Data, Stats & Daily Numbers started 20th Jan

[TheSunIsStillShining]

UK govt pressers Slides & data www.gov.uk/government/collections/slides-and-datasets-to-accompany-coronavirus-press-conferences#history
R estimates UK & English regions www.gov.uk/guidance/the-r-number-in-the-uk
Imperial UK weekly LAs, cases / 100k, table, map, hotspots statistics Attendance explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/attendance-in-education-and-early-years-settings-during-the-coronavirus-covid-19-outbreak
NHS England Hospital activity www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/
NHs England Daily deaths www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/
Cases Tracker England Local Government lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/view/lga-research/covid-19-case-tracker
ONS MSAO Map English deaths www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/
CovidMessenger live update by council district in England www.covidmessenger.com/
Scot gov Daily data www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-daily-data-for-scotland/
Scotland TravellingTabby LAs, care homes, hospitals, tests, t&t www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavirus-tracker/
PH Wales LAs, tests, ONS deaths Dashboard app.powerbi.com/view?r=eyJrIjoiZGYxNjYzNmUtOTlmZS00ODAxLWE1YTEtMjA0NjZhMzlmN2JmIiwidCI6IjljOWEzMGRlLWQ4ZDctNGFhNC05NjAwLTRiZTc2MjVmZjZjNSIsImMiOjh9
ICNRC Intensive Care National Audit & Research reports www.icnarc.org/Our-Audit/Audits/Cmp/Reports
NHS t&t England & UK testing Weekly stats www.gov.uk/government/collections/nhs-test-and-trace-statistics-england-weekly-reports
PHE Surveillance reports & LA Local Watchlist Maps by LSOA www.gov.uk/government/collections/nhs-test-and-trace-statistics-england-weekly-reports
ONS England infection surveillance report each Friday www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/previousReleases
Datasets for ONS surveillance reports www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/datasets/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveydata/2020
ONS Roundup deaths, infections & economic reports www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19roundup/2020-03-26
Zoe Uk data covid.joinzoe.com/data#interactive-map
ECDC rolling 14-day incidence EEA & UK read https_www.ecdc.europa.eu/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecdc.europa.eu%2Fen%2Fcases-2019-ncov-eueea
Worldometer UK page www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/uk/
Our World in Data GB test positivity etc, DIY country graphs ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/united-kingdom?country=~GBR
FT DIY graphs compare deaths, cases, raw / million pop ig.ft.com/coronavirus-chart/?areas=gbr&areas=fra&areas=esp&areas=ita&areas=deu&areas=swe&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&byDate=1&cumulative=1&logScale=1&per100K=1&values=deaths
Alama Personal COVID risk assessment alama.org.uk/covid-19-medical-risk-assessment/
Local Mobility Reports for countries www.google.com/covid19/mobility/
UK Highstreet Tracker for cities & large towns Footfall, spend index, workers, visitors, economic recovery www.centreforcities.org/data/high-streets-recovery-tracker/

⏭ Our STUDIES Corner ⏮www.mumsnet.com/Talk/coronavirus/3869571-Studies-corner?msgid=99913434

We welcome factual, data driven and analytical contributions
Please try to keep discussion focused on these

TheSunIsStillShining You are unfailingly negative about pretty much everything. I find it wearing. Would I have encouraged my 92 year old mother to have the AZ vaccine, yes, yes, I would. Shame it didn't get to her before she died.

@TheSunIsStillShining I agree that on a lot of points - from vaccine efficacy to contract details - we are just going to have to wait and see. But I do suspect that some decision makers out there are letting emotions get the better of them!

oh sorry...
I obviously really want to go to Belguim if I wrote spekuloos instead of specualtion :)

The over 65 vaccinated trial group produced antibodies in the same way that the vaccinated under 65s trial group produced antibodies. The countries that approved AZ for all age groups concluded that this demonstrated correlation of efficacy.

