Coronavirus - Data Analysis Thread
Discussion
RSTurboPaul said:
So they can rush into coercing everyone not at risk into taking a genetically engineered vaccine that is still in its trial phase and has no long term data, but they can't rush into relaxing restrictions when we already have the actual hard data from last year that demonstrates obvious seasonal reductions to near-negligible infection rates and subsequent death rates in the warmer months (and that without the vulnerable cohort being injected with said experimental treatment)?
Ok then! lol
That we are still in near-full lockdown when only 50 people a day are dying, when 1500 a day are dying of other things, is obvious nonsense.
Look at the lockdown period last year...we were locked down until the Summer, and then the relaxation prompted a rather sharp resurgence 6-8 weeks later.Ok then! lol
That we are still in near-full lockdown when only 50 people a day are dying, when 1500 a day are dying of other things, is obvious nonsense.
Warm weather HELPS, but quite clearly your average Brit can't be trusted to wear a mask properly or give people a sensible amount of space (I can vouch for this through a year of empirical evidence), so the government HAS to play it safe.
No-one likes it...but the alternative is more deaths, and the gov't are being roundly criticised for the numbers already lost.
havoc said:
RSTurboPaul said:
So they can rush into coercing everyone not at risk into taking a genetically engineered vaccine that is still in its trial phase and has no long term data, but they can't rush into relaxing restrictions when we already have the actual hard data from last year that demonstrates obvious seasonal reductions to near-negligible infection rates and subsequent death rates in the warmer months (and that without the vulnerable cohort being injected with said experimental treatment)?
Ok then! lol
That we are still in near-full lockdown when only 50 people a day are dying, when 1500 a day are dying of other things, is obvious nonsense.
Look at the lockdown period last year...we were locked down until the Summer, and then the relaxation prompted a rather sharp resurgence 6-8 weeks later.Ok then! lol
That we are still in near-full lockdown when only 50 people a day are dying, when 1500 a day are dying of other things, is obvious nonsense.
Warm weather HELPS, but quite clearly your average Brit can't be trusted to wear a mask properly or give people a sensible amount of space (I can vouch for this through a year of empirical evidence), so the government HAS to play it safe.
No-one likes it...but the alternative is more deaths, and the gov't are being roundly criticised for the numbers already lost.
but this is not the thread for it!
Quick update. I was going to do this yesterday, but the testing data was not published until today:
1. Tests and cases. Test volumes continue to be highly variable due to the testing of school children. However, the Sunday peak was 250k down on the previous week suggesting commitment to the scheme is waning. The mass testing has slowed the fall in cases, but not completely:
2. This zooms on the last few weeks to show the relationship between increased testing and case numbers.
3. Key metrics. All continue to fall. Broadly halving every 18 days, but admissions is following the trend more closely:
4. Metrics overlaid. The relationship between cases, admissions and deaths continues to be very clear, with all metrics converging
1. Tests and cases. Test volumes continue to be highly variable due to the testing of school children. However, the Sunday peak was 250k down on the previous week suggesting commitment to the scheme is waning. The mass testing has slowed the fall in cases, but not completely:
2. This zooms on the last few weeks to show the relationship between increased testing and case numbers.
3. Key metrics. All continue to fall. Broadly halving every 18 days, but admissions is following the trend more closely:
4. Metrics overlaid. The relationship between cases, admissions and deaths continues to be very clear, with all metrics converging
Murph7355 said:
You quite clearly haven't listened to what he said.
The govt have been criticised heavily before for not acting quick enough/too late. So now they are taking a cautious approach with a 5wk firebreak between phases to ensure the data trends fully continue and no gotchas spring up.
In the circumstances of the last 12mths, that is a perfectly reasonable approach to take. When you consider how rapidly the vaccines have been developed and deployed, it is a perfectly reasonable approach to take.
There will be those at both ends of the spectrum that thoroughly disagree. Nothing at all would even get close to satisfying either end.
