Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

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, Stats and Daily Numbers started 26th June

992 replies

boys3 · 26/06/2021 19:10

UK govt press conferences Slides & data www.gov.uk/government/collections/slides-and-datasets-to-accompany-coronavirus-press-conferences#history
PHE Variants of Concern Technical Briefings www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-of-novel-sars-cov-2-variant-variant-of-concern-20201201
Data Dashboard coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
Covid 19 Genomics www.cogconsortium.uk/tools-analysis/public-data-analysis-2/
NHS Vaccination data www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/
Global vaccination data ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations
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 imperialcollegelondon.github.io/covid19local/#map
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/

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, cases, tests, deaths Dashboard public.tableau.com/profile/public.health.wales.health.protection#!/vizhome/RapidCOVID-19virology-Public/Headlinesummary
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 (from last summer) 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 (European Centre for Disease Control rolling 14-day incidence EEA & UK www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/cases-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=eur&areas=usa&areas=bra&areas=gbr&areas=cze&areas=hun&areasRegional=usny&areasRegional=usnj&areasRegional=usaz&areasRegional=usca&areasRegional=usnd&areasRegional=ussd&cumulative=0&logScale=0&per100K=1&startDate=2020-09-01&values=deaths

PHE local health data fingertips.phe.org.uk/profile/health-profiles
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 Cornerwww.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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
115
PrincessNutNuts · 29/06/2021 13:27

@PrincessNutNuts

Warwick modelling on hospitalisations if we opened up fully on June 21st versus what actually happened when we didn't:
Forgot to say. These graphs are from a random Twitter account so I can't vouch for their absolute accuracy but in broad strokes, positive news, delaying June 21st was the right decision, lots of British people have been spared serious illness and hospital admission because of it.
Wakeupin2022 · 29/06/2021 13:37

They will need to take into account those who have received 1st doses and 2nd doses in that time.........

Quartz2208 · 29/06/2021 13:43

Am I missing something @PrincessNutNuts because to me those graphs are showing that the modelling was way out by June 21st and therefore it accuracy at showing what would have happened is in doubt.

Whatever9999 · 29/06/2021 13:56

@Quartz2208

Am I missing something *@PrincessNutNuts* because to me those graphs are showing that the modelling was way out by June 21st and therefore it accuracy at showing what would have happened is in doubt.
If you're missing something, I am.too. looks like the modelling for what would happen with the delayed release is out by a factor of 3. And the graphs are designed to show how wildly inaccurate the modelling was....
BellaintheWychElm · 29/06/2021 14:16

@Quartz2208 @Whatever9999 - The graph is created by @RP131 on twitter and is apparently the set of Warwick models used to justify the unlock delay (the models do not include the delay) compared to actual data. However at the point these models were presented they were already inaccurate as you say and not reflecting reality.

PrincessNutNuts · 29/06/2021 14:30

@Quartz2208

Am I missing something *@PrincessNutNuts* because to me those graphs are showing that the modelling was way out by June 21st and therefore it accuracy at showing what would have happened is in doubt.

I don't know how the Twitter account accurately plotted the "Warwick" curve in the early stages because it was quite a low resolution image with big intervals on the axis.

But I've given them the benefit of the doubt and assumed they tried their best in good faith, because otherwise it's just bullshlt isn't it?

PrincessNutNuts · 29/06/2021 14:32

f you're missing something, I am.too. looks like the modelling for what would happen with the delayed release is out by a factor of 3. And the graphs are designed to show how wildly inaccurate the modelling was....

Now I'm missing something.

How does the graph do that?

Bordois · 29/06/2021 14:32

@Quartz2208

Am I missing something *@PrincessNutNuts* because to me those graphs are showing that the modelling was way out by June 21st and therefore it accuracy at showing what would have happened is in doubt.
Exactly. The modelled numbers pre 21st June were already way out so how can that graph prove anything except how inaccurate the modelling is!
PrincessNutNuts · 29/06/2021 14:35

Here's a reminder of what those graphs are apparently based on.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/996229/S12866SPI-M-OMediumTermProjections.pdf

Bordois · 29/06/2021 14:42

Why don't you ask him on twitter. I'm sure he will be happy for you to correct his data for him.

Whatever9999 · 29/06/2021 15:49

@PrincessNutNuts

f you're missing something, I am.too. looks like the modelling for what would happen with the delayed release is out by a factor of 3. And the graphs are designed to show how wildly inaccurate the modelling was....

