Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Data and Analysis Thread, started Oct 29

999 replies

PatriciaHolm · 29/10/2020 14:07

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
75
NeurotrashWarrior · 12/11/2020 05:53

The whole sentence "schools are/aren't the drivers" is a misnomer. Humans are the driver. Lots of humans interacting inside. It's a chicken and egg scenario. We don't see it as mass outbreaks due to bubble closures. Doesn't mean it's not a risk.

Thinking about local rates and ages, it was the young adults, students and young professionals, now it's in the community and schools.

I'm finding it increasingly ironic that I personally know of huge issues in local SEN schools, including full closures, and not just because of staff SI; staff and pupils who are ill with Covid. That's where there is the most normal pre Covid circumstance.

MRex · 12/11/2020 07:32

@herecomesthsun - You are showing a chart of hospital admissions rising from the week before schools went back as evidence that schools are driving infections. Why?
Look at the data in figures from August: coronavirus.data.gov.uk - the case rises bed in during mid-August and hospitalisations from 24th August.

The education settings includes all the uni cases. Look at the previous ONS report; how did young children not catch covid for 6 weeks at school, but then you want to blame the same school environment for transmission? www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/englandwalesandnorthernireland9october2020#age-analysis-of-the-number-of-people-in-england-who-had-covid-19.
Schools reflect community spread; children can also catch covid from their parents, from playdates etc. 90% of infections come from the 10% who are superspreaders. If young children in primary were the main superspreaders, most of the class would catch it, then you would see their parents all catch it. This is why it matters to be specific about which school group you mean, there is a clear difference with primary.

Older secondary age (14+) - yes, there is increased transmission. We know from research back in May that they were likely to spread covid as much as adults, while younger children weren't. (Most likely because of ACE2 receptors). However, they for some reason had lower positivity as well as rates than university teenagers. Physical differences are unlikely to impact from 16-18, so that makes it activity risk. Do you think university students caught covid:
A) in lectures, or
B) sharing flats with someone infected, or
C) at parties.
Cause of infection actually matters, it really really does. I don't think you should expect cases to go down if you send teenagers out of school to hang out in each other's homes.

MRex · 12/11/2020 07:43

@herecomesthsun - the summary version is that age risk and cause of infection don't support any statement that starts with just "schools". If you were saying that secondary schools should move to remote learning for older year groups so teenagers would only be putting their own families at risk not their teachers, I'd have a lot more sympathy. We might fret about the varying impact of deprivation (lower chance of a parent at home) and risks to shop workers etc, but it would be logical.

MRex · 12/11/2020 08:48

Wow. 15.5% growth July-September, leaving the economy only 8.2% smaller than pre-covid:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54914410.
I was bracing myself for the growth to be much lower than that.
All the datasets are in here; interesting to see the public funds trickle through and the big boost to agriculture. Less hiccup on Financial Services than you'd expect, expecting a trade deal? www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp#timeseries

herecomesthsun · 12/11/2020 09:03

[quote MRex]@herecomesthsun - You are showing a chart of hospital admissions rising from the week before schools went back as evidence that schools are driving infections. Why?
Look at the data in figures from August: coronavirus.data.gov.uk - the case rises bed in during mid-August and hospitalisations from 24th August.

The education settings includes all the uni cases. Look at the previous ONS report; how did young children not catch covid for 6 weeks at school, but then you want to blame the same school environment for transmission? www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/englandwalesandnorthernireland9october2020#age-analysis-of-the-number-of-people-in-england-who-had-covid-19.
Schools reflect community spread; children can also catch covid from their parents, from playdates etc. 90% of infections come from the 10% who are superspreaders. If young children in primary were the main superspreaders, most of the class would catch it, then you would see their parents all catch it. This is why it matters to be specific about which school group you mean, there is a clear difference with primary.