I do admire their more, how shall we say? Scientific approach? Of changing a variable and awaiting the outcome. But they chose their time to do it didn’t they, when everybody has had enough. Why couldn’t they have been a bit more scientific and coherent with applying all these NPIs (because let’s remember they applied them wholesale without any evidence whatsoever that they were effective…and largely, I think they haven’t been all that effective, or at least not enough to rise above the noise)The govt have been criticised heavily before for not acting quick enough/too late. So now they are taking a cautious approach with a 5wk firebreak between phases to ensure the data trends fully continue and no gotchas spring up.
In the circumstances of the last 12mths, that is a perfectly reasonable approach to take. When you consider how rapidly the vaccines have been developed and deployed, it is a perfectly reasonable approach to take.
There will be those at both ends of the spectrum that thoroughly disagree. Nothing at all would even get close to satisfying either end.
Elysium said:
Quick update. I was going to do this yesterday, but the testing data was not published until today:
1. Tests and cases. Test volumes continue to be highly variable due to the testing of school children. However, the Sunday peak was 250k down on the previous week suggesting commitment to the scheme is waning. The mass testing has slowed the fall in cases, but not completely:
...
4. Metrics overlaid. The relationship between cases, admissions and deaths continues to be very clear, with all metrics converging
Don't forget school easter holidays are this week and next week, so parents probably haven't bothered testing on Sunday. Test numbers will probably be down this week as well then pick up the monday after next (12 April?).1. Tests and cases. Test volumes continue to be highly variable due to the testing of school children. However, the Sunday peak was 250k down on the previous week suggesting commitment to the scheme is waning. The mass testing has slowed the fall in cases, but not completely:
...
4. Metrics overlaid. The relationship between cases, admissions and deaths continues to be very clear, with all metrics converging
re: the last graph - I remembered this morning that someone on the other thread (graveworm??) previously posted a simple 'finger in the air' test - where x number of cases? hospitalisations? provided y number of deaths, and that relationship seemed to be pretty fixed regardless of what the numbers were doing. (I have 1/1000 in my head but may be wrong.)
If that ratio has now changed that would effectively show the reduction in deaths brought about by the vaccination process in the vulnerable populations - but I need to work out what the ratio was in the first place... lol
If we can remember it / work it out and the latest ratio hasn't changed, that would suggest that reductions in deaths will remain in line with cases, a la the above graph, which would suggest vaccination is not 'the golden ticket out of here'...
I think the above graph may well show this effect that I'm talking about (and I recall you writing previously about the vaccination effect not being overtly clear) - can it be extended all the way back to the start of the pandemic, to see if there's any change in similarities between the lines??
Hope this doesnt make it more difficult to see the wood from the trees
Rapid, twice-weekly COVID tests to be offered to everyone in England - including home delivery
https://news.sky.com/story/rapid-twice-weekly-covi...
Rapid, twice-weekly COVID tests to be offered to everyone in England - including home delivery
https://news.sky.com/story/rapid-twice-weekly-covi...
the-photographer said:
Hope this doesnt make it more difficult to see the wood from the trees
Rapid, twice-weekly COVID tests to be offered to everyone in England - including home delivery
https://news.sky.com/story/rapid-twice-weekly-covi...
Good... would have been ideal last year. Not sure the point of a twice weekly test at this point with the rates being low and evidence of asymptomatic cases being not very high.Rapid, twice-weekly COVID tests to be offered to everyone in England - including home delivery
https://news.sky.com/story/rapid-twice-weekly-covi...
I guess if you don't go out much at the moment it makes sense to have a few test kits at home so you can check before you go off to an event.
Is the idea to find the true prevalence in the population?
At my work the people still going in have to test twice a week at the company's cost, so I guess if the government are sending the test kits we can stop spending money on it.the home workers don't get tested, but maybe this would make it easier for us to pop into the office from time to time.
Glade said:
Good... would have been ideal last year. Not sure the point of a twice weekly test at this point with the rates being low and evidence of asymptomatic cases being not very high.
to all of that.Once again, i think it's a combination of:-
- Cronyism - someone, somewhere, is making a mint out of the public purse
- Pushing to get the economy moving again...you can bet this will be used by a LOT of employers as an excuse to get everyone 'back in the office'...with the consequent increase in spend on transport and eating out (even if just a coffee).
