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 1st January 2022

992 replies

boys3 · 01/01/2022 18:49

Whilst I'd love to say all is quiet on New Years Day the reality is:

Welcome to yet another DATA thread.

Our preference is - still - for factual, data driven and analytical contributions.

Please try to keep discussion focused on these.

All the usual links below; New for '22 suggestions always welcome, and there may well be some that just need to go.

UK govt press conferences slides & data www.gov.uk/government/collections/slides-and-datasets-to-accompany-coronavirus-press-conferences#history
UKHSA Variants of Concern Technical Briefings www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-of-sars-cov-2-variants-technical-briefing
UKHSA Vaccine efficacy www.gov.uk/guidance/monitoring-reports-of-the-effectiveness-of-covid-19-vaccination
SAGE : Minutes and Models www.gov.uk/government/collections/scientific-evidence-supporting-the-government-response-to-coronavirus-covid-19
Data Dashboard coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ includes R estimates
UKHSA Weekly Flu & Covid Surveiilance Reports 2021-22 Season www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-flu-and-covid-19-surveillance-reports-2021-to-2022-season
Dashboard Vaccine Map to MSOA level coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map/vaccinations
Covid 19 Genomics www.cogconsortium.uk/tools-analysis/public-data-analysis-2/
Sanger Genome Maps & Data covid19.sanger.ac.uk/lineages/raw
UCL Virus Watch ucl-virus-watch.net/
NHS Vaccination data www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/
Sewage www.gov.uk/government/publications/wastewater-testing-coverage-data-for-19-may-2021-emhp-programme/wastewater-testing-coverage-data-for-the-environmental-monitoring-for-health-protection-emhp-programme.
Sewage reports www.gov.uk/government/publications/monitoring-of-sars-cov-2-rna-in-england-wastewater-monthly-statistics-june-2021
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 MSOA 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/

OP posts:
Thread gallery
230
Thewiseoneincognito · 04/01/2022 09:50

@Player067

There has been some chat on Twitter about a new variant B16402 - worrying because it sounds more severe than omicron. Wondered if knowledgeable data people on this thread had any thoughts about whether it could/would replace omicron? Perhaps less infectious? see eg twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1477767585202647040

(apologies if already discussed, I dip in and out of this thread and find it very helpful)

I’m purposely avoiding reading about this for at least another week until more is known about it.
containsnuts · 04/01/2022 09:51

Also on Twitter from Tom Peacock, Virologist - Imperial College London -

"Lots of chat about B.1.640.2 in the last few days - just a few points to keep in mind:

  • B.1.640.2 actually predates Omicron
  • in all that time there are exactly... 20 sequences (compared to the >120k Omis in less time)
Def not one worth worrying about too much at the mo..." 9:36 PM · Jan 3, 2022

Hope this reassures

sirfredfredgeorge · 04/01/2022 09:57

Is there a better study than Imperial looking at reinfection rates, in your opinion?

No reason to assume any of the others are better, I'm sure they all just suffer from lack of data and biases in the data they do have - the SA study at a similar time www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.11.11.21266068v2.full.pdf came up with double the re-infection risk, that's more the 7% of cases shows compared to the 1-2% in delta (remember infection risk is not just your risk from protection, the prevalence and transmissibility increase the chance too, and the overall rate is dependent on the other protections success or failure)

JanglyBeads · 04/01/2022 10:11

Learnt via Twitter this morning, something which am sure some on here know already, but others like me may not:

Registered LFD positives are only counted in the data for England, not for the devolved administrations.

Player067 · 04/01/2022 10:13

Thanks containsnuts and Thewiseone - hopefully it will fizzle out then... fingers crossed

JanglyBeads · 04/01/2022 10:17

I've read scientists saying that, as B.1.640.2 (or the Cameroonian variant, as that was where it was first recorded!) obviously couldn't outperform Delta in the autumn, there's no way it will dent omicron's current performance.

sirfredfredgeorge · 04/01/2022 10:23

obviously couldn't outperform Delta in the autumn, there's no way it will dent omicron's current performance

But if omicron infection is not protective against re-infection against it, then it doesn't matter if it can't outcompete.