Older secondary age (14+) - yes, there is increased transmission. We know from research back in May that they were likely to spread covid as much as adults, while younger children weren't. (Most likely because of ACE2 receptors). However, they for some reason had lower positivity as well as rates than university teenagers. Physical differences are unlikely to impact from 16-18, so that makes it activity risk. Do you think university students caught covid:
A) in lectures, or
B) sharing flats with someone infected, or
C) at parties.
Cause of infection actually matters, it really really does. I don't think you should expect cases to go down if you send teenagers out of school to hang out in each other's homes.[/quote]
1 Why [is this chart circumstantial evidence of school return influencing infection rates]? I wouldn't expect the curves to be that shape if the increase in cases were primarily driven by returning holiday makers. I'd expect a sharp rise in August-? early September followed by a slower rise, a plateau or even a fall.

In fact, cases rose a little in August, but so slightly that many people on the data thread had difficulty seeing a rise at all for a long while.

I'd agree that holidays played a part- back in August- but I don't think they were the main cause of rises in September and October. You can see the gradient of the curves rising more and more steeply as the weeks go by.

I would also agree with both SAGE and Independent SAGE that there is a significant transmission risk from schools remaining open.

I also agree that there is a difference, fortunately between primary and secondary.

  1. The graph from 9th October does show a slight increase for primary school children, but the y axis is not calibrated to show this very much.

If smaller units on the Y axis were used for this data, the beginnings of a rise in cases would be better shown.

3 how did young children not catch covid for 6 weeks at school, but then you want to blame the same school environment for transmission
think the numbers were really very low in many areas for several weeks. If cases weren't getting into schools in the first place, then the transmission between pupils of course wouldn't be happening.

I think that as cases rise in the community, people, even young people, who are crowded together indoors are going to be vulnerable to infection and transmission processes. If you just get 1 case in a crowded classroom, at the end of the school day there are liable to be more cases, and this is likely to progress.

If cases are transmitted in the community, why wouldn't they also be transmitted in school, which is unusual currently as a place when many people from different households are gathering together indoors with poor ventilation for hours at a time?

There may be transmission happening elsewhere as well of course, but now we are in lockdown, we can expect that a larger proportion of the transmission will be happening in school (from the ONS figures, it looks like this would be both primary and secondary). This increase in the proportion of transmission happening in schools may have been happening already in areas with higher tiers, of course.

  1. However, do actually look at the ONS graphs I was discussing (and I'm really sorry that I can't reproduce them directly, I did try) from 23rd October and 2nd November, the most recent available. The positivity rate for children in primary school in the ONS graphs is as high or higher than anyone else in the community aged over 25.

Year 12 - age 24 have highest rates (now coming down) but positivity rates in primary school children are rising to close to the rates for secondary school children.

I have linked many times on the Coronavirus board to the WHO recommendations, which we still aren't following in our schools. They are not as stringent for younger children, but there is yet much guidance which we aren't following.

It is of course great that younger children seem to be less at risk from the virus than other people. However, the evidence does suggest that younger children can and do spread this infection, even if this is at a lower rate, other things being equal, than in adults or secondary school children (again there are studies to which I have linked a number of times before. Also there is a level of common sense scientific thinking here. )

Certainly, putting children all together in classes of 30, not sending the whole class home if one tests positive, and indeed limiting testing, this is creating the right conditions for spread, as Neurotrash Warrior was suggesting. There is a good infection control reason why everyone else in society is social distancing etc.

5 I wouldn't like to speculate on the transmission issues around young adults, as I couldn't do that in an informed way, but I am very sure that rigorous academic analysis is being done around that, with a view to making University life possible and safe (I note that University teaching is currently going almost entirely on line and that seems sensible)

herecomesthsun · 12/11/2020 09:05

[quote MRex]@herecomesthsun - the summary version is that age risk and cause of infection don't support any statement that starts with just "schools". If you were saying that secondary schools should move to remote learning for older year groups so teenagers would only be putting their own families at risk not their teachers, I'd have a lot more sympathy. We might fret about the varying impact of deprivation (lower chance of a parent at home) and risks to shop workers etc, but it would be logical.[/quote]
the summary version is that age risk and cause of infection don't support any statement that starts with just "schools".