Now I'm missing something.

How does the graph do that?

Bar chart along the bottom axis shows the actual, Real life data, while the line graphs show what the modelling came up with. Therefore it shows just how far out the modelling is. The graphs you think prove your point actually prove the absolute opposite
Itsprobablynotcominghome · 29/06/2021 16:58

Does anyone know if I can find further data on vaccinations? Things such as amount of doses we have ordered and what should arrive per week/month?

Vaccinations seem to be grinding to a halt and I’m curious to know why.

EasterIssland · 29/06/2021 17:01

@Itsprobablynotcominghome ir doesn’t fully answer your question but there is some info here
mobile.twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1409593065426272257

PurpleWh1teGreen · 29/06/2021 17:32

@Itsprobablynotcominghome

Does anyone know if I can find further data on vaccinations? Things such as amount of doses we have ordered and what should arrive per week/month?

Vaccinations seem to be grinding to a halt and I’m curious to know why.

Not officially, but I am aware of some concerns about Pfizer supply in the coming weeks. Some areas are planning not to give second Pfizer doses at less than 11 weeks because of this.

Locally, we have had walk ins for both Pfizer and AZ in the last week and it feels less busy. Arguably most people who are motivated to be jabbed have been done, leaving those who are less sure or resistant.

MargaretThursday · 29/06/2021 17:33

@Piggywaspushed tends to be 35 in top/second sets to allow for smaller lower sets, I think dd1's top maths set was 38 at one point.

But at juniors his form was 33 throughout because they allowed all the appeals. In his year (only year they accept more than 1-2 appeals) because the head turned up and said they could take all of the appeals that year, which meant 3-4 extra per class. I believe the head's dc were one of the appeals... Hmm

I'm still hopeful that as schools close we'll see numbers falling and by September all the age groups will be mostly vaccinated. Cross fingers anyway!

PrincessNutNuts · 29/06/2021 18:09
  • Bar chart along the bottom axis shows the actual, Real life data, while the line graphs show what the modelling came up with. Therefore it shows just how far out the modelling is. The graphs you think prove your point actually prove the absolute opposite*

@Whatever9999

But the modelling was based on opening up on June 21st. Fully back to normal, no NPIs, nightclubbing, the lot.

And in real life we didn't do that.

JanFebAnyMonth · 29/06/2021 18:33

‘Mass testing gives a skewed picture of the scale of the Covid pandemic
Telegraph analysis shows community prevalence is now far lower than December last year, when we had similar case numbers
By Sarah Knapton, SCIENCE EDITOR
29 June 2021 • 4:13pm

Mass testing is giving a skewed picture of the coronavirus pandemic, with community prevalence currently five times lower than when the country had similar case numbers last year, analysis by The Telegraph shows.

On Tuesday, Downing Street said it would continue to publish daily coronavirus figures, even after restrictions are lifted, claiming they "provide an important level of transparency".

Yet critics have previously called for the daily cases data to be scrapped, with focus shifted to admissions and deaths, because vaccinations have broken the link between infections and healthcare needs.

On Tuesday, Britain recorded 20,479 cases, with the seven-day total increasing by 72 per cent. Looking at the daily case data, it might be assumed that the country is now in a similar predicament to mid-December, when around 20,000 daily infections were reported.

Yet on December 13, when cases hit 20,263 average of 340,285 tests were being carried out each day, compared to the current seven-day rolling rates of 922,622.

The chance of testing positive now is just 2.2 per cent in comparison to 5.9 per cent when we had similar daily rates last winter.

It means that community prevalence must have been higher the last time that the country reported similar figures.

This is confirmed by latest infection figures for the Office for National Statistics (ONS) which has been monitoring community prevalence separately. Weekly data shows that just 1 in 440 people in the community in England currently has a coronavirus infection.

When we were experiencing similar daily figures last winter, community prevalence was 1 in 85, five times higher than it is now.

The data suggests that if we were testing the same number of people as last year, we would only be picking up around 7,536 cases a day.

Prof Carl Heneghan, director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford, said even if lateral flow testing is removed from the data, the country is still in a very different position to last December.

“The seven-day positivity rate by PCR (Polymerase chain reaction) testing on June 23 was 3.6 per cent, whereas it was 9.3 per cent in mid-December and at its height it hit 18.2 per cent,” he said.

