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

How do you find out the test positivity rate for your area?

@Keepdistance - as someone who needs year-round vitamin D supplementation, I'm a big fan, but that finding might be challenged as being chicken and egg without blind testing research. Low vitamin D = more likely hospitalised due to covid and = low testosterone. Or hospitalised due to covid = system hammered into low vitamin D = low testosterone.

How do you find out the test positivity rate for your area?

Unfortunately, the test positivity rate is only available for areas in the "watchlist". It is provided in appendices to the Friday surveillance reports:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-covid-19-surveillance-reports

Here are the 2 links that cover all London boroughs:

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/921685/Contain_framework_lower_tier_local_authority_watchlist_-maps_by_Lower_Super_Output_Area-25_September_2020-5_of_5.pdf
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/921681/Contain_framework_lower_tier_local_authority_watchlist-maps_by_Lower_Super_Output_Area-25_September_2020-_4_of_5.pdf

Can I ask what people think about Khan's claims that testing in London had dramatically reduced ?

^
He said the number of Covid tests carried out each week in London had fallen 43% between mid-August and mid-September as other areas were prioritised, despite the period coinciding with schools, universities and offices starting to reopen^.

Unconvinced by the testing figures, City Hall analysed other data including visits to GPs, calls to NHS 111 and hospital admissions, and came to the conclusion that London was not far behind other virus hotspots.

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/25/sadiq-khan-urges-pm-to-ban-household-visits-in-london-to-tackle-covid

I think Sadiq Khan strongly suspects the same as me.

It will be just like the first wave. London very badly hit - partly because right up until it was too late to take containment measures, many people, government included, were denying and downplaying the extent of the situation there.

I also think that some areas spiralled out of control mid to late sept due to testing shortages which would have meant contact tracing was limited and late.

This was shared on 19th sept taken from the week before. It's noticeable that in London it was relatively easy to get a test compared to other key areas that have since got out of hand.

Where's your info from @NeurotrashWarrior?
London's test shortages were widely reported. Not just by Sadiq Khan. It was mentioned in the media, and plenty of London mumsnetters posted about their difficulties. The lack of home test availability was a particular problem because London has more non drivers than other places.

That was the Times around 19th sept.

My point is, at that time, test availability was better than elsewhere, notably areas that are now really struggling.

That's going to have had some impact in terms of contact tracing and spread elsewhere and London.

I'm simply suggesting London could be a little behind in terms of a bigger spike; perhaps the NE and NW would be better if they'd had better test availability? Positivity was high at that time in those areas.

I think that Tines report was just based on journalists trying 5 times to get a test for postcodes in each area wasn’t it? So not official data as to availability.

I guess we can all agree that the testing system is still not functioning as it should to meet the needs of the pandemic ( even taking as given that no country can have unlimited testing).

The BBC news just states that despite London councils requesting extra measures central government does not want to impose and will watch the data further.

Certainly from watching the numbers for my borough ad the surrounding 5 through littleowls helpful emails something funny did seem to happen last week and the week before in that cases everywhere dropped. This week they have returned back to nearer the daily numbers before those two weeks again and rising ( although cumulatively there is still a lag). So it did look like something a bit odd happened those two weeks.

I think people in London ( well some) are nervous because despite what is sometimes thought it felt like the lockdown was too late for London in March. I guess we have to hope that the wfh guidance may help here.

But the Times journalists would have been using the NHS booking site exactly the same as everyone else, so the research was fair, surely?

No idea @Augustbreeze. For example in London I think drive through was more available ( although relatively far away) but no home testing despite low car use. This could have been replicated elsewhere not just saying it’s a London problem. I guess all I was saying is it’s difficult to know how accurate that Times map was.

We will of course see in the next few weeks I guess. Overall I think it would obviously be good if every area gets the attention and resource it needs.

I’m probably a bit over sensitive as I come from way up north but have also lived in London.

Monday down ~8% from the previous Monday ( 4,044 vs 4,368)
but Sunday massively up from Sunday 20th (5,693 vs 3,899)

To see current trend, we need at least a few more days data,
especially of hospital admissions, which are a more reliable - although older - indication than confirmed cases

That is a fair point Little, we don't know how accurate the times map was.

