Data and Analysis Thread, started Oct 29

[PatriciaHolm]

With a link to the previous header for all the great links to data -

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/4057030-Pure-data-thread-1-Daily-numbers-graphs-focused-analyses?

And with a polite plea to keep the focus on data and analysis if you please.

thanks all

Still no figures?

shuffles feet

So, been anywhere nice this year?

This is getting silly.

Options are, really high numbers and we will freak out, really low numbers on day one of national lockdown and Boris will get lynched, or someone fell asleep on the keyboard and deleted the spreadsheet.

DHSC have commented on the Guardian article on Twitter.

I think we will see low numbers due to half term. Schools are definitely the silent driver in this country - the only mitigation we have is hand sanitizer.

it's there - 24,141 cases, 378 deaths.

www.google.com/amp/s/eminetra.co.uk/operation-moonshot-rapid-covid-test-with-pilot-misses-over-50-of-cases-world-news/82066/ Non pay-walled article re rapid testing pilot.

Very high cases for specimen date of 2nd, (Monday!), across all areas in England. Suggests, again, that people were hanging back from testing over the weekend/half term. Will be interesting to see if it is a blip or a continued growth pattern.

@Choconuttolata thanks I'll go and have a read.

Prof Tim Spector (Zoe app) update.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=H7O1U-ZSR0w

@MarcelineMissouri

DHSC have commented on the Guardian article on Twitter.

Interesting thread on the Guardian article here: mobile.twitter.com/ScienceShared/status/1324489965296902153

From the Guardian:

"Scientists have found the strongest evidence yet that people who recover from Covid may mount a much faster and more effective defence against the infection if they encounter the virus again.

Researchers at Rockefeller University in New York found that the immune system not only remembered the virus but improved the quality of protective antibodies after an infection had passed, equipping the body to unleash a swift and potent attack if the virus invaded a second time."

Paper discussed in article linked below
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.03.367391v1

Moonshot:

Jennifer Williams @JenWilliamsMEN
I’m up so watching the US stuff so might as well say that there were three pilots of lamp tests, as I understand it: two were 90% or so, but the GM pilot came out at 43%. Govt doesn’t like the GM result so have basically told them to do it again. But GM pilot people think the way they’ve tested the test, as it were, is much more aligned to the way actual humans would use it, ie not under really specific lab conditions - early in the morning before they’ve brushed their teeth or whatever - and stand by it.

Brushing or not brushing teeth won't be affecting the tests, a little bacteria isn't going to make a difference in GM where everyone else in the other studies was unaffected. It's more likely due to there having been many more infected people in GM; people can take many weeks to fully clear remaining virus and could get a positive in the more sensitive PCR test when they're actually no longer infectious, while a less sensitive test misses them. Basic process error would still need to be ruled out too e.g. If the GM tests weren't stored correctly, being kept somewhere too hot or too cold.

Link to raised air pollution and small rise in deaths.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/04/tiny-air-pollution-rise-linked-to-11-more-covid-19-deaths-study?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

11% increase in deaths is pretty much the all cause mortality for air pollution, there are lots of good reasons to fix air pollution, and I really doubt covid is anywhere near the top of the list.

@sirfredfredgeorge

11% increase in deaths is pretty much the all cause mortality for air pollution, there are lots of good reasons to fix air pollution, and I really doubt covid is anywhere near the top of the list.

Yes! It's an easy blame.

I saw an article in National Geographic about the air pollution in somewhere, (I think it was Moscow, but I might be wrong) causing congenital limb deficiencies there.
Only thing was I have a dd with a congenital limb deficiency, so I know statistics about this. The number of children per year, was exactly the same rate per 100k as over the whole UK and there is no cluster over cities-in fact I think if anything there's a disproportional number in rural Scotland.
I thought they could have at least checked basic facts before they produced their article. Was surprised that they hadn't.

Latest ONS survey report is out - main points being they think the rate of growth has slowed, with incidence stabilising at about 50k a day in England. This is the result of declines in positivity rates in younger groups but increases in older ones.

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest

Crikey. A Missouri election official had been diagnosed with covid 4 days before the election and went to the poll anyway, so he exposed 2000 people. He's also now dead, unclear what of.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-us-2020-54786937

[quote MRex]Crikey. A Missouri election official had been diagnosed with covid 4 days before the election and went to the poll anyway, so he exposed 2000 people. He's also now dead, unclear what of.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-us-2020-54786937[/quote]
Apparently covid positive patients were allowed to vote, too, and given there’s likely 1 million plus of them with an active infection at the moment in the US, I’m sure there’s going to be a post election spike.

And still 84 days until they get an adult back at the helm. Poor Americans.

I read the pollution article as potentially an additional reason why more deaths / illness around areas of concentrated populations eg North West.

It's definitely a issue for increased deaths / lung function generally.

The deprivation indices show much higher deaths usually at younger ages across NW and NE, particularly for men. Clearly it sounds logical that pollution will weaken health such that covid can take hold more efficiently, but it isn't clear to me from the report where we're looking at causation or where is just correlation.

The other problem is that deprivation stats specifically include health deprivation, when really we want them removed for this (not for other purposes obviously) but saying people with health problems suffer more with more health problems is expected. So hard to control for these things in the stats.

Very few of the "X increases risk with covid" have actually really increased the risk over all cause mortality for the individual - not that that means the extra covid risk itself isn't relevant of course! It's just the actual correlated things are things which should be taken really seriously anyway from an all health aspect.

23287 cases
355 deaths
Early days, but hopefully cases are plateauing.