Data, Stats & Daily Numbers started 28th 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

You cover all bases if you are being wise because nobody does know what will happen next. Unknown waters and all that.

At the current rate of vaccinations over 50s will be done by end of March. Some places have now started on group 5.

Reading between the lines of today's government leaks group 9 will be finished with second doses in May

Those are things we can take an educated guess about. Using the data and information available. Everything else I don't even think the government are 100% sure. That is a pandemic for you🤷‍♀️

@TheSunIsStillShining

one last thing to this though experiment. The reason I believe that giving more ppl less protection is a mistake is that imo (taking over virologist's views) we are opening a huge door to mutations to happen here. I think if it was communicated that xyz is the exit strategy; this and that will happen and you will have to bear lockdown/school closure/etc until appr. x time people would be more willing to comply. This way the economy could also be planned for, furloughs and "band aids" could be given for a specified time. And again: better to actually calculate in advance and plan than go in guns ablaze and hope to have enough munition to actually last until the fight.

I am pretty sure we have hundreds of scientists, economists, mathematicians and other experts making models for all scenarios. The trouble is there are to many moving components to this puzzle.

It would be very wrong to tell the general public all the details of the vaccination program or state a fixed plan to open up. To much can change or go wrong. Just like alot could go way better than expected.

Anyway 22nd February we get to hear their next targets and schedule to open up apparently.

Let's just agree to disagree :)
I agree that a fixed plan would be wrong. But I believe in way more transparency.
What would be so wrong with making these algorithms public?

Because some people will fixate on them and it would be bad for their mental health for a start. Obviously as well as the good scenarios they will be running worst cases ones too.

Imagine how that could affect the economy or the way people act. We have had the EU flipping out over the thought we could have massive piles of vaccine hidden away. Which proves that security and keeping quiet are sometimes the best option.

Basically you really shouldn't play cards if your going to show everyone your hand

Well, one virologist only. Most virologists say mutations are most likely to occur when people are unwell for a very long time. Low hospitalization would dramatically reduce that pool. Single dose vaccinations seem to be strongly showing as at least very low hospitalisations, as well as breaking transmission chains for fewer cases overall. It's the entire point of vaccination. There is also no evidence yet that immunity wanes after one dose. It probably does, but because there aren't stats that could be a year away. Meanwhile cases are high, hospitals full and multiple variants creating new risks. This is not the time for years of studies assessing endless fine details, it's the time to protect the greatest number.

@TheSun How are you coming up with a figure of only 21m by end of March? Current rate of vaccination is 3m a week. There's 7.5 weeks until the end of March so that's 22.5m extra done, plus the 11m done already, so 33.5 They've been booking people in for second jabs around 10-11 weeks after the first, and did only about 1m in the whole of December so no major impact from second doses until late March.

@MRex

Well, one virologist only. Most virologists say mutations are most likely to occur when people are unwell for a very long time. Low hospitalization would dramatically reduce that pool. Single dose vaccinations seem to be strongly showing as at least very low hospitalisations, as well as breaking transmission chains for fewer cases overall. It's the entire point of vaccination. There is also no evidence yet that immunity wanes after one dose. It probably does, but because there aren't stats that could be a year away. Meanwhile cases are high, hospitals full and multiple variants creating new risks. This is not the time for years of studies assessing endless fine details, it's the time to protect the greatest number.

Agree completely, very well put. Thankfully the evidence is already starting to emerge that one dose protects fine at least for a few months, and we should very soon have stronger evidence from the UK early Pfizer vaccinated. There are some in the scientific community who divide everything into "things we know to be correct because we've tested them precisely to a 95% confidence interval" and "things we do not know at all" My background is in the social sciences where there's much more often a need to form sensible conclusions from real world evidence that's messy, but informative nonetheless. It's been good to see the bio science community slowly adapting to use a more similar realistic approach.

.

I'd rather keep going for as long as possible until we break transmission.
Imagine if they made us all stay in for two weeks at the end of this 🔒 down with prep, click and collect only from supermarket. School closed.. And hobbled for two weeks.. Yes I know it couldn't happen but imagine if we finished this off with two weeks indoors.. No bubbles nothing.
Just q few weeks.

Yes I know it couldn't happen but imagine if we finished this off with two weeks indoors..

Pretty negative health outcomes, healthy people see immediate effects, and vulnerable people see worse effects, see e.g.
journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2042018819888824
Although they're mostly reversible (if they weren't isolation wouldn't work at all as a health intervention)

So the reason why "lock up all the vulnerable" applies exactly to this two week thing, you have to stay active, and for most that is impossible without leaving the house. And even more so in older and more vulnerable groups who do not have home exercise equipment!

@Mudmudingloriousmud

I'd rather keep going for as long as possible until we break transmission. Imagine if they made us all stay in for two weeks at the end of this 🔒 down with prep, click and collect only from supermarket. School closed.. And hobbled for two weeks.. Yes I know it couldn't happen but imagine if we finished this off with two weeks indoors.. No bubbles nothing. Just q few weeks.

I thought the same after the first lockdown. Tell people in advance to they can prep and get enough food in for two weeks then do lockdown in full. No meeting others, no shopping just because you can etc. Maybe then we would be more likes countries who have better control of cases.

How would you keep running vaccination clinics?

The Welsh lockdown in October was intended as a short sharp lockdown and was about the strictest anywhere - schools shut (overlapping with half term), no outdoor socialising, etc. And the data suggests it really didn't work very well. There are just too many unavoidable contacts (within households, healthcare, essential services, food shopping, etc) You could not ask everyone to stock up on enough food to last two weeks, the supermarkets don't stock that much!