There's a long Covid thing on radio 4 today, inside science, 11:00 am.

Only the data will demonstrate what is happening in London. The central London streets are empty and public transport in the day is much diminished re numbers using. The issue is socialising and cramming onto the streets at night by the young and less vulnerable.

Everyone talks about London Not locking down and the disease escalating but whilst the official lockdown was 23rd March, people retreated from about 10th March. DS and DH went in until 20th and both reported it became creakily eerie. My institution closed on 16th.

My suspicion is that Covid was rife and growing throughout February and that the impact on London of this wave may be muted. SK's views may be influenced by his home turf - Tooting which demographically reflects some of the hard hit northern areas.

Despite working for a large institution and three of us going up to London, none of us know more than a tiny handful who have had Covid. Looking back a member of my team lost taste and smell (someone who would be classed as vulberable) and a couple of others were ill with shocking chesty viruses in Feb. Without a widespread antibody test it is hard to assess future risk. However bearing in mind the testing fiasco how they will roll out a vaccine if we get one, goodness only knows.

Delighted that the councillor of Gateshead has pointed out that we got infections to a level where track and trace would have been effective but it wasn't fit for purpose in R4 just now.

I am certain that case numbers will be up again today but anything under 5,000 would still be really promising IMO after the few days of 6,000+

@NeurotrashWarrior

Delighted that the councillor of Gateshead has pointed out that we got infections to a level where track and trace would have been effective but it wasn't fit for purpose in R4 just now.

I agree. We could have been in the much improved situation if things had been managed properly. I get so angry about it!

Came back to the thread after a little while and I have a request - this thread was excellent for focusing on data.

I’ve found the past few pages to be quite full of opinion and predictions.

While I appreciate people want to give opinion, would it be possible to keep the conversation more about the data and analysing it?

@Augustbreeze

But the Times journalists would have been using the NHS booking site exactly the same as everyone else, so the research was fair, surely?

Yes, but only 5 times isn't definitive. If say 1% don't get through, you could be unlucky and not get through twice, if 50% don't get through, you could still be lucky and get all 5. You'd need to do far higher numbers of tests per region to really show it.

However the map is very regional, there's very few regions on the map that stand out compared to ones around them, which makes me suspect it is reasonably accurate.

And you also have to add in the effect of people saying "I tried 150 times and didn't get a test anyway"-will that then mean people don't even bother trying.

@1990s

Came back to the thread after a little while and I have a request - this thread was excellent for focusing on data.

I’ve found the past few pages to be quite full of opinion and predictions.

While I appreciate people want to give opinion, would it be possible to keep the conversation more about the data and analysing it?

Agreed!

They didn't check five times. They checked five postcodes from each LA once an hour for 24 hours.

@1990s

Came back to the thread after a little while and I have a request - this thread was excellent for focusing on data.

I’ve found the past few pages to be quite full of opinion and predictions.

While I appreciate people want to give opinion, would it be possible to keep the conversation more about the data and analysing it?

I think the problem is there is a lack of data in some key areas where the government really should be providing it. E.g. the data on school closures is lacking and not easily accessible to say the least. In some cases it seems to be actively hidden. There seems to be no testing of close contacts of positive tests which - given the rate of asymptomatic children seen in other studies (60% in the Israeli outbreaks) - means we cannot know what is happening with transmission in schools.

So when that happens, you get more opinion.

I think it's fair enough to discuss lack of data and give opinions on how this affects the picture given by the data we do have and how accurate it is.

@1990s

Came back to the thread after a little while and I have a request - this thread was excellent for focusing on data.

I’ve found the past few pages to be quite full of opinion and predictions.

While I appreciate people want to give opinion, would it be possible to keep the conversation more about the data and analysing it?

Agreed

I think it's also that this thread has people on it, not least the OP, who actually understand the numbers, to a far greater degree than most of us.

Any other coronavirus threads (eg Worried About Coronavirus) do not have those people, so you're left pontificating in the dark!

Posters on here are pretty much all craving facts. But also wanting discussion with informed, rational people who are interested in the pandemic.

I don't know what the answer is.