Daily numbers, graphs, analysis thread 23

[BigChocFrenzy]

Welcome to thread 23 of the daily updates

Resource links:

Uk dashboard deaths, cases, hospitals, tests - 4 nations, English regions & LAs
UK govt pressers Slides & data
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
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
Zoe Uk data
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
📈 📉 📊 👍

I think introducing a formal scheme to allow children to be removed from educational settings temporarily to help families manage the risk factors is sensible yes but obviously that is more about helping individuals where I was considering more about how we take effective nation wide action to bring down the infection rate.

This is where I am interested in more data about this key 16-24 group. In particular the difference between 16 -18 year olds and 18-24 year olds yes. But also the difference between those in education settings and those not, we assume that this is uni and collage but what impact is low paid zero hour contract work having in this group (less than fifty percent in the 18-24 age group will be at uni). Given their lower wages and less likely to have savings are failure to financially support self isolation may be impacting highly on this age group for example. What about accommodation spread yes uni, but rates of multiple occupancy accommodation must be high for this age group. I just think this is where we have a bit of a data gap and the “stop being so irresponsible you silly young people” message is not helpful re trying to work out what is going on and how to stop it!

We are in the ONS study, except we didn't get a visit this week. There is another MN thread on the erratic testing.

DD rarely gets tested because few testers are willing to arrive before 8 or after 4pm.

What I don't understand is the argument for saying that lockdown ended too soon for the North. On paper the North should have been able to come out of lockdown earlier than the south

This argument relies on underestimating the nature of the continued spread after lockdown, there's a much smaller pool of contacts, but there is still a pool of people who are susceptible - healthcare, emergency services, supermarket workers - the people who come into contact with large numbers of people both to infect and become infected. Locking down later, would mean that more of these individuals had "herd immunity" such that these people were all immune so couldn't spread it around so much. Which explains the lower London rate.

However I can't see the evidence really supporting coming out of lockdown too early, since the numbers stayed bumbling along at those low rates for quite awhile, and other areas rates soon reached the same numbers as the NW but haven't (yet) followed the same path.

Ds's primary school has been in touch today setting up the home learning platform in case of lockdown.

Its now the only school in the local area that hasnt had a burst bubble due to a positive test.

@Qasd

I think introducing a formal scheme to allow children to be removed from educational settings temporarily to help families manage the risk factors is sensible yes but obviously that is more about helping individuals where I was considering more about how we take effective nation wide action to bring down the infection rate.

This is where I am interested in more data about this key 16-24 group. In particular the difference between 16 -18 year olds and 18-24 year olds yes. But also the difference between those in education settings and those not, we assume that this is uni and collage but what impact is low paid zero hour contract work having in this group (less than fifty percent in the 18-24 age group will be at uni). Given their lower wages and less likely to have savings are failure to financially support self isolation may be impacting highly on this age group for example. What about accommodation spread yes uni, but rates of multiple occupancy accommodation must be high for this age group. I just think this is where we have a bit of a data gap and the “stop being so irresponsible you silly young people” message is not helpful re trying to work out what is going on and how to stop it!

I'm inclined to think that reducing bubble sizes in schools is likely to be evidence-based and effective given what we know about how reducing contact numbers works with adults -- and perhaps justified given the new information we have about how children catch and spread Covid-19. So maybe part-time schooling and blended learning isn't crazy from that perspective.

I start thinking about how tough that would be for working parents, though, and I can see why they are reluctant to do anything.

It's so difficult, isn't it!

Maybe there is an argument that we need to think about a universal basic income for one parent from every household.

However I can't see the evidence really supporting coming out of lockdown too early, since the numbers stayed bumbling along at those low rates for quite awhile, and other areas rates soon reached the same numbers as the NW but haven't (yet) followed the same path

Anyone in an area of low cases needs to reflect how quickly some places in the north went from no cases and way below the national average for cases per 100,000 to being at levels of concern. In far too many cases it was 10 to 14 days from nothing to a problem.

@RedToothBrush

Ds's primary school has been in touch today setting up the home learning platform in case of lockdown.

Its now the only school in the local area that hasnt had a burst bubble due to a positive test.

It's law I believe after the 22nd.

@RedToothBrush

I can completely see that things can change very quickly. I'm in the SE and we are ok for now but in 2 weeks it could be completely different.

I don't think that supports the point that lockdown ended too early in the North though? I'm not trying to pick holes I just see this point raised a lot and I genuinely don't understand the argument!

Our school were very good during lockdown and the DC did have prerecorded lessons. There were covering new learning during that time. Although i suspect the offering will be even better this time as I know they have been working hard on it.

[quote Sunshinegirl82]@RedToothBrush

I can completely see that things can change very quickly. I'm in the SE and we are ok for now but in 2 weeks it could be completely different.

I don't think that supports the point that lockdown ended too early in the North though? I'm not trying to pick holes I just see this point raised a lot and I genuinely don't understand the argument![/quote]
I think lockdown ended too early here. More people working in low paid front line jobs per head of population. And less cases here initially perhaps leading to more complacency. And a great NW attitude towards distrust of 'the establishment'.

Cases here were still at a level of concern when ds's school went back in June.

@RedToothBrush

It's not that I necessarily disagree that lockdown ended to early in certain areas. To my mind the question is why were numbers still high in certain areas despite a long period of lockdown from a lower base level of cases? They should have come down faster in principle.

My concern is that if there is some fundamental problem with the restrictions/the way the restrictions work in certain areas (for example, widespread disengagement) then just piling on more and more restrictions in those areas is unlikely to have much of an impact.

I do not think there is any tangible evidence that the lockdown in the North West ended too early. I previously included links to a couple of ONS surveys from this summer. When we started lifting restrictions, prevalence in the North was very low (and definitely lower than in London).