And the summary response is that the figures do (support the contention that positivity rates are rising in both primary and secondary aged pupils). Sorry.

Sunshinegirl82 · 12/11/2020 09:20

@MRex

I'm with you from my interpretation. I'm not sure there much value isn't saying much more, as is always the case with anything related to schools, we just go round and round in circles.

Moving on...

I was also pleasantly surprised by the economic data, it was much better than I expected and hopefully that will give business a bit of confidence which always helps! This second lockdown will have. Lower things down but I'm hoping the vaccine news might provide some counter balance. I'm hopeful for Q2 2021!

sirfredfredgeorge · 12/11/2020 09:38

Wow. 15.5% growth July-September, leaving the economy only 8.2% smaller than pre-covid

Despite growth in the third quarter, the volume of healthcare consumption remains 25.2% below where it was at the end of 2019

This is the most depressing part from that report, even with all the huge covid healthcare expenditure, we're still spending so much less on healthcare - either government healthcare spending was so wasteful before, or there are an awful lot of people missing treatment.

herecomesthsun · 12/11/2020 09:45

[quote Sunshinegirl82]@MRex

I'm with you from my interpretation. I'm not sure there much value isn't saying much more, as is always the case with anything related to schools, we just go round and round in circles.

Moving on...

I was also pleasantly surprised by the economic data, it was much better than I expected and hopefully that will give business a bit of confidence which always helps! This second lockdown will have. Lower things down but I'm hoping the vaccine news might provide some counter balance. I'm hopeful for Q2 2021![/quote]
Um but what I have said is entirely based on the figures, the ONS figures, which are the gold standard?

And my comments about schools and risk are supported by SAGE, and Independent SAGE? Not to mention the WHO?

????

MRex · 12/11/2020 09:46

Transmission is shown when rate of increase occurs @herecomesthsun. I am only explaining the actual pattern of cases.

Week 27 (ends July 5th) infections for age 10-19: 4.1
Let's follow week by week, watch the pattern of transmission in this age group:
4.8 (+17%)
5.0 (+4%)
7.4 (+48%) - who went to school at the end of July?
7.2 (-3%)
8.2 (+14%)
10.4 (+27%)
12.0 (+15%)
18.1 (+51%) - did you spot the rise to get to here?
27.4 (+51%) - SCHOOL STARTS HERE
36.2 (+32%) - FIRST POSSIBLE INFECTIONS FROM SCHOOL
54.0 (+50%) - UNIVERSITIES GO BACK
109.3 (+102%) - UNI TESTING STARTS
270.1 (+147%)
294.7 (+9%)
234.4 (-20%)
243.0 (+3%) - SOME HALF TERM
190.9 (-21%) - MOST HALF TERM

herecomesthsun · 12/11/2020 09:49

But -as we've said on this thread before - 10-19 is too wide a bracket. It includes primary school at one end and University 1st and 2nd years at the other.

To discuss transmission we'd need to look at figures that are more broken down by age, to start with. (will look at the data further though)

MRex · 12/11/2020 09:51

@herecomesthsun - I'm really not saying there is no transmission in schools, of course there is. And particularly among the older school age groups there are more cases. However, it is happening only when there is lots of community spread and it really isn't the major driver of infections, that's happening outside schools. The rate put on it by Sage is incredibly low considering there is no effective distancing, few schools even with masks in corridors etc; don't forget that rate is compared with so many other activities where people ARE wearing masks, distancing etc.

TheSunIsStillShining · 12/11/2020 09:54

I always* found it slightly puzzling that govs artificially pump up GDP by pouring money in, than comes austerity because gov has spent too much and need to recover. And come higher taxes (there are already ideas on how much higher should capital gains tax bads should be...)
and comes more spending on social areas, etc... which in turn make gov need more money,...