Sadly, the evidence shows that the majority of the population won't isolate even if they've got symptoms, so why should we trust them to administer a test to themselves?
Edit:
https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/health/ramming...
Edited by havoc on Monday 5th April 11:28
havoc said:
Sadly, the evidence shows that the majority of the population won't isolate even if they've got symptoms, so why should we trust them to administer a test to themselves?
Quite, theres nothing to stop anyone from just sticking the swab in the washing up water an sending it back. It's ridiculous.Edited by havoc on Monday 5th April 11:28
It's unlike the incompetant, negligent criminals currently in government to not have thought plans like this through to the finest details though isn't it. I mean, when has that ever happened before...
Edited by neilr on Monday 5th April 17:17
Edited by neilr on Monday 5th April 17:18
Dudes!
This is the data analysis thread - all of this should be in one of the other threads
On a side note, though, LOL at the Privacy / cookie option buttons on that site's pop-up:
This is the data analysis thread - all of this should be in one of the other threads
On a side note, though, LOL at the Privacy / cookie option buttons on that site's pop-up:
havoc said:
'Options' or 'Whatever' We finally got a decent update from PHE today after the Easter break:
1. Tests and cases. Testing volumes have really dropped down and cases are dropping back to the dotted red line, indicating an 18 day halving time since New Year. I am guessing that compliance with the twice weekly school testing, which was intended to continue through the holidays has fallen substantially. This is probably a good indicator of what will happen with the proposed extension of LFD to the population as a whole:
2. Key metrics. Cases per 100k tests and admissions are still following the long 18 day halving. I would have liked to see some acceleration here to signal a growing level of protection due to vaccination, but to me this seems to be 'on rails'. Deaths fell faster initially, but now also seem to be tracking the same line. We have been below 100 deaths per day since 9th March. Almost a month now:
3. All three metrics overlaid. My simple assumption of a 7 day lag between cases and admissions and a 14 day lag between cases and deaths is still checking out. This also shows how admissions and deaths are moving in lockstep now. Again with that 18 day halving:
1. Tests and cases. Testing volumes have really dropped down and cases are dropping back to the dotted red line, indicating an 18 day halving time since New Year. I am guessing that compliance with the twice weekly school testing, which was intended to continue through the holidays has fallen substantially. This is probably a good indicator of what will happen with the proposed extension of LFD to the population as a whole:
2. Key metrics. Cases per 100k tests and admissions are still following the long 18 day halving. I would have liked to see some acceleration here to signal a growing level of protection due to vaccination, but to me this seems to be 'on rails'. Deaths fell faster initially, but now also seem to be tracking the same line. We have been below 100 deaths per day since 9th March. Almost a month now:
3. All three metrics overlaid. My simple assumption of a 7 day lag between cases and admissions and a 14 day lag between cases and deaths is still checking out. This also shows how admissions and deaths are moving in lockstep now. Again with that 18 day halving:
Update on the impact of LFD testing in England.
Firstly. The school testing surge seems to have collapsed with the LFD testing (shaded in blue) dropping back to early March levels. Regardless of testing, LFD cases remains very low.
We have performed almost 27 million LFD tests in the last month, but found only 17,577 cases. 7 positives for every 10,000 tests.
The expected false positive range for that volume is between 8,000 and 27,000 so its quite possible that these are almost all false positives.
Interestingly, the positivity of the LFD and PCR tests continues to be linked. Suggesting that they are both indicating changes in prevalence. PCR positivity is consistently 10-20 times higher than PCR positivity. This could be about the relative sensitivities of the tests or reflective of the difference between asymptomatic and symptomatic prevalence.
Firstly. The school testing surge seems to have collapsed with the LFD testing (shaded in blue) dropping back to early March levels. Regardless of testing, LFD cases remains very low.
We have performed almost 27 million LFD tests in the last month, but found only 17,577 cases. 7 positives for every 10,000 tests.
The expected false positive range for that volume is between 8,000 and 27,000 so its quite possible that these are almost all false positives.
