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
📈 📉 📊 👍

@AHippoNamedBooBooButt
I was having similar cynical thoughts. I don't know if this is normal on a Saturday, but the BBC still has Fridays numbers, and discovering it at a weekend just after the report yesterday.
I'm hoping I'm being cynical.

@AHippoNamedBooBooButt

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....

... Too many people would have to be keeping quiet

It just looks like the collating and reporting systems are not very reliable, rather than any deliberate manipulation

Worldometres is saying just over 7 thousand for today.

The suggestion that cases might be levelling off were primarily based on (i) the Imperial /REACT study and (ii) the Friday ONS survey results. Zoe swab data also points to the same conclusion. Population level studies (especially ONS) are generally quite reliable.

I do not think that many people used daily case numbers to argue the case. Earlier this month getting a test was challenging so week-on-week comparisons would in any case be misleading.

The Whitty/Valance graph was based on a doubling every 7 days; based on specimen dates, we are tracking on a doubling every 14 days at the moment. Graphs credit to @rp131 on Twitter.

Good thread summarizing most recent research re: kids + covid, from Zoe Hyde, epidemiologist

twitter.com/DrZoeHyde/status/1312392762445066243

I think these are interesting in a bigger context as well, because many workplaces eg. factories, don't differ really from schools.

I was also getting cautiously optimistic after a few days of flat hospital admissions (in England) but, unfortunately, we have now seen growth from Sep 27 to Oct 1.

Zoe Hyde is only presenting one side of the story. There are well thought out arguments why a lot of studies referenced in her post may lead to a different conclusion.

The balanced approach would be to read both Zoe Hyde and Alasdair Munro and only then decide which point of view is more convincing.

@BigChocFrenzy
I agree 100% it was very much othering.

I'm glad they've stopped doing it - except that by now the damage is done.

Many assume it happens only to Other People. The amount of posts I see suggesting the deaths are confined only to 'the old and ill' - and that this is ok ('a price worth paying' etc) because these people are apparently expendable.

Part of me thinks cynically the only reason they would stop Othering in their reporting is if more previously fit and healthy (as in no underlying conditions at all) are dying.

@wintertravel1980

The suggestion that cases might be levelling off were primarily based on (i) the Imperial /REACT study and (ii) the Friday ONS survey results. Zoe swab data also points to the same conclusion. Population level studies (especially ONS) are generally quite reliable.

I do not think that many people used daily case numbers to argue the case. Earlier this month getting a test was challenging so week-on-week comparisons would in any case be misleading.

... "I do not think that many people used daily case numbers to argue the case"

The great majority of people only read the daily figures, not ONS or REACH

• we are a small minority community of nerds !

Widely circulated on social media is a chart showing the Whitty / Vallance prediction and the daily cases being so far under
This has been used to say that the public health authorities are trying to scare people and that the current SD measures etc are unnecessary and overblown
Much circulated among mask-refusers etc

I would like to know whether the positive test info was given to track & trace at the time, or whether this has only just been done
Hopefully the former, but this information should be given

If people still got their results (which the explanation this evening stated they did), surely T&T would have been notified almost simultaneously?

Am I correct in thinking that the headline figure for daily total positive cases for U.K. is cases by date reported - not specimen date.

Ive always assumed that it’s by date reported as it would be logistically impossible to have it by specimen date unless they lagged the data some how and I would expect that to be disclosed in their data disclaimer if it were the case.

@Pertella
From @ukcovid19stats on Twitter

I don't agree about Zoe Hyde , sorry. Munro campaigns and has an open agenda about schools. He almost entirely uses quite dated studies and is not an epidemiologist.

Zoe Hyde seems more objective to me.

I find that message in the dashboard immensely unclear and unspecific. So it sounds like they are going to add a load of cases from 249 - 1/10 to the cases by reported date for the U.K. (and nations perhaps?) over the coming days. Ok - I get that. But are they doing the same by specimen date (ie adding historical cases to the next few days data) or will they retrospectively add the omitted cases to the correct historical specimen date.

