about holidays right at the end of the old thread

Thanks BigChoc and all the regulars. I ventured out of this thread today and ended up getting Very Cross Indeed so I'm back to hanging out with the calm, rational, evidence-based kindred spirits on the data thread.

Thanks BCF. I try to keep up and fail every time as just don't have the brain power to go into the stats much but I appreciate all the factual info on here.

We are all still stuck in ordered isolation until we are symptom free. It's been a crap first 3 weeks back to school. 230 schools now affected in Greater Manchester and dds' school closed to year 8 today and isn't included in that figure.

230 schools now have confirmed coronavirus cases across Greater Manchester www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/230-schools-now-confirmed-coronavirus-18979574

I am fascinated to see how these figures change over the next 3 weeks with the new measures. I don't think they will have much positive impact. I think the virus has got a good hold again and is going forth and multiplying as though the good book told it to do so. My area has jumped from 55 to 66 cases per 100,000 in 24 hours and we are near the bottom of the GM league table for cases. Bolton is at over 200 still so measures there are not having an effect yet that we can see.

Stares manically. I am still on thread 17, don't worry, will have plenty of time to catch up, just hoovered a large spider from next to my be. I ain't going to be sleeping for a while yet.

Secondary school in Solihull closed to pupils for two weeks.

Can anyone please summarize, do we know where we are compared to march?

Thank you for the new thread, this is such a useful thread giving fact and stat based info.

.

Thank you for the new thread.

I wonder if @RedToothBrush could re post the info on positivity rates or the links to find them?

That was quite shocking and I do wonder if Leicester etc had had more tests moved that way.

In my opinion it's spiralled on Tyneside so quickly partly due to lack of available tests. It took 'them' (not sure who) by surprise.

Psychologically if you're only half sure you need a test and it's really hard to get one, you're more likely to brush it off as a cold but probably not think to do 2 weeks of SI, especially if kids have just returned to school.

The whole system (schools track and trace) breaks down with lack of tests.

Thank you!

Pocket summary - cases are rising (and we dont know how fast as 4x more people want tests than can get them), reinfection is possible, hospital admissions now increasing in all age groups, deaths also beginning to increase.

Slightly better place than March because there are now some treatments that will reduce the death rate. However not yet known if that just increases long covid, the ongoing health problems that can occur at any age.

We know what to do - avoid people as much as you can, wear a mask when you cant, wash hands frequently and sanitise them after exposure to other people if you cant wash. Wear your mask properly - not under your nose or chin - and take it off from the side, not by touching the front.

The NHS will not be able to treat people for anything unless everyone starts pulling together.

This is probably an old point, but I often see the figure quoted that those who died from Covid had an average remaining life expectancy of over 10 years.

The authors of that study have responded to comments and admit that that is an overestimate as it does not take into account that almost half of all deaths were in care homes. Care home residents have a remaining life expectancy of approximately one year, but in the study they were assumed to basically have the same remaining life expectancy of another individual of their age.

The authors have not published a new calculation but my back-of-the envelope calculation is that it would take the average remaining life expectancy from over 10 years to around 7.

(There is a caveat in that they took into account whether someone had an underlying condition but as (i) over 90% of over 80s have an underlying condition and (ii) they did not adjust for severity the end result is to basically assume the average for the whole population. If those who died with Covid have more severe conditions on average, even the figure after adjusting for care homes will be an overestimate.

See link below, particularly the care home admission at the end.

github.com/dmcalli2/covid19_yll_final/blob/master/Scripts/Addendum.md

@Eyewhisker
Your link does not work
Can you post it in full please

@NeurotrashWarrior

Thank you for the new thread.

I wonder if @RedToothBrush could re post the info on positivity rates or the links to find them?

That was quite shocking and I do wonder if Leicester etc had had more tests moved that way.

In my opinion it's spiralled on Tyneside so quickly partly due to lack of available tests. It took 'them' (not sure who) by surprise.

Psychologically if you're only half sure you need a test and it's really hard to get one, you're more likely to brush it off as a cold but probably not think to do 2 weeks of SI, especially if kids have just returned to school.

The whole system (schools track and trace) breaks down with lack of tests.

... The link to test positivity is in the OP:

Our World in Data GB test positivity etc, DIY country graphs

and scroll down a bit to the graph

github.com/dmcalli2/covid19_yll_final/blob/master/Scripts/Addendum.md

.

No-one is ever taking into account the effect of this on health care. It doesnt actually matter if people lose 10 years of life or 7/8 years of life on average - unless you kill them off (as I'm sure some people would like) they take up a bed and prevent other receiving treatment. So the lost life years also need to include those people who dont get care. They may be people with limited life expectancy and you are simply shortening that by not treating their cancer or they may be people suffering years of unnecessary pain, going blind when their sight could have been saved or otherwise becoming long term disabled. And that ignores the ones becoming temporarily and possibly permanently disabled from Covid. So you are advocating for killing the clinically vulnerable to ease suffering in others - be honest about your desire!