Germany looks like it has decided otherwise although it seems strange that they're saying it's effective for a 64 year old but not a 65 year old.

Be interesting to hear the EMA announcement. If it's not good enough for Germany's over 65s then it shouldn't be good enough for the rest of the EU bloc - or can Germany set it's own rules and expect a larger share of Pfizer to compensate for its decision not to give AZ to its over 65s?

The Oxford vaccine was found to be equally effective in all age groups and was approved in the UK for over 18s. The UK government is not going against any manufacturers guidance in recommending it for all over 18s, including over 65s. The German government, meanwhile, looks like failing to get hold of much of it anyway, so can decide to approve it for whoever it likes.

The US FDA haven't approved it at all for any age group. The reason is the same - the trial data is insufficient. They have insisted on a further trial in the US.

I don’t know what relationship there is between the German regulator and the EMA and why the German body announced this today before the EMA decision. I would like to understand that.

@Haffiana

The Oxford vaccine was found to be equally effective in all age groups and was approved in the UK for over 18s. The UK government is not going against any manufacturers guidance in recommending it for all over 18s, including over 65s. The German government, meanwhile, looks like failing to get hold of much of it anyway, so can decide to approve it for whoever it likes.

The US FDA haven't approved it at all for any age group. The reason is the same - the trial data is insufficient. They have insisted on a further trial in the US.

It will be interesting to see outcome but I’m fine with MHRA decisions.

You do get that in the UK they are using it freely in 65+ population, right?
Meaning that we have no more data than anyone else and yet in this country's officials have their fingers crossed and "let's hope for the best" attitude.
I understand that this gov wants to be world beating and shout vaccined ppl numbers, but it's just simply stupid.

What's simply stupid is you making it sound as though Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock have the power to approve medicines just in order to make themselves look good. It was the MHRA, one of the best organisations of its type in the world, and one that has been highly critical of the govt at times, who made the decision. Do you really think they would have done so if they were not pretty confident of the vaccine's efficacy?

Not to mention that several other countries around the world, among them India and Argentina, have also approved it. Do you think all their relevant authorities are looking ot make BoJo look good too?

@Haffiana I’m not sure it’s fair to say that overall trial data is insufficient. The US decision must be more complex than that. I think it included concerns about ethnic diversity in the trial among other points but there will be speculation about other motives too.

What’s so frustrating is that all national authorities seem to be undermining one another in subtle or not so subtle ways and in so doing, undermining trust of all of us. I think various people who should know better from Anthony Fauci to Stella Kyriakides have said things that are pretty outrageous for people in their positions. (That’s part’s not data sorry!)

It will be interesting to see outcome but I’m fine with MHRA decisions.

Yes, I am too because, well, pragmatism. I am just tired of the creepy and disturbing nationalism that seems to take over whenever Germany or the EU is mentioned. It is as if people are OK with thinking in Sun headline slogans and emoting like toddlers.

@Haffiana

It will be interesting to see outcome but I’m fine with MHRA decisions.

Yes, I am too because, well, pragmatism. I am just tired of the creepy and disturbing nationalism that seems to take over whenever Germany or the EU is mentioned. It is as if people are OK with thinking in Sun headline slogans and emoting like toddlers.

I don’t think so. I don’t feel emotive the opposite. I find it interesting from contractual and data POV. Also the relative calm against outbursts from German MEPs helps.

Am sure I should know this, but I don't: Is it correct that a hospital patient admitted too late (10+ days later)!to test for Covid, if they go on to die of suspected Covid, won't be counted as a Covid death?

Have just read someone making this point, and saying therefore as testing is going down currently Covid deaths figures will decrease but hospitals still be full??

@BigWoollyJumpers

TheSunIsStillShining You are unfailingly negative about pretty much everything. I find it wearing. Would I have encouraged my 92 year old mother to have the AZ vaccine, yes, yes, I would. Shame it didn't get to her before she died.