I would assume this will be somewhat driven by whether they know the specimen date of the case results they have “found”. I might try contacting them to find out. I would like to understand that. If they are adding cases with historical specimen dates to future specimen dates it will grossly overstate cases by specimen date over next few days.

Yeah I have mild asthma. Never had a proper asthma attack so noy going to kill me but COVID might.

@littleowl1

Am I correct in thinking that the headline figure for daily total positive cases for U.K. is cases by date reported - not specimen date.

Ive always assumed that it’s by date reported as it would be logistically impossible to have it by specimen date unless they lagged the data some how and I would expect that to be disclosed in their data disclaimer if it were the case.

yes, which regularly confounds the media.

although as the Beeb appear unable to differentiate between the median and the mean.........expecting them to grasp the fundamental difference between reported and specimen date is perhaps a forlorn hope.

Is there any way for the lay person to calculate whether this means an increase in the positivity rate - or is it 'just' that a higher number of test results are being reported today, so the number of positive tests will also be higher. (Had a quick look at the dashboard and you can't just divide the number of tests done by the 12k positives, as the former include antibody tests.)
So I suppose my basic question is - do we know from these figures whether they manifest an increase in the percentage of people testing positive? (Sorry if this is answered further up the thread!)

[quote MarcelineMissouri]@Pertella
From @ukcovid19stats on Twitter[/quote]
Just what I was looking for. Thanks 😊

Would it be totally wrong to say that the only consistent metric we have for now and march/April/may is the numbers admitted to hospital?

@Piggywaspushed

I don't agree about Zoe Hyde , sorry. Munro campaigns and has an open agenda about schools. He almost entirely uses quite dated studies and is not an epidemiologist.

Zoe Hyde seems more objective to me.

I'm confused to what you are actually saying. You don't like Zoe Hyde, but you do?

This is the one I'm referencing:

Dr Zoë Hyde
@DrZoeHyde
Epidemiologist, Neue Deutsche Härte fan, avid reader of science fiction, contrarian.

Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.
Perth, Western Australia.publons.com/researcher/286…Joined January 2020
209 Following
18.7K Followers
Followed by Prof. Devi Sridhar, Adam Hamdy, and 3 others you follow

She seems legit.

@Wemayhavemetbefore

Is there any way for the lay person to calculate whether this means an increase in the positivity rate - or is it 'just' that a higher number of test results are being reported today, so the number of positive tests will also be higher. (Had a quick look at the dashboard and you can't just divide the number of tests done by the 12k positives, as the former include antibody tests.) So I suppose my basic question is - do we know from these figures whether they manifest an increase in the percentage of people testing positive? (Sorry if this is answered further up the thread!)

... Finding / adding thousands of positive tests automatically increases % positivity over some time period

However, we can't yet assign the additional positives to the correct days
So we can't work it out atm

@Wemayhavemetbefore - I expect it would do, because we have about 1000 extra cases per day add the positivity added up before (unless there is also an increase in the number of tests run).

I wonder if it was investigating the Northumbria figures discrepancy that they found an error in picking up cases. There's a surprisingly consistent proportional gap with the added cases stretching back over time. Could be a timing gap on integration for example; collect all cases up to 3.30pm today and then anything processed after 3.30pm isn't picked up the next day unless it's after midnight. If so they would have got the main labs to fix it, but maybe still have contact some small labs for the same. Integration with T&T would be separate.

we can't yet assign the additional positives to the correct days
They look assigned to me?

Thanks, Yes mrex and bigchoc i suppose thats my question - were there also more tests run than previously thought? So if on mrex’s hypothesis a particular testing centre’s results have been omitted by mistake all this week, then you’d have to also know how many negative results that centre found, in order to see if there’s been An increase in the proportion of people who are testing positive over the past week.