“The fundamental problem with testing is it depends on who turns up, so you get selection bias, and the increase in testing only adds to problems with the data. You put all this together and following the case data becomes a problem for us in interpreting what to do next.

“The ONS infection survey is a better judge of what’s going on because you have a random selection of people.

“Singapore is now accepting that this virus is endemic and has said that daily case reporting is becoming problematic for society. It’s instigating a sort of anxiety, and policies that are uncalled for.

“The mass testing also skews where Britain sits in world rankings. A lot of asymptomatic cases are being picked up here through blanket testing, but you’ll get underestimates in countries not doing that.”

Prof Kevin McConway, emeritus professor of applied statistics, The Open University, said the daily case figures can be subject to biases depending on who is being tested, the general level of concern, whether surge testing is happening, and what kinds of tests are being used.

“I'm not sure it is as extreme, but I think it’s certainly an issue,” he said.

“It’s always been the case that the new confirmed case counts on the dashboard can be subject to biases, in that they don’t compare like with like.

“Other things being equal (which of course they never are, quite), the more people you test, the more cases you find. It’s important to find cases, in order to keep control of outbreaks and local surges, but that’s bound to lead to changes in who’s being tested and why, and in turn that means that the trends in the numbers of cases that are found might not mean what it looks as if they mean.

“Recently, the number of infections measured in the ONS survey has certainly been going up, but it hasn’t been going up as fast as the count of new cases on the dashboard.”

Death data from the ONS for the week ending June 18, also shows that the country is experiencing very few Covid-19 fatalities despite the apparent surge in infections, with a weekly rise of just 19 deaths. Wales recorded no Covid-19 deaths for the first time since the start of the pandemic.

Deaths from Covid-19 now make up just 1.1 per cent of all deaths, up from 0.8 per cent last week but experts said the figures were still small and not yet cause for concern.

JanFebAnyMonth · 29/06/2021 18:34

Lots to analyse above.....

Piggywaspushed · 29/06/2021 18:40

Yes, including the word yet in the final sentence!

PatriciaHolm · 29/06/2021 18:48

@PrincessNutNuts

* Bar chart along the bottom axis shows the actual, Real life data, while the line graphs show what the modelling came up with. Therefore it shows just how far out the modelling is. The graphs you think prove your point actually prove the absolute opposite*

@Whatever9999

But the modelling was based on opening up on June 21st. Fully back to normal, no NPIs, nightclubbing, the lot.

And in real life we didn't do that.

But the point is, the model up until June 21 should have been on a par with reality, if we are to be able to look at it and say - if we had opened up on that date, this is what would have happened.

It isn't. Looking at the model data for June 21 vs reality, it was already significantly adrift. Admissions in reality were less than half what the model said they should be, at the point where the model and reality should have been exactly the same if we are to look at it and say - that's what would have happened if we opened up. The model shows significant growth in admissions from June 9/10, which we already knew was wrong by June 21.

The model starts from the wrong starting point, the wrong data for June 21, so we can't look at it and extrapolate anything unfortunately. There is little doubt that full opening up would have resulted in greater growth than we have now, of course, but the model is useless in telling us what.

Bordois · 29/06/2021 18:55

It was pointed out at the time and every time the previous warwick graph was posted that the data on it was out of date and incorrect, but some wouldn't have it.

CornishYarg · 29/06/2021 19:05

Yes, for the Warwick graphs of predicted vs actual to show what Princess say they do (where we would have been if we'd gone ahead with unlocking on 21 June), the red lines would need to be recalibrated so that they're equal to the blue bar charts on 21 June. The two options they're modelling only divergence from 21 June onwards.

CornishYarg · 29/06/2021 19:06

diverge not *divergence"

Piggywaspushed · 29/06/2021 19:23

I am not sure I understand all the science in this but it seems interesting.

twitter.com/ewanbirney/status/1409526043707416576

Anyone want to lay(wo)man it?

Cornettoninja · 29/06/2021 19:28

Following the article @JanFebAnyMonth posted does that mean that our (meaning me!) perception of how well the vaccines are performing are also skewed?

I don’t think it will be a massive difference but testing=more cases must affect general comparisons to previous rises in infections and their links to admissions and deaths.

Swipe left for the next trending thread