Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 22

[BigChocFrenzy]

Welcome to thread 22 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
School statistics Attendance
Modelling real number of UK infections February to date
NHS England Hospital activity
NHs England Daily deaths
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
📈 📉 📊 👍

@MarshaBradyo

He is looking at data so I don’t think it matters so much about inside the classroom, he won’t be speculating on what should happen given SD but what is happening.

He is basing it on the extent to which cases are amplified by the various age groups being in schools.

.... Yes this is an important point

Many teachers on MN seem to think that public health experts don't know about the lack of SD in schools and hence are giving the wrong advice

Those experts are in fact looking at data about infections and illness in schools, compared to the local community level
They don't need to know about how much SD is in schools unless they want to recommend changing it.

The evidence so far, not just from the UK, is that schools reflect community levels, but don't add much to it
Also that teachers aren't dying at a higher rate than the average adult of working age
Yes, I know there is concern about Long Covid, but there is a reasonable assumption that if deaths aren't higher, then serious illness isn't either

So, as we've discussed before, schools are not Covid-secure,
but trying to keep them open ft is a balance of slightly increased transmission vs huge short term and longterm benefit to most students and to working parents
Parents' jobs matter to kids too - there is serious risk of disadvantage to them if their parents lose jobs, cannot pay bills, get into financial difficulties, even risk losing their home

The whole community is damaged long term by mass unemployment, business / personal bankruptcies, much reduced tax take, many more people on benefits,
just as they would be by a sudden wave of deaths

So the risk / benefit balance and the measures for school and e.g. the hospitality sector would change if experts predict very high deaths in probable - not worst case scenarios.

The government could and should invest and change some rules to make ft schools safer
However, govt incompetence, cronyism and failures still do not significantly change the risk / benefit analysis of keeping them ft at current levels of infection & death

re mandatory masks in class:
in a democracy policed by consent, there has to be a large majority of parents who agree to this before enough students would comply properly

• leaving it to each head to decide might work, if they can judge the acceptance level in their particular school.

Ditto acceptance required before pt schools

@IloveJKRowling - again, there are actually facts that can be used. Schoolchild age WERE massively over-represented in the testing stats in August in Scotland, and in September in England. In England, only 1% of 200,000 children tested over 2 weeks WITH SYMPTOMS had a positive result. What they actually had was rhinovirus, in huge numbers, as happens every year at the start of the school year.

If there was a robust proactive testing approach in schools as in universities then I would be very interested in hearing about the data and interpretation of that data.

But we just don't have the data in the UK. And it's not really that helpful to teachers in real time and parents in real time to speculate about studies done under completely different conditions.

In fact it's fairly unscientific to try and compare studies done under completely different conditions. It would not be allowed in a peer reviewed paper.

They're doing the equivalent of endlessly interviewing scientists about growing lemons in Italy and asserting there is no reason to suggest that lemons won't grow in the UK. Why not try and grow lemons under UK conditions and monitor that instead?

Why aren't they doing proper monitoring of schools? Particularly in the NW they should be proactively testing schoolchildren - particularly where there has been a positive case to see how many asymptomatic positives there are.

Instead PHE is sending letters to parents (via the school) telling parents they must not test their children unless they have fever, cough or loss of smell and taste.

Why are they testing students who don't have these symptoms (and I know some personally who have been tested, and got positive tests, who simply had fatigue and headache), but not schoolchildren?

Rhinoviruses often have the same symptoms as the 3 PHE symptoms for testing.

It may well be the case that coronavirus is more likely to be asymptomatic in young children than rhinovirus. Unless we test we won't know.

So again, where there is a positive case why not test the other close contact children?

As Mrex just posted, children are already massively over-represented in those being tested
The public health authorities are not increasing testing of children even further because only 1% of even those with symptoms turn out to be positive

There is a limited number of tests in any country, so what there is available needs to be carefully targeted

Also, the tests are unpleasant for anyone, let alone children, some of whom would have to be physically overpowered to continue a test, or to have a 2nd test once they know what it is like

We need to base decisions on data and statistics, not on emotions and feelings

The other thing we do have some data on is the damage done to many children from lack of education and support ( in the broadest sense).

This is why many, many teachers do support schools staying open particularly given that the evidence we have at the moment is that primary does not seem to increase Covid incidence.

We cannot test everyone.

And if there is no clear evidence there, then surely it is just as bad to make the assumptions the other way?

A camp in US is completely different to a UK school.

We need to remember that schools closed on 19th March in the UK.

OK we were not testing then, but how many cases a day did we have in reality?

There was mass exposure then to the virus, but still school staff were not over represented in the ONS figures I think from May.