This is a service economy. Kill off all your clinically vulnerable and you considerably reduce jobs. The elderly are more likely to employ people to do their decorating, their gardening, supply them with meals or personal care. I was surprised to be told by a manicurist that a lot of their business was elderly people who found it hard to cut their own nails. They keep many small shops in business. Kill off your clinically vulnerable and it will have effects on your economy you have not forseen.

Thanks, Eyewhisker I would hope they publish their amended calculation, so we don't have to use back of the envelope

Report by government statisticians estimating years lost due to Covid 21 March - 1 May

(The ONS states that > 57,000 deaths so far with COVID)

UK gov: Direct and Indirect Impacts of COVID-19 on Excess Deaths and Morbidity
(DHS , ONS, Govt actuary & HO)

Category A: Health impacts from contracting COVID-19

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/907616/s0650-direct-indirect-impacts-covid-19-excess-deaths-morbidity-sage-48.pdf

We estimate that from the 32,000 COVID-19 deaths registered between 21st March and 1st May,
25,000 were “excess deaths” in that they would not have occurred otherwise within 1-year.

Under the COVID-19 Static Scenario (CSS),
it is estimated there would be an additional 53,000 COVID-19 deaths to March 2021,
42,000 of which would be “excess deaths"

In total this equates to 530,000 lost Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and 700,000 Years of Life Lost (YLL)
over the 12 month period (21st March 2020 to 19th March 2021).

For people who contract COVID-19 and survive,
there are likely to be morbidity impacts particularly amongst those hospitalised and needing critical care, including cognitive, physical and mental health impairments.

We estimate these equate to 40,000 lost QALYs within 1-year.
The long-term health impacts are unknown.

@NeurotrashWarrior

Thank you for the new thread.

I wonder if @RedToothBrush could re post the info on positivity rates or the links to find them?

That was quite shocking and I do wonder if Leicester etc had had more tests moved that way.

In my opinion it's spiralled on Tyneside so quickly partly due to lack of available tests. It took 'them' (not sure who) by surprise.

Psychologically if you're only half sure you need a test and it's really hard to get one, you're more likely to brush it off as a cold but probably not think to do 2 weeks of SI, especially if kids have just returned to school.

The whole system (schools track and trace) breaks down with lack of tests.

@NeurotrashWarrior

I posted what I found at the end of the last thread. The graphs are quite telling.

I'm convinced a huge part of the problem is slow track and trace in certain areas (due to a reliance on home testing and a lack of access to local testing / lack of local testing) turnaround leading to a chain of infection which wasn't caught in time and an explosion in cases which overwhelmed the system.

The areas which have had the highest rate of increase in cases have also seen a huge rise in positivity. They also seem to be places least well served by testing facilities and/or places that have high levels of deprivation (and therefore people with issues travelling to testing facilities which often located in difficult areas to get to).

The data really is only supported my early theory on this.

What I want is to find data with a complete list of positivity rates across the country.

@alreadytaken

No-one is ever taking into account the effect of this on health care. It doesnt actually matter if people lose 10 years of life or 7/8 years of life on average - unless you kill them off (as I'm sure some people would like) they take up a bed and prevent other receiving treatment. So the lost life years also need to include those people who dont get care. They may be people with limited life expectancy and you are simply shortening that by not treating their cancer or they may be people suffering years of unnecessary pain, going blind when their sight could have been saved or otherwise becoming long term disabled. And that ignores the ones becoming temporarily and possibly permanently disabled from Covid. So you are advocating for killing the clinically vulnerable to ease suffering in others - be honest about your desire!

This is a service economy. Kill off all your clinically vulnerable and you considerably reduce jobs. The elderly are more likely to employ people to do their decorating, their gardening, supply them with meals or personal care. I was surprised to be told by a manicurist that a lot of their business was elderly people who found it hard to cut their own nails. They keep many small shops in business. Kill off your clinically vulnerable and it will have effects on your economy you have not forseen.

... The above link estimates this as 40,000 QALYS in the first year

and then can only state:
"The long-term health impacts are unknown

As more evidence is gathered on e.g. Long Covid - how long, how severe, what improvements, treatments etc -
hopefully there will be more calculations

More importantly in the interim is that those who e.g. cannot work as before are provided with prompt and adequate financial support, employment protection etc

• unfortunately, going by the track record for disability & illness from other causes, financial help will probably be too little and too late

"I'm convinced a huge part of the problem is slow track and trace in certain areas (due to a reliance on home testing and a lack of access to local testing / lack of local testing) turnaround leading to a chain of infection which wasn't caught in time and an explosion in cases which overwhelmed the system."

Partr of the essential public health toolkit during an epidemic:
An efficient contact tracing system breaks chains of transmission and drives infections down

This probably doesn't exist anywhere much in the UK, but is likely much worse in the areas you highlight

Long delays in even starting t&t mean that the trail is cold, very difficult for an inexperienced call centre operative to handle
and the number of contacts can become too high for the available local resources, who have the local knowledge, to tackle