And as usual, the middle class will be hit as they are poor enough to not be able to afford to hide their money in tax havens but "wealthy" enough to actually have savings, own things/house,....

It looks like the world economies are interconnected hamster wheels where each country has to keep doing what has been done before otherwise the whole system would collapse (worst case) or they would just be grinded up by the other wheels (best case).

*When learning economics at uni(s)

MotherOfDragonite · 12/11/2020 09:55

@Mrex How do you square this stance with the view that Sage and independent Sage take on the significant impact on R of schools being open?

lurker101 · 12/11/2020 09:56

Yes economic data is better than I expected, but sadly we’re further below pre-COVID levels than any other G7 country, although I suspect at least some of that is related to our heavily service-based economy

MotherOfDragonite · 12/11/2020 09:57

Also, if the main driver of infections is happening outside schools, why would educational settings be the locus of the steepest rises in infection rates?

MRex · 12/11/2020 10:14

@MotherOfDragonite - Educational settings includes University, Further Education colleges, Sixth form collehes, Secondary, SEN, Primary and Nursery.

  • The total and proportional number of cases in Primary and Nursery have been tiny.
  • SEN has additional risks with more adults in the room, older children and no effective distancing; arguably these children are most in need of open schools and also most at risk of covid; I think at one point we saw it had 3* the primary school cases
  • Secondary has lots isolating and more outbreaks than the others; I think at one point we saw it had 6* the primary school cases
  • Most universities have had big outbreaks, lots of infected students, utterly dwarfs all other categories by volume but low number of institutions because they are few and large
  • I don't know for further education, but would expect more outbreaks given the age group.
MRex · 12/11/2020 10:17

@herecomesthsun
To discuss transmission we'd need to look at figures that are more broken down by age, to start with. (will look at the data further though)

Smile excellent, I'm hopeful of a table that gives us more breakdown (to save me being driven to create it when I should be working).

MotherOfDragonite · 12/11/2020 10:41

@MRex Yes, I quite agree that there are differences between age groups and that secondary schools, FE colleges and universities have seen the highest rate of infections.

I agree that primaries and nurseries appear so far to be less risky, although as the symptoms that younger children experience are often not those on the list for testing, we have little data for young children other than the ONS survey (which is relatively small in terms of sample size).

I am also interested in the steep rise in positive cases among primary school age children found in the latest ONS survey, though, and curious about what would be driving an increase at this stage.

MotherOfDragonite · 12/11/2020 10:42

That's still 'schools' though -- secondary schools.

Some evidence for higher rates among Year 6 of primary schools too.

herecomesthsun · 12/11/2020 10:51

I found some ONS break downs of positivity by age Contents should be here

Percentage testing positive for COVID-19 by age/school year and non-overlapping 14 day periods (weighted), England here

I haven't got my head round them all yet (supermarket delivery!) - would love to tabulate them but not sure how to do it neatly and post on here.

There was a fabulous break down, I think by ONS or PHE, fairly recently, by actual age at 12 month intervals, but I can't find that sorry.

MRex · 12/11/2020 10:54

@MotherOfDragonite - ONS is an estimate based on sampling, with a huge statistical range, and it's an outlier given their previous results. So, it may be right or it may be overestimated, we need more backup info as it's only one metric. The actual cases and positivity have both increased in line with other age groups (i.e. still much lower cases but very slightly higher positivity) rather than a steep increase. Well, there was a slight drop last week, but I suspect that's half term reduced testing. Until we get more stats to show one way or the other, we can't know. Let's discuss again after tomorrow and next week's surveillance reports!

MRex · 12/11/2020 10:59

@herecomesthsun - do you mean the graphs in the surveillance report? They had a startlingly smooth curve of cases increasing by age. They're here, updated version due by tomorrow:
www.gov.uk/government/news/weekly-national-flu-and-covid-19-surveillance-reports-published.

MRex · 12/11/2020 11:03

I mean, it has age but not per year of birth, but it is useful.