I have posted on a few schools threads saying that the evidence/data as it stands doesn't support the idea that schools are a driver of infection. It hasn't generally gone down that well!

There is a long thread at the moment referencing an article in the Guardian suggesting that schools are a key cause but the data that they use in the article doesn't actually seem to suggest anything of the sort.

I am very worried about silent spread in secondaries.

Piggywashed - I think the stigma you talk about connected with testing in schools is the fear of causing disruption and further lack of learning.

So many teachers and students were off at the beginning due to just one case, in our school.

It seems now that schools are seeing that kids and teachers are not dropping like flies, they are choosing to carry on regardless and turn a blind eye to potential cases.

We need to base decisions on data and statistics, not on emotions and feelings

Agree, which is why it's a shame there is so little gathering or sharing of data for UK schools.

I personally would like real time data - as a parent - on how many local schools are closed or partly closed because of positive cases, knowing that children from different schools are mixing freely at out of school activities. Instead it's just rumours at the school gate, which surely is actually worse, as no-one knows whether to believe it or not. Why? Why not share this information freely with parents - particularly ECV parents?

It seems now that schools are seeing that kids and teachers are not dropping like flies, they are choosing to carry on regardless and turn a blind eye to potential cases.

This is very worrying. Particularly for ECV students, parents and teachers.

@IloveJKRowling

It seems now that schools are seeing that kids and teachers are not dropping like flies, they are choosing to carry on regardless and turn a blind eye to potential cases.

This is very worrying. Particularly for ECV students, parents and teachers.

It is very worrying.

It is irresponsible and dangerous.

I feel quite despairing. We are so lost at the moment, without test and trace working.

I agree we shouldn't test everyone - we should take a few schools in the NW perhaps and test the close contacts of positive cases to see what proportion of asymptomatic positive children there are. Then test their close contacts in the home and see if they spread it to their family.

Then, if it shows what everyone wants it to show, it would be massively reassuring to all the parents in the UK. Including those who are most vulnerable.

(test and monitor their close contacts)

IF they'd had this set up at the start of term, we could have had initial findings by now.

Why not test children with (child related) symptoms as and when, and teaching staff, say, weekly, or if in contact with someone testing positive? A few children testing positive won’t close the school, but enough teachers self isolating could.

@BigChocFrenzy

We need to base decisions on data and statistics, not on emotions and feelings

Agree. This is a science based thread.

There is plenty of speculation elsewhere (everywhere).

Just an aside, feeling a little spiteful - my manager, who has been insisting that I and my colleague work (teaching) pretty much as normal (we’re both fairly high risk due to age and health), is now self isolating because one of his DC has tested positive (and is asymptomatic and well, I’m happy to say). Says this was very unexpected as clearly believed in the magic virus repellent feature of classrooms.

If atm schools seem to replicate the community transmission rate wouldn't it be a sensible approach to assume that as community cases go up school cases go up somewhat proportionally. For me this begs 2 questions:

1. wouldn't it make sense to replicate community measures?
2. Wouldn't it be logical to set a threshold where schools need to move to partial/full online learning? Same logic as with threshold per area=lockdowns, more stringent measures

I personally would feel that if these 2 pieces were discussed, implemented we would be in a better place already. Of course TTR -in general- would be needed.

Would anyone more numbers oriented care to look at this?
Multiple models overlayed on US CDC seasonal flu deaths to try to speculate(?) IFR.

twitter.com/laoneill111/status/1313542640391139329/photo/1

Interesting, but I don't have time to look into it more.

@TheSunIsStillShining I agree.

@TheSunIsStillShining

If atm schools seem to replicate the community transmission rate wouldn't it be a sensible approach to assume that as community cases go up school cases go up somewhat proportionally. For me this begs 2 questions:

1. wouldn't it make sense to replicate community measures?
2. Wouldn't it be logical to set a threshold where schools need to move to partial/full online learning? Same logic as with threshold per area=lockdowns, more stringent measures

I personally would feel that if these 2 pieces were discussed, implemented we would be in a better place already. Of course TTR -in general- would be needed.

1. Primary age transmission is lower than adults in community, less likely to get it and also to spread it. Professor Semple 1/4 to 1/2 as likely to become infected and less likely to pass it on.

1. There is already tier 2

Also that teachers aren't dying at a higher rate than the average adult of working age

I am not suggesting this has changed but when was the last time occupational stats were released?

We just need a test that is easier to administer on children - the saliva test or whatever. Then more parents would be willing to do it I think.

After the initial snotty cold/cough that went round in our school, there hasn't really been any major issue with illness or absence. Most issues are with staff - either for themselves, or for getting tests for their secondary children, or being off for childcare of year 7/8/9 children who are isolating.

Staffing is what will cause issues in school.