Data, Stats and Daily Numbers started 17th March

[boys3]

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

@purple I don't think there's any really clear evidence on the ideal spacing of the AZ vaccine. My reading of the shaky evidence that there is is that it points to there being some longer term benefit of a 12 week has compared with a 3 week gap, but they haven't tested all possible options - the ideal gap might in fact be 8 weeks. Or 16 weeks. The trials weren't set up to test different gaps so the evidence is weak. I've opted for a full 12 week gap for mine, but that's partly because I got in a little early for the first one (via volunteering at the vaccine centre) and am not high risk so felt it was also the more public spirited thing not to take a second dose until as many as possible have had their first. The risk balance might be different for others.

@Firefliess the ONS survey asks about mixing - questions about physical contact and socially distanced contact with each person and age groups under 18, 18-70 and 70+

[quote AnneofScreamFables]@Firefliess the ONS survey asks about mixing - questions about physical contact and socially distanced contact with each person and age groups under 18, 18-70 and 70+[/quote]
That's interesting. Has the information been factored into the models though? It's hard to see how it would be if it was collected during the pandemic when everyone's mixing was far from normal. I suspect it's being collected in the ONS survey more in order to collect data that will help prove how well the vaccine is preventing spread. (Because we know the proportions of different age groups who are vaccinated)

@sirfredfredgeorge

AZ is 50% at stopping transmission after 3 months. Catching covid is 99% at stopping transmission after 3 months.

It's not immediately obvious to me why in people with little to no risk of covid we'd bother with the ineffective treatment, it's simply not that effective at stopping transmission - it's not enough to reduce the R below 2 on its own!

I think the figures on AZ transmission prevention are a bit higher than that aren't they? (Though data still emerging) But even if you were right, vaccinating all the under 18s would mean that we'd very soon reach a herd immunity level between just them as a group (once another 10% or so catch it naturally) It would take a lot more infections to reach that level without vaccination.

Latest data was 76% symptomatic and 50% prevention I thought, and yes it's emerging of course, it could be more, it could be less, but that's why I think there's a question of if it's worth vaccinating, rather than the assumption that it will be worth it.

A 50% or even 75% vaccine can't reach herd immunity - you need well over 80% for the Kent variant, so you're relying on transmission as well, and if you're going to rely on transmission, why not just use the transmission, it'll be quicker?

Or just wait until there's a better candidate that does more to prevent transmission, rather than cost (and not just financial, it can increase the chance of future non-compliance in kids who have a negative experience)

Case rates down again today at 4052 compared with 5605 a week ago. Looks like about 2/3 of this fall is a reduction in cases identified via LFTs, but that still leaves a fall in PCR detected cases too. Hospital admissions still falling gradually and deaths falling fast currently - 40% down on a 7 day average in a week.

On the question of whether we need to vaccinate kids...

The usual calculations for herd immunity levels assume homogeneity of spread. The 60 to 85% herd immunity threshold that often gets mentioned implicitly assumes each infected individual transmits the virus to roughly the same number of people.

However, as we know, it is not true for Covid. Its spread dispersion (also known as k-factor) is significantly higher than the same parameter for most other viruses:

www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/

What we have learnt about Covid is that 10-20% of infections lead to 70-80% of transmissions. 60-70% of people do not pass the virus to anyone else and 10-20% individuals infect others at a standard R rate (say - 3.0).

There have been no documented cases of super spreading events involving children (including younger teenagers). If we are able to vaccinate superspreaders (older teenagers and adults), we may be able to halt the vast majority of onward transmissions without letting Covid "ripping through" the younger age groups.

I was disappointed to note that the vaccination of adults who live with immune compromised people is not being extended to those who live with immune compromised children. I thought that was sad . Probably expedient but sad nonetheless.
They should have been covered in Group 6 as carers. Or at least, I know several who were, so I presumed it was a general rule.

@MRex

I was disappointed to note that the vaccination of adults who live with immune compromised people is not being extended to those who live with immune compromised children. I thought that was sad . Probably expedient but sad nonetheless. They should have been covered in Group 6 as carers. Or at least, I know several who were, so I presumed it was a general rule.

I would guess that would cover most parents. But not all adults - eg older (adult) siblings living at home, etc who aren't involved in caring.

Mrex yes group 6. My slight concern is that despite the very many young men "caring" for their Grandparents who have come forward there will be too many genuine carers who haven't.

If anyone knows anyone in this group, please encourage them to book their jabs.

Fireflies personally when it has been apparent that there has been someone extremely vulnerable in the house, colleagues and myself have offered to do other household members too. Even if they have had an appointment. I can't speak confidently for other centres, but would like to think most HCPs would try to do the same.

sirfred the confidence intervals in that study suggesting 50% are pretty wide though aren’t they? I’m not sure how much use it is as a study as a result tbh. I’m trying not to recall whether the earlier real world studies ( Scotland and England) on transmission split by AZ/Pfizer - the results there were higher.

I don’t disagree on the general argument re children though ( particularly younger) and vaccinating. I think that gets into very difficult risk/benefit analysis on an individual level and societal level.

I also wonder ( do we have good studies?) what uptake would be from parents for younger children, particularly come august.