Of course, there is a potential counterargument - ONS surveys back in summer were not indicative of the situation in some of the sub-regions/groups and infections in the North kept spreading below the radar. In this case the problem was not the length of the lockdown - it was its effectiveness/ineffectiveness.

In England schools reopened on 1st June. In Merseyside and Sefton, we didn’t send children back until 22nd June, because until that point the R was still above 1 locally.

By 22nd June, many more people were being encouraged back into work and interactions; implying that while the R and infections had dropped in the rest of the country, they hadn’t yet around here and as such lockdown could be viewed as having lifted too early

@GetAMoveOnTroodon

All of Red’s points about NW hospitals are 100% true. I also think there’s an alarming level of ignorance surrounding it with Westminster.

So no lessons learned? You'd think they'd want to avoid a repeat of what happened in London in March (Birmingham too, I believe).

ONS surveys only monitor the cooperative
and cannot say anything about the numbers who stay under the radar outof habit, who avoid all tests because they can't afford / cba to isolate

It may be the infection smouldered in this hidden underbelly all the time and then the end of lockdown allowed the embers to travel

The difficulty with Covid and low dispersion factor / superspreader is that it can probably stay under the radar spreading widely at a low level among working age people,
then suddenly large groups are allowed and at some time the number of superspreader events rockets and also infection spreads to more vulnerable groups

I saw Sweden mentioned earlier.
We can't compare to them. 50% of the Swedish population lives in single person households. Very easy to self isolate and socially distance in that setup.

If patients are just left to accumulate in NW hospitals, then does central government plan to leave regions outside London to sink or swim ?
The regions don't have sufficient autonomy or devolved resources to cope on their own, especially councils in very deprived areas

More likely, there is no coherent strategy or planning, just stumbling along from day to day

A densely populated country containing a "world city" and with extensive international connections
cannot copy the strategy of either Sweden or new Zealand and expect it to work

A Western country cannot copy Taiwan / SKorea / VietNam either

A wild and probably barking up the wrong tree speculative guess... but is it perhaps in any way possible that more people from the north west travelled abroad this summer? Airports provide a wonderful opportunity for a virus to spread. (Unlikely, I know, what with Heathrow being the world's busiest airport.)

If we're still having testing/spreadsheet problems, isn't it better to go by hospital admissions? I don't see how we can have a true picture of how many cases - and where - when the testing system is such a mess?

FYI Germany

15,000 soldiers have been made available to help civil authorities with medical support, transport, t&t etc
More available if needed, including airforce transport and personnel

Currently only 1,400 are being used, but the rest are on standby

www.tagesschau.de/inland/corona-bundeswehr-105.html

Sheep - most of the issues around the NW hospitals are infrastructure based, with the best will in the world no government could have been expected to construct new transport networks or proper hospitals over the summer.

The real question that needs focussing on is Choc’s - are they going to leave us to sink or take patients elsewhere?

@BigChocFrenzy

If patients are just left to accumulate in NW hospitals, then does central government plan to leave regions outside London to sink or swim ? The regions don't have sufficient autonomy or devolved resources to cope on their own, especially councils in very deprived areas

More likely, there is no coherent strategy or planning, just stumbling along from day to day

I would assume yes. Afterall they left London to sink or swim back in March. I'd like to think they'd learned lessons but it seems perhaps not?

It's surely will not, rather than cannot. Nowhere is helplessly an international 'hub'. New York City is normally an international hub but temporarily restricted it's borders after it was hit so hard at the start. Essential travel ie imports only.

Sweden, I agree. It's impossible to overnight get half the population into single person households or raise the NHS up to the standard of the well funded Swedish healthcare system.

@BigChocFrenzy

If patients are just left to accumulate in NW hospitals, then does central government plan to leave regions outside London to sink or swim ? The regions don't have sufficient autonomy or devolved resources to cope on their own, especially councils in very deprived areas

More likely, there is no coherent strategy or planning, just stumbling along from day to day

Thats more or less what local leaders in the North are saying tbh.

And ive got to be honest, i dont think its along political lines either.

There are a number of NW Tory MPs who have openly critical of lack of accessible testing and no coherent planning. Even if they do support things being open more than their Labour counter parts.

I was talking about this yesterday and how part of the psychological problem now with the public is no strategy at all. And how that means we cant monitor and assess how far down the rabbit warren we are, and have no sense of what marker points we need to pass.

During the original lockdown we had numbers and timescales that largely played out and we could understand with the daily presser to provide a sense of how we were going.

Now the north feels abandoned. Theres no sense if what happens next. Whether there is a local plan. What the implications for the north being restricted for so long compared with the rest of the country. No figures that mean any thing anymore cos restrictions get imposed almost at random either with 5 mins notice or the polar opposite with a bizarre lack of urgency.

Im personally hearing the same sort of message from both strict rule followers and those away in conspiracy land.

Bottom line.

Lack of centre leadership and clear plan we can all - regardless of location - can look at and say "100 cases per 100,000? Thats level two. We are at 86. Best not be a fuckwit" or "235 cases per 100,000 but its dropping. If we get to 200,000 we are out of level 3".

Its the lack of direction thats the real problem.

@GetAMoveOnTroodon

Sheep - most of the issues around the NW hospitals are infrastructure based, with the best will in the world no government could have been expected to construct new transport networks or proper hospitals over the summer.

The real question that needs focussing on is Choc’s - are they going to leave us to sink or take patients elsewhere?

And when.

@GetAMoveOnTroodon
I'd like to think the patients won't be left - but unfortunately a precedent was set with London patients. They weren't moved. They were left to sink or swim.

It would be great if we didn't see a repeat of this but as it's happened once already and been pretty much brushed under the carpet/excused, I wouldn't be surprised to see it happen again elsewhere.