Feel free to not read them then. it's fuckup after fuckup. Even the things that have good elements and/or remarkable achievements behind it (for example the AZ/oxford vacc) they manage to fuck it up with partially shitty trial and patchy data.

And it is extra annoying that individuals have to do their own research to form valid, critical judgement because otherwise it's politics and shit stirring. See AZ data - UK/EU have exact same data. UK says it'll be good for 65+, German regulators say there's not enough proof. How is anyone supposed to know which statement is true?

@JanuaryChill - it would still go on the death certificate and be included that way. If someone is still very unwell enough to be in hospital after 10 days then they might test positive anyway. It's people recovering who are less likely to get a positive result.

@TheSunIsStillShining I don’t agree that it was a shitty trial. It was a more complex design of trial, but this may well have been to our advantage because we gained usable data about things like dosage spacing and impact on transmission.

Thanks MRex. That's what I thought.

ok, sorry. maybe not shitty trial - I shouldn't have said that as I don't work in the medical research industry.
But from the outside the cockups in the trial make it look like one. The fact that some interesting data came out was coincidence and luck, not by design.

It's infuriating that they want us to believe
"“Both the AstraZeneca and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines are safe and provide high levels of protection against COVID-19, particularly against severe disease,” Mary Ramsay, Head of Immunisations at PHE said in a statement. “There were too few cases in older people in the AstraZeneca trials to observe precise levels of protection in this group, but data on immune responses were very reassuring.”"

If I want to believe I'll go to a church. I want data and proof, as should regulators.

if anyone has the time to do some research, here is an interesting idea:
www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/19045662.nasal-spray-said-stop-covid-released-summer/

@TheSunIsStillShining the only as it were “cock up” I’m aware of was with the half dose, but we know how it happened and that it was handled appropriately and cleared with MHRA at the time. The other aspects such as dosage spacing, to my understanding, were an intended part of the trial design.

Anyone who knows more please feel free to correct me of course.

@TheSunIsStillShining

"UK/EU have exact same data. UK says it'll be good for 65+, German regulators say there's not enough proof. How is anyone supposed to know which statement is true?"

To my mind they can both be true. U.K. regulator have decided, having weighed up the data, benefits and risks, that it is appropriate to licence the vaccine for the over 65's. Germany have decided they need more data and so have declined to recommend the vaccine for over 65's at this time. Lack of data isn't the same as evidence of the vaccine not being effective in the over 65's.

On balance, given that we know that the vaccine is safe, I think the MHRA made the right call. This is an emergency and therefore not the time to be over cautious. There may well be an element of judgement in the decision, not everything is always completely black and white.

nothing ever is b&W :)

LFT question
Almost half of the daily tests now come from LFT if I read correctly.
Is there any data on how many are administered by a professional? Or should we simply assume that these are the self administered ones in mostly ed settings? I really have no idea.

[quote ATieLikeRichardGere]@TheSunIsStillShining the only as it were “cock up” I’m aware of was with the half dose, but we know how it happened and that it was handled appropriately and cleared with MHRA at the time. The other aspects such as dosage spacing, to my understanding, were an intended part of the trial design.

Anyone who knows more please feel free to correct me of course.[/quote]
No, it wasn't intended. Some of the differences in dose spacing was due to the trial being suspended for a time.

@TheSunIsStillShining

nothing ever is b&W :)

LFT question
Almost half of the daily tests now come from LFT if I read correctly.
Is there any data on how many are administered by a professional? Or should we simply assume that these are the self administered ones in mostly ed settings? I really have no idea.

Actually, I'd guess a lot of them are from NHS who do LFT 2x weekly.

Out Secondary only tests staff who are in teaching the KW/V cohort. We've had access to the LFT from the beginning of January. Primaries are only starting LFT this week - if there is a jump in numbers it'll be from them.

Moving on from as yet unsubstantiated leaks..........

1239 deaths, 28680 cases , first doses cumulative almost 7.5 million

Just under 37000 in hospital and looks to be falling