JanglyBeads · 04/01/2022 10:28

Sir Neil Ferguson interview, report from the Guardian, says 10-15% are reinfections so that's rather more significant than 7%?

48m ago 09:36
Up to 15% of Omicron cases are reinfections, says Ferguson
And here is a full summary of the lines from Prof Neil Ferguson’s interview on the Today programme.
But he said hospital admissions may take longer to plateau than case numbers because older people were infected later. He explained:

This epidemic has spread so quickly [in the 18-50 age group] it hasn’t had time to really spread into the older age groups which are at much, much greater risk of severe outcomes and hospitalisation. So we may see a different pattern in hospitalisations. Hospitalisations are still generally going up across the country and we may see high levels for for some weeks.
He said shortage of tests may have kept Covid case numbers lower than they otherwise would have been. He said:

[Case numbers are] not as useful as they used to be because there has been, frankly, demand management of cases by region, which means we’ve been running out of tests. And so in some regions, as we’ve heard over Christmas, numbers of tests have been limited. So almost certainly case numbers, true infection rates, have been much higher than [the published figures].
He said up to 15% of Omicron cases were reinfections. He said the official headline case numbers did not include reinfections. But the scientists did see the reinfection numbers, he said.

The data we see includes reinfections. Between 10 and 15% of Omicron cases are reinfections, so you have to just interpret the numbers through that lens.
He said school reopening was likely to lead to an increase in Omicron infections in children. He explained:

The Delta infections in the last few months have been really driven by school-age children and by the older age groups in the population.
Omicron slipped in the middle in 18 to 45-year-olds really but it didn’t have much time to get into schoolchildren before schools shut and we expect to now see quite high infection levels, of mild infection I should emphasise, in school-age children.

Omicron may have plateaued amongst under-50s in London, says Prof Neil Ferguson
Medium confidence is probably also good way of summing up Prof Neil Ferguson’s overall mood when he was interviewed on the Today programme this morning. Ferguson, the Imperial College epidemiologist whose modelling is closely followed by government, said he was “cautiously optimistic” that the Omicron pandemic may have plateaued in London (where cases have been highest) amongst the under-50s. He told the programme:

I think I’m cautiously optimistic that infection rates in London in that key 18-50 age group, which has been driving the Omicron epidemic, may possibly have plateaued, it’s too early to say whether they’re going down yet.
And this is what he said when he was asked whether he thought, overall, the effect of Omicron was as bad as originally feared, or whether it was better. He replied:

I think the good news here is it is certainly less severe. We think, if you’ve never been infected before, never had a vaccine, [there is] about a one third drop in the risk of just any hospital admission, probably a two thirds drop in the risk of dying from Omicron. So [it is] substantially less severe. And that has helped us undoubtedly. We would be seeing much higher infection case numbers in hospital otherwise.
And vaccines, as we always expected they would, are holding up against severe outcomes well.
Well that doesn’t mean it’s not going to be, as the prime minister said, a difficult few weeks for the NHS.

sirfredfredgeorge · 04/01/2022 10:38

But the scientists did see the reinfection numbers, he said

This is a repulsive statement, that completely misappropriates the definition of scientist.

I have literally no respect for the man if he can say such a thing.

amicissimma · 04/01/2022 10:39

@herecomesthsun, you made me smile!

Today you say 19% is 'very little', on 2nd you say 16.7% is 'a lot'!

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but on a really horrible morning that critical 2.3% brightened my day.

herecomesthsun · 04/01/2022 10:45

[quote amicissimma]@herecomesthsun, you made me smile!

Today you say 19% is 'very little', on 2nd you say 16.7% is 'a lot'!

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but on a really horrible morning that critical 2.3% brightened my day.[/quote]
Smile

Oh I just quoted from an article that was cited by another poster, who wanted it to mean the opposite of what it was actually saying

(that made me smile)

The percentages are in relation to completely different things, though, your maths is even more original than subtracting apples from oranges.

MarshaBradyo · 04/01/2022 11:00

@sirfredfredgeorge

But the scientists did see the reinfection numbers, he said

This is a repulsive statement, that completely misappropriates the definition of scientist.

I have literally no respect for the man if he can say such a thing.

I think I know why but can you expand?

