Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 21

[BigChocFrenzy]

Welcome to thread 21 of the daily updates

Resource links:

Uk dashboard deaths, cases, hospitals, tests - 4 nations, English regions & LAs
R estimates UK & English regions
Imperial UK weekly LAs, cases / 100k, table, map, hotspots
UK School statistics Attendance
Modelling real number of UK infections February to date
NHS England Hospital activity
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
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 analytical contributions
Please try to keep discussion focused on these
📈 📉 📊 👍

Wonder if the university testing has somehow been missed off previously? Manchester has had about 250 cases in total added to the previous 7 days as well I think

@Shitfuckoh

''Over the coming days'' tells me that whilst todays number is high, they haven't put all the cases on. Which makes them even more worrying.

Thats the bit that concerns me too

Another thought. How can they know which places need to be on the watch list / restrictions imposed, if they aren't keeping up to date & on track with all the data?

According to my local council ... sorry I dont know to link.. Northumberland was at 150/100,000 and broken down my small town was at 259/100,000. My dc primary school only one in area not had cases as they made mask wearing mandatory from day one. No children to mix outside school or have to isolate for 14 days etc

Mobile testing labs - harder to process or more delays?

''Over the coming days'' may take the numbers to the Whitty / Vallance scenario

However, although getting closer, we have had several days of being well under, accumulated ~50% before today,
so the previous and the updated figures both reduce confidence in the system, the predictions and the daily stats

Epidemiologists keep saying that public trust is very important in a public health emergency, for compliance with official measures
The standard of collating and reporting needs genuine improvement, not spin

Seen an alarming graph on Twitter will try and screenshot which says that these 12k+ tests come from 76 dates stretching back to March. What the hell.

Deaths might be low now but that is deaths within 28 days of a positive test which is not necessarily the full picture.
I sincerely hope that it remains low either because of who is catching it or the virus is weakening or the impact of increased testing.

Here we go if you can make sense of this

This helps explain what has been going wrong
and that they will trying to correct it / update the dashboard over the next several days

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/oct/03/coronavirus-live-news-australia-sydney-melbourne-victoria-who-rapid-covid-19-test-donald-trump-positiveglobal-news-latest-updates

A spokesperson for the UK’s Department of Health and Social Care has told the Guardian that the government currently does not know exactly how many new infections were recorded in the past 24 hours.

They said “some new data” would be published over the next couple of days,
“but currently, we do not have a breakdown showing which cases are from today and which from a previous period”.

A technical issue resulting in conflated old and new test results was blamed,
and the spokesperson said this would affect reported cases for a number of days.

“This issue does not affect people receiving their Covid-19 test results.
All people who tested positive have received their Covid-19 test result in the normal way,”
they added.

The delayed results all refer to positive cases identified between 24 September and 1 October.

“The issue will affect the total new cases published on the Covid-19 dashboard over the coming days,
which will be updated to provide accurate data on the total number of positive cases over this period,”
the spokesperson added.

Also, if we have a lag in cases, it's not impossible that there might be a lag in deaths.

It does make you wonder how accurate any of the figures are.

@herecomesthsun

Also, if we have a lag in cases, it's not impossible that there might be a lag in deaths.

It does make you wonder how accurate any of the figures are.

... The ONS would pick up Covid deaths, up to about 10 days in the past

We've no evidence that death certificates are being delayed, which is what it would take to prevent the ONS flagging up extra deaths

@BigChocFrenzy

So why then did we have lags of several weeks or months before deaths got added to the figures, over the summer? Has that been sorted out?

The ONS and PHE surveillance studies are a good guide to the population level infection

Missing cases from testing would mean more infection spread, of course
However, are the tests results mislaid / delayed / lost, or is it just a collating / reporting issue, as seems more likely

Are they still including the ages (and whether or not they had an underlying condition) of those who've died?

The daily announcement used to be something along the lines of 'today 72 people have sadly died. Aged between 32 and 80, 10 of whom had no known underlying condition'.

BCF, based on the information you've read so far. Do you find todays figure (and possibly more to come over the next few days) concerning or do you think they're level with what you thought cases would be?

(Well here's something positive - testing capacity appears to be increasing, at least in my area. In theory it should have gone down as we stopped being an area of concern about a week ago.

But I just looked, and there are 100s of drive through and walk in tests available, unlike 3 weeks ago when it was suggested I make a 130 mile round trip.)

[quote herecomesthsun]@BigChocFrenzy

So why then did we have lags of several weeks or months before deaths got added to the figures, over the summer? Has that been sorted out?[/quote]
...
There was an update at the end of April when care home and other non-hospital deaths were added to the official figures

This made a big difference and the previous figures were updated over the next days

There were small updates over summer and since, which is to be expected if there are autopsies, delays in death certificates etc

However, have there been any really major updates to deaths after the care homes were added ?
I can't recall this - although I may have been busy at the time !

@Shitfuckoh

BCF, based on the information you've read so far. Do you find todays figure (and possibly more to come over the next few days) concerning or do you think they're level with what you thought cases would be?

.... imo, it looks like the case figures are just going to come up to, or a little below, the Whitty / Vallance prediction from 21 September

The only update over summer was the reduction in death numbers when PHE switched to the 28 days cut off from the date of the positive test.

There were no other major updates increasing death numbers post addition of care home deaths / deaths in all settings (back in spring).

I am sure I read age range 40 to 80

@SheepandCow

Are they still including the ages (and whether or not they had an underlying condition) of those who've died?

The daily announcement used to be something along the lines of 'today 72 people have sadly died. Aged between 32 and 80, 10 of whom had no known underlying condition'.

... remember that "underlying condition" including conditions they monitored but had no likely effect on death e.g. autism, LDs as well as conditions people live with for years, e.g. T1, T2, high BP etc

I consider it othering, so I hope they just leave that info for the detailled weekly reports

I thought it was interesting that in the news over the last couple of days has been how cases are levelling off the suddenly this massive hike. And it's interesting how these numbers just happen to be added to today's figures, a day when they have been buried in the news as its all about trump. It's been well know the government has previously kept bad news back, ready to release on a day it won't get noticed much. Maybe I'm just cynical....

BCF thank you. Very helpful as always & always value your opinion.

Yes, I certainly remember the reduction with the 28 day limit for England
(the other 3 nations already used it)

but only minor additions to deaths

As we know from ONS stats, the more accurate figure lies between 28 and 60 days,
but for the daily announcement, the WHO and nearly all countries around the world use 28 days, so England should too