I guess we're talking about locking down as much as humanly possible. Vaccination and other essential-at-this-time health services would have to continue. Fire service for emergencies, caters for vulnerable, even school/nursery for primary essential workers' children if there was absolutely no alternative.

Good point @Firefliess

I suspect the problem with short, planned lockdowns is there's a period just before where there's increased risk as everyone rushes to stock up/ see friends supposedly "at a distance", do all the stuff they might normally try and get away with over the next few weeks but do it all at the same time pre-lockdown, then a period at the end where people think they've had rough/ well it's nearly over anyway/ well I've seen my neighbour do xyz so why shouldn't I, that there's not long in between to counteract those behaviours and have much effect.
Just speculation, not data...

*they've had enough

There are many people in this country who can’t afford to buy two weeks worth of food in advance. And unless the government is going to force factories and warehouses to close (with force furlough payments) then the people who work in these sectors will still have to go to work, as well as healthcare, police, fire services, vaccination manufacturers and clinicians, people who operate water/sewage works, power stations, fuel stations, and schools/public transport would need too keep running for those roles too.

@Quarantino

I suspect the problem with short, planned lockdowns is there's a period just before where there's increased risk as everyone rushes to stock up/ see friends supposedly "at a distance", do all the stuff they might normally try and get away with over the next few weeks but do it all at the same time pre-lockdown, then a period at the end where people think they've had rough/ well it's nearly over anyway/ well I've seen my neighbour do xyz so why shouldn't I, that there's not long in between to counteract those behaviours and have much effect. Just speculation, not data...

There is data on that - in some areas at least you can see a real spike in the case rates just before the November lockdown (ie a spike a week or so into lockdown, corresponding with cases caught just before it) To be fair, it would be harder to go out doing a lot of pre-lockdown socialising or shopping right now. But I also think there would not be the appetite (or acceptance of) stricter rules right now, when case rates are already falling

@ceeveebee

There are many people in this country who can’t afford to buy two weeks worth of food in advance. And unless the government is going to force factories and warehouses to close (with force furlough payments) then the people who work in these sectors will still have to go to work, as well as healthcare, police, fire services, vaccination manufacturers and clinicians, people who operate water/sewage works, power stations, fuel stations, and schools/public transport would need too keep running for those roles too.

Yes there’s always this mixing.

Plus even if I did get two weeks’ food I would need milk and fresh vegetables

Been catching up on the Economist this morning. I do like their excess death charts. In some ways, it is good to know that our covid deaths match our excess deaths, it means we are reporting them correctly. In fact we seem to be the only country who has an excess of Covid deaths, over and above our excess, which is interesting in itself. It is also, of course, interesting to look at those countries who have big lags in their excess v. covid, Spain, Italy, Portugal, even Germany has a gap in the Summer as does Belgium...... very interesting, perhaps people dying long after they actually contracted Covid, and dying of heart attacks or strokes prematurely?

www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker

Could the supermarkets cope if everyone needed two weeks of mostly non perishable food at once? Thinking back to the Great Toilet Roll Crisis, if I recall correctly toilet roll sales didn't even jump that much, but it was enough to clear the shelves? I think they were up by about a third, but may be misremembering.

Also I suppose there's too many asymptomatic/non-typical symptomatic cases that won't get picked up and it could take longer than two weeks to go through a household. I think that's been one of the biggest problems with controlling cases tbf...is there any data on how many cases have one of the typical three symptoms?

[quote Firefliess]@TheSun How are you coming up with a figure of only 21m by end of March? Current rate of vaccination is 3m a week. There's 7.5 weeks until the end of March so that's 22.5m extra done, plus the 11m done already, so 33.5 They've been booking people in for second jabs around 10-11 weeks after the first, and did only about 1m in the whole of December so no major impact from second doses until late March. [/quote]
double checked - should have been beg of march sorry. And not 3, just 2.5m per week.
I wasn't trying to prove anything or say this is wrong or right. Was just playing around. I have an opinion, but it doesn't make it right :)
I think both dosing options -from a high vantage point have their pros and cons and can be defended.

For me the interesting thing was how the end dates were so close in either scenarios. I thought that they would be further apart.

@MRex in either scenarios the whole country will be vaccinated by nov(ish), so nowhere am I saying to do endless studies and research.* I agree with the need for speed. Just not sure atm that speed is based upon science and not agenda.

I wish there was a public model showing what could happen if:

• 30-40% percent of the population are vaccined
• they start moving around
• immunity level is 60-70-80%
• transmission chance is lower, let's say 50%

Will the risk increase/decrease and at what rate for those who are not vaccinated? what are the parameters that have a big(ger) influence on risk?

*I would like to see ongoing, deep data gathering and analysis, but wouldn't we all? :)

If you wanted to lock down harder you’d close non-essential indoor workplaces, including offices where managers think that people don’t work as well without being kept an eye on, warehouses for non-essential retail and takeaway kitchens (because of workers’ contact with each other not with customers). That would have an impact on transmission without society falling apart, but it would be hugely financially costly. But it’s not going to happen now - it was never on the table at any stage.

Not that I think it’s workable but to join in with the theory I think there would have to be government supplied ration packs to ensure that there was fairness in grocery and toiletry supply if a hard lockdown was going to happen.

I don’t think there’s the public appetite or logistical skill to organise it. As much as I support lockdowns when cases overwhelm the hospitals and restrictions I don’t think I could argue to justify attempting such a strict lockdown. It would be a wasted effort unless we were going to very strictly control our borders (the whole of the UK) afterwards.