Out of curiosity

herecomesthsun · 04/01/2022 11:02

Presumably scientists who are involved with modelling for and advice to the Government, do get to see analyses of all sorts of data not available to the public?

Quartz2208 · 04/01/2022 11:02

That was me @herecomesthsun and I said it offers some protection - it becomes semantics rather than maths based as to what I mean by some and what you mean by very little.

I still see may be as low as 19% as offering some protection you see it is as very little. I guess it depends on what you think I meant by some - which given that by its very nature is unspecified it is difficult to see what made you smile. Some could indeed mean very little.

So please dont say it proves the opposite of what you think I was saying. I was merely giving a figure to your question and answering that it offers some. Unless you dont think it offers any (and there is no evidence of that)

JangolinaPitt · 04/01/2022 11:23

@herecomesthsun

Presumably scientists who are involved with modelling for and advice to the Government, do get to see analyses of all sorts of data not available to the public?
In which case all the data should be made available on real time -no excuse at all for lack of transparency -not as if someone had to type up and circulate a memo these days.
herecomesthsun · 04/01/2022 11:25

The initial reports from Israel, for example, suggested that vaccines offered 95% effectiveness against infection, hospitalisation and severe illness. And then we had news of vaccine effects waning etc etc

Protection of 19% from previous infection against re-infection on this sort of comparison would appear fairly low, & lower than we'd hope.

The point being made in the title of the paper is that omicron "evades" immunity from re-infection.

(I am very sorry to hear this in fact as many in my DC's class had covid last month and I was hoping that this might mean DC & their classmates would be unlikely to get another infection any time soon. 19% protection is not looking very secure to my eyes)

However, I guess we can hope that other studies show a stronger protective effect from previous infection.

containsnuts · 04/01/2022 11:29

Does anyone know what percentage of over 80s and CEV people are estimated to have had covid? Looking for something similar to the vaccine break-down by age but for infection. Many over 80s and CEV people I know have avoided it so far but are likely to get it now. The concern being that we're still to see the impact of a massive amount of infection in the groups more at risk of being unwell even after 3x vaccinations.

JanglyBeads · 04/01/2022 11:56

@herecomesthsun

Presumably scientists who are involved with modelling for and advice to the Government, do get to see analyses of all sorts of data not available to the public?
That was my reaction too.
the80sweregreat · 04/01/2022 12:06

Where are the stats and data for people becoming ill with the vaccines / boosters ?
I've heard of five today already , varying ages.
Will those stats ever come out ?
I'm not an anti vaxxer, I've had them all. I feel there is more going on ( news black out ?) or the hospitals are full of people ill from the vaccines too.

herecomesthsun · 04/01/2022 12:10

I'd assume that some of this is preliminary data that needs to be checked out; it would be reasonable for there to be awareness of this at a senior level and a concern if emerging data wasn't available to scientists.

It would also be really concerning if data became available at too early a stage and then for example had to be rescinded because there was a problem with it.

It is not unusual for scientists working with data to give a vague indication of the direction in which their findings are trending, which will be pursued in papers etc later.

So it didn't immediately seem irresponsible to me for him to be talking like that.

I could be open to persuasion though Smile

herecomesthsun · 04/01/2022 12:10

that was @JanglyBeads and @sirfredfredgeorge

JanglyBeads · 04/01/2022 12:51

Here's some graphs of share of general pop unvaxxed vs share of those in ICU:

twitter.com/jim_reed/status/1477421130533249028?s=21

JanglyBeads · 04/01/2022 12:52

Here

Data, Stats and Daily Numbers started 1st January 2022
Data, Stats and Daily Numbers started 1st January 2022
JanglyBeads · 04/01/2022 12:55

From a brilliant thread by John Burn Murdoch re current state of play, which is worth reading in its entirety:

twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1478339769646166019?s=21

Ohsofedupwiththis · 04/01/2022 13:07

[quote JanglyBeads]From a brilliant thread by John Burn Murdoch re current state of play, which is worth reading in its entirety:

twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1478339769646166019?s=21[/quote]
He is always great.

And whilst the situation here is very precarious, we are in a better position that other places. The red on his graph got Austria was scary.

Swipe left for the next trending thread