For children for whom the risks of covid are extremely low (say 1 in a million) there is a real question as to whether the risks of rare vaccine side-effects are greater than the risk from infection.

I’ve had the AZ vaccine and was taken aback at how strong the side-effects were (now better but I’m taking aspirin for a couple of weeks as a precaution).

This is pure anecdata on a data thread, but I've written before about being conflicted about any potential covid vaccine for my young children.

I wouldn't personally mind them having it, but they wouldn't want it due to the needle. So I would be forcing them into something that they don't want, that wouldn't really be for their benefit.

They've been exposed to covid before, to symptomatic people and they either caught it and were asymptomatic, or they didn't catch it. Now, they could, I accept, encounter it from one of their school buddies and maybe catch it? But when their school chums' parents have been vaccinated that then already lowers the risk of children being exposed? This is just my musing.

I've also talked before on here about the covid outbreak among my DH's side of the family due to our errant rule breaking, which I partook in at the time and miraculously escaped catching covid.

In that outbreak, no children under 12 caught it, despite being in households with people with covid and absolutely no distancing. Maybe they did have it, but they certainly weren't ill/displaying any symptoms (obviously we were all isolating at the time).

So I remain very conflicted about any potential covid jabs to children.

There still isn't actual data on the impact of vaccines on transmission, because we don't normally know where someone catches it from of course. The 50% figure for AZ is 50% fewer people testing positive, when routinely tested (with or without symptoms) by PCR tests www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2021/covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-confirms-protection-against-severe-disease-hospitalisation-and-death-in-the-primary-analysis-of-phase-iii-trials.html
There's also a significant reduction in the amount of virus that those who do test positive have (so much so that most of them don't get ill), which means they are likely to be less infectious than they would otherwise have been. This means that the 50% effectively sets the lower bound on possible impact on transmission. It could be quite a bit higher.

@ILookAtTheFloor - they are looking at a sniffable version that would be great for kids. Well, for all of us because respiratory tracts may be less likely to transmit if they've been exposed the vaccine that way.
It's a lot longer until vaccines for kids are approved and rolled out, and we don't yet know the cut-off age they'll start at (2? 7? 12?). Leave it until then to see what is being offered, remaining transmission etc.

@Eyewhisker

For children for whom the risks of covid are extremely low (say 1 in a million) there is a real question as to whether the risks of rare vaccine side-effects are greater than the risk from infection.

I’ve had the AZ vaccine and was taken aback at how strong the side-effects were (now better but I’m taking aspirin for a couple of weeks as a precaution).

Did your GP advise aspirin? It's a blood thinner, so could increase the risk of a bleed and needs to be taken with caution, paracetamol is better.

@Firefliess

There still isn't actual data on the impact of vaccines on transmission, because we don't normally know where someone catches it from of course. The 50% figure for AZ is 50% fewer people testing positive, when routinely tested (with or without symptoms) by PCR tests www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2021/covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-confirms-protection-against-severe-disease-hospitalisation-and-death-in-the-primary-analysis-of-phase-iii-trials.html There's also a significant reduction in the amount of virus that those who do test positive have (so much so that most of them don't get ill), which means they are likely to be less infectious than they would otherwise have been. This means that the 50% effectively sets the lower bound on possible impact on transmission. It could be quite a bit higher.

Does anyone know if this would be studied in the "live trial" that started a while ago? (Deliberately infecting healthy volunteers in order to study covid)

@Quarantino - I've not heard of them using live trials (challenge trials) to test how infections someone who catches Covid after vaccination is. I would have thought you could do so. You'd need quite large numbers though to even out the large natural variation in how infectious people are. And you'd only be able to measure the impact on transmission of vaccinating young people as they're the only ones suitable for challenge trials.

Ability to add self as a carer has gone from the NHS booking site as of today (I check on occasion for when DH becomes eligible...).
BBC says 85% of 50-55 now done, so we should expect 40-49 to finally open soon. (Also random number generation on self isolating with dubious methodology included in the article.)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56598217

That’s new Mrex and I’m afraid I can’t help wondering if it is because it has been extensively abused! The PGD has been updated for under 50s now so hopefully not too long for your DH.

The guidance on second AZ vaccines has also changed to between 8 & 10 weeks so supply maybe less lumpy than expected.

@ILookAtTheFloor

I understand the rest of your argument, but I have an issue with one part:
I wouldn't personally mind them having it, but they wouldn't want it due to the needle. So I would be forcing them into something that they don't want, that wouldn't really be for their benefit.

We do a few things as parents that the kids don't like, because as adults we know that it benefits them eg in the long run. They don't like shoes in the beginning, yet we make them wear it. It's the same with masks and vaccinations in my opinion.
Simply saying that I don't think that it's safe/reasonable is okay, but making arguments that don't hold ground weakens it.

Vaccinators seem so much better these days. I haven't felt the needles go in at all when I have been jabbed.

[quote MRex]Ability to add self as a carer has gone from the NHS booking site as of today (I check on occasion for when DH becomes eligible...).
BBC says 85% of 50-55 now done, so we should expect 40-49 to finally open soon. (Also random number generation on self isolating with dubious methodology included in the article.)
www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56598217[/quote]
In our East Mids city, GPs sent out text messages in Monday inviting over 40s to book their vaccine. I've got mine booked for today.