Interestingly, the positivity of the LFD and PCR tests continues to be linked. Suggesting that they are both indicating changes in prevalence. PCR positivity is consistently 10-20 times higher than PCR positivity. This could be about the relative sensitivities of the tests or reflective of the difference between asymptomatic and symptomatic prevalence.
@Elysium, or anyone in fact who likes analysing data...
This website is claiming only 3,542 died of Covid-19 with no known pre-existing conditions up to 4pm 31st March 2021.
There are links to NHS data and pics of tables from said data.....
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/04/05/official-nhs-...
This website is claiming only 3,542 died of Covid-19 with no known pre-existing conditions up to 4pm 31st March 2021.
There are links to NHS data and pics of tables from said data.....
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/04/05/official-nhs-...
steveT350C said:
@Elysium, or anyone in fact who likes analysing data...
This website is claiming only 3,542 died of Covid-19 with no known pre-existing conditions up to 4pm 31st March 2021.
There are links to NHS data and pics of tables from said data.....
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/04/05/official-nhs-...
The underlying point here is sound, but they take it too far. This website is claiming only 3,542 died of Covid-19 with no known pre-existing conditions up to 4pm 31st March 2021.
There are links to NHS data and pics of tables from said data.....
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/04/05/official-nhs-...
Its very clear that the chances of dying from COVID-19 are very closely aligned with your chances of dying of anything else.
Your chance of dying increases with age, if you are affected by chronic conditions and if you are already sick due to other causes.
So if the case fatality rate for a given age group is 1%, then the sickest people in that group will have a higher chance of dying than the healthiest. Which is sort of obvious really.
What these people are really drawing attention to is the reality that people in good health rarely die due to COVID. The trouble is that when you get to 80+ the majority of people have something wrong with them.
This is a good read:
https://medium.com/wintoncentre/what-are-the-risks...
Elysium said:
steveT350C said:
@Elysium, or anyone in fact who likes analysing data...
This website is claiming only 3,542 died of Covid-19 with no known pre-existing conditions up to 4pm 31st March 2021.
There are links to NHS data and pics of tables from said data.....
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/04/05/official-nhs-...
The underlying point here is sound, but they take it too far. This website is claiming only 3,542 died of Covid-19 with no known pre-existing conditions up to 4pm 31st March 2021.
There are links to NHS data and pics of tables from said data.....
https://dailyexpose.co.uk/2021/04/05/official-nhs-...
Its very clear that the chances of dying from COVID-19 are very closely aligned with your chances of dying of anything else.
Your chance of dying increases with age, if you are affected by chronic conditions and if you are already sick due to other causes.
So if the case fatality rate for a given age group is 1%, then the sickest people in that group will have a higher chance of dying than the healthiest. Which is sort of obvious really.
What these people are really drawing attention to is the reality that people in good health rarely die due to COVID. The trouble is that when you get to 80+ the majority of people have something wrong with them.
This is a good read:
https://medium.com/wintoncentre/what-are-the-risks...
Elysium said:
What these people are really drawing attention to is the reality that people in good health rarely die due to COVID. The trouble is that when you get to 80+ the majority of people have something wrong with them.
When you get over 40, a larger number of people than you think will have something* wrong with them...- Hypertension (or other minor heart defects)
- Diabetes
- Obesity
- Autoimmune conditions
- etc...
And whilst that person's risk of dying is still small, it's well above what it would be without Covid.
...and then you add in the issues of:-
- Long Covid...I saw one estimate suggesting up to 1 million people in the UK had or were currently suffering from it. 5-7% hit-rate from the virus for that alone...would YOU want to be suffering from an equivalent to ME with an uncertain end-date???
- Potential ITU treatment. Very unpleasant and very scary for the individual..."psychologically scarring" as one medical professional put it.
So, to all those claiming "it'll be just like the 'flu" or "it doesn't kill anyone healthy"...maybe do some research before you spout off, eh?!?
(Not aimed at you Elysium)
* Specifically, something that amplifies the risk when combined with Covid, despite being something eminently manageable for decades without Covid...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff