Data, Stats and Daily Numbers started 1st January 2022

[boys3]

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/

I assume no requirement to wear a mask and avoid crowds, unlike in US.

Omicron is shown to most infectious after this/towards the end of this period and US isolation period counted from date of positive test - so could be very interesting.

I did just see this on another thread

UK Health Security Agency data shows that two-thirds of positive cases were no longer infectious by day five.

Haven’t read rest of article but Googled and here www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59980505.amp

This form DHSC -
7% of people released from isolation on day 6 under new rule will still be infectious, DHSC says
The Department of Health and Social Care has sent out its news release about the decision to cut the minimum isolation period to five days, and it says that it could result in 7% of people leaving isolation when they are still infectious.

That sounds worrying, but DHSC says that under the current rules, the figure is already 6%.

Although the way the government is presenting the new rule makes it sound as if the minimum isolation period is being cut by two days, in fact it is only a one day cut.

@Lalalablahblahblah

Hmm if releasing at 7 days means 2 in 5 infection cases are missed, reducing to 5 days seems counter productive, no? I mean what's the point in making people isolate at all if it's not for long enough to stop the spread. Surely it's the worse of all worlds? Seems to me to be a very unscientific attempt to distract from the number 10 drinks party situation.

How infectious are you if you have a negative LFT?

If two thirds aren’t anymore bland get released but LfT gets over third to stay home

@Lalalablahblahblah

Hmm if releasing at 7 days means 2 in 5 infection cases are missed, reducing to 5 days seems counter productive, no? I mean what's the point in making people isolate at all if it's not for long enough to stop the spread. Surely it's the worse of all worlds? Seems to me to be a very unscientific attempt to distract from the number 10 drinks party situation.

I agree. It will be interesting to see if our current Prime Minister at time of posting shows his face after 5, 6 or 7 days depending on whether he can find his way out of his freezer 🤔

I don’t think it’s the worst of all worlds though?

If LFTs pick up how injections you are it seems a pretty good way to go

@Piggywaspushed

This form DHSC - 7% of people released from isolation on day 6 under new rule will still be infectious, DHSC says The Department of Health and Social Care has sent out its news release about the decision to cut the minimum isolation period to five days, and it says that it could result in 7% of people leaving isolation when they are still infectious.

That sounds worrying, but DHSC says that under the current rules, the figure is already 6%.

Although the way the government is presenting the new rule makes it sound as if the minimum isolation period is being cut by two days, in fact it is only a one day cut.

7% may be infectious, but of those most will people's infectiousness will be much lower than at the onset of symptoms.... It's a calculated compromise that doesn't assess someone's potential to be infectious as something worth avoiding at all costs. People need to appreciate this and risk assessment accordingly.

@Lalalablahblahblah

The text on BBC says " rapid tests ahead of release should capture most of those who are infection but not all.

The current policy if release at 7 days with 2 negative tests means about 2 in 5 infe those cases are missed, according to the data.

Unless I'm totally misunderstanding (which I might be tbf I have covid brain fog) this seems to be saying that 40% of still infectios cases are missed on release.
If we're releasing that many when they're still infectious why are we bothering to isolate at all?

Did I miss something there?

Because their infectiousness is likely to be far lower. Being infectious isn't binary... You can be highly infectious and be spraying masses of virus and spawn a super-spreader event as people 10m away are caught in your Covid draft, or you can have far lower viral load and only likely infect someone by snogging them.

By draft, I meant draught!

We are basically moving to giving up. The Army has been called in as hospitalisations and death continue to rise. Cases are going down as most people can't get a test. This is what "living with it" looks like at this stage of the pandemic.
People will die unnecessarily. Who cares? Not the government.

Just quoting the DHSC tree.

Most working people can't 'risk assess'.

And it is shit for ecv people who work.

BTW, I am not sure it's true that people are less infectious with omicron at 5 days than they were at onset symptoms? I thought its profile on that was distinctly different from delta.

Apparently, with Omicron, peak viral loads occur at 3-6 days.

Omicron has been described as much more infectious than previous variants.

So I guess it depends whether the aim is to pick up the great majority of infectious people and prevent as much spread as possible.

Or whether the aim is to pick up some infectious people en route to opening up society more.

It seems they are going for the latter.

I'm sure there will be analyses in future as to whether this was actually a wise course of action with what looks like the most infectious variant yet.

It depends on whether the decreased cost & inconvenience of isolating for 1 less day outweighs the increase in spread.

@herecomesthsun

Apparently, with Omicron, peak viral loads occur at 3-6 days.

Omicron has been described as much more infectious than previous variants.

So I guess it depends whether the aim is to pick up the great majority of infectious people and prevent as much spread as possible.

Or whether the aim is to pick up some infectious people en route to opening up society more.

It seems they are going for the latter.

I'm sure there will be analyses in future as to whether this was actually a wise course of action with what looks like the most infectious variant yet.

It depends on whether the decreased cost & inconvenience of isolating for 1 less day outweighs the increase in spread.

Totally my own gut feeling but... Personally I think they would prefer to completely do away with isolation if asymptomatic, but know that there would be far too much push back from the MSM, so they're slowly reducing isolation time. (Well not that slowly, it's less than a week since the last change). I would imagine the next stage will be that if you have 2 clear tests you can stop isolating (even if that means you've only isolated for 3 days). And then asymptomatic testing will go and people will only isolate if they actually have symptoms and a positive PCR, and eventually (possibly by spring), even symptomatic testing will be restricted to those that are actually ill. Testing and isolation simply won't last forever.

Well, we have very good antiviral treatments now, but access to them hasn't been sorted out very clearly.

If it were straightforward and easy for vulnerable people to get PCRs and antiviral tx if they get covid, I would feel much more comfortable with a plan to wind down isolations.

Otherwise, there will be a lot of deaths in the wake of this (and this plan would depend on the vulnerable people being clued up to test etc)

Yes, it’s been shambolic for some CEV people to get the anti-vitals they were told in writing they should receive if they tested positive. It’s also been difficult for some of them to get fourth jabs too.

publichealthscotland.scot/media/11089/22-01-12-covid19-winter_publication_report.pdf

Says only 9 of the 45 new ICU patients are confirmed omicron, doesn't make it clear if that means the others are delta, or the others are just not yet confirmed?

Table 11: Age-standardised case rate per 100,000 individuals by week and vaccination status, 11 December 2021 to 07
January 2022

Shows that being double vaccinated is very bad for case rates, way higher in that than anywhere else - the rates are "age standardised" so it shouldn't be the impact of lower spread in unvaccinated kids (over 10 to be included in figures), so it's presumably past infection in those not previously protected?

Double vaccinated Over 70's more likely than unvaccinated over 70's to be an acute hospitalisation. I suspect this will be because the few over 70's who are not vaccinated are either ill enough to really isolate themselves, or chose not to be vaccinated due to past infection? rather than anything particularly bad about being double vaccinated. But it could be something else?

Anyway, I can't see anything particularly alarming, or explanation of why the ICU admissions are following a slightly different pattern in Scotland.

Anecdata but positive; a friend who works in ICU in the north east (north of Tyne but not Newcastle or North Tyneside, can't remember quite where!) said that for the first time they closed the Covid ICU and opened it to all ICU patients.

Obviously she said who knows how long it will last but it was great.

This risk assessment for omicron has been updated. For the first time there is an extra row at the bottom for children.

ONS positivity rates by region; 9.8% in the North West!

www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/14/omicron-rise-uk-infants-hospitalised-covid-figures-suggest