Coronavirus - Data Analysis Thread
Discussion
Muncher said:
Muncher said:
Here is a chart of antibody prevalence of adults in the community as per the ONS surveys. The last data collected was as at 17 May, I have added the last point on the graph as at today's date based upon the trendline.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...
Updated chart, prevalence of antibodies for over 16s in the UK, as of today should be around 91.5%.
If we continue on the same trend we will reach 100% antibody prevalence in the last week of July.
Without using the words 'variants' or 'refuseniks' or 'failed vaccinations', preferably.
RSTurboPaul said:
Can someone please explain why the .... we are facing four more weeks restrictions and then Vaccine Passports and 'winter lockdowns' to prevent flu??
Without using the words 'variants' or 'refuseniks' or 'failed vaccinations', preferably.
Irrational fear of the unknown. Without using the words 'variants' or 'refuseniks' or 'failed vaccinations', preferably.
RSTurboPaul said:
Can someone please explain why the .... we are facing four more weeks restrictions and then Vaccine Passports and 'winter lockdowns' to prevent flu??
Without using the words 'variants' or 'refuseniks' or 'failed vaccinations', preferably.
Hospitalizations, occupancy and ICU occupancy are all still rising. They'll start dropping slowly at the weekend(ish) but had we opened everything yesterday they'd all have continued to rise. Without using the words 'variants' or 'refuseniks' or 'failed vaccinations', preferably.
What I've written above is simple fact, even though the numbers are low they are growing.
Why didn't we open up yesterday? It's a political decision to keep nurses happier than nightclub owners.
spikeyhead said:
Hospitalizations, occupancy and ICU occupancy are all still rising. They'll start dropping slowly at the weekend(ish) but had we opened everything yesterday they'd all have continued to rise.
What I've written above is simple fact, even though the numbers are low they are growing.
So two questions spring to mind:-What I've written above is simple fact, even though the numbers are low they are growing.
- What are the levels and the rate of growth?
- If 75-80% of adults are now vaccinated, who is going into hospital? Unvaccinated 20-somethings, or vaccinated elderly?
...because those answers will make a BIG difference to whether it's an excess of caution or is more of a "we know something the public don't".
Oh, and one further question - the Euro 2020 match is allowed to go ahead with 60,000 people in close proximity, but far smaller events aren't...are the government a bunch of hypocritical muppets pandering to popular opinion or what?
Bit of an update:
1. Cases per 100k tests are starting to level off. Deaths have not risen anywhere near as quickly as cases, even allowing for a 2 week lag. As a result, the Case Fatality Rate is low. Holding at an average of 0.19% for the first week of June:
2. Similarly, although there is a rise in admissions, it is much slower than cases, even allowing for a 1 week lag. The Case Admissions Rate is now just over 2%.
3. This shows cases, admissions and deaths overlaid. It's clear that the relationship between these metrics has changed and cases are leading to less serious outcomes
4. This shows the growth rate in the 7 day rolling total of cases and admissions. Case growth began to slow on the 7th June, but the slowdown has stalled in recent days. I think its a bit early to say the same about admissions as the data is quite laggy.
1. Cases per 100k tests are starting to level off. Deaths have not risen anywhere near as quickly as cases, even allowing for a 2 week lag. As a result, the Case Fatality Rate is low. Holding at an average of 0.19% for the first week of June:
2. Similarly, although there is a rise in admissions, it is much slower than cases, even allowing for a 1 week lag. The Case Admissions Rate is now just over 2%.
3. This shows cases, admissions and deaths overlaid. It's clear that the relationship between these metrics has changed and cases are leading to less serious outcomes
4. This shows the growth rate in the 7 day rolling total of cases and admissions. Case growth began to slow on the 7th June, but the slowdown has stalled in recent days. I think its a bit early to say the same about admissions as the data is quite laggy.
havoc said:
So two questions spring to mind:-
- What are the levels and the rate of growth?
- If 75-80% of adults are now vaccinated, who is going into hospital? Unvaccinated 20-somethings, or vaccinated elderly?
...because those answers will make a BIG difference to whether it's an excess of caution or is more of a "we know something the public don't".
Oh, and one further question - the Euro 2020 match is allowed to go ahead with 60,000 people in close proximity, but far smaller events aren't...are the government a bunch of hypocritical muppets pandering to popular opinion or what?
Most people going into hospital either haven't been jabbed, or have had their first jab within the last three weeks so it's not really taken effect, which is why I and others are confident that cases will start to fall in a week or so. I seem to remember seeing that more 20-30 year olds are being admitted than 50 to 60 year olds, or indeed any other age group. Rates of growth are already slowing, but would have gone up quicker if all restrictions had been removed as planned on the 21st. - What are the levels and the rate of growth?
- If 75-80% of adults are now vaccinated, who is going into hospital? Unvaccinated 20-somethings, or vaccinated elderly?
...because those answers will make a BIG difference to whether it's an excess of caution or is more of a "we know something the public don't".
Oh, and one further question - the Euro 2020 match is allowed to go ahead with 60,000 people in close proximity, but far smaller events aren't...are the government a bunch of hypocritical muppets pandering to popular opinion or what?
As I said before, it's a political move to keep nurses happier than nightclub owners. Politically I'm sure it's arguable either way about what is the best way forwards, but in another four weeks then the pendulum of what's right in all viewpoints is firmly at the "open everything up now" end f its swing.
spikeyhead said:
I seem to remember seeing that more 20-30 year olds are being admitted than 50 to 60 year olds, or indeed any other age group.
Which is what puzzles me, as a year ago (and then forever on here afterwards) we were being told anyone under 40* didn't need to worry......so either the younger generation have suddenly found they've a lot of underlying conditions, or this new variant IS more virulent, or...???
* Without underlying conditions.
havoc said:
spikeyhead said:
I seem to remember seeing that more 20-30 year olds are being admitted than 50 to 60 year olds, or indeed any other age group.
Which is what puzzles me, as a year ago (and then forever on here afterwards) we were being told anyone under 40* didn't need to worry......so either the younger generation have suddenly found they've a lot of underlying conditions, or this new variant IS more virulent, or...???
* Without underlying conditions.
Most people in the UK are fat and lazy, and it shows, but even healthy people can end up suffering with this.
havoc said:
spikeyhead said:
I seem to remember seeing that more 20-30 year olds are being admitted than 50 to 60 year olds, or indeed any other age group.
Which is what puzzles me, as a year ago (and then forever on here afterwards) we were being told anyone under 40* didn't need to worry......so either the younger generation have suddenly found they've a lot of underlying conditions, or this new variant IS more virulent, or...???
* Without underlying conditions.
As a comparison the highest number of beds occupied by covid positive patients this year was 34,336 on Jan 18th.So at the moment beds occupied is less than 4% of this years high. You may get told on the news that 160 people a day being admitted to hospital but what you are not being told is that 120 a day are leaving. If you were told that 40 people have been admitted to hospital per day last week or that 18 extra people a day had been admitted to hospital per day during the last month would you be as concerned?
The info is here in the daily admissions and bed occupancy chart.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-...
Vanden Saab said:
Data
spikeyhead said:
Relatively, they don't need to worry, that's why so few are dying.... but a few youngsters still get ill, 20% of 20 year olds have an underlying health condition, 30% of 30 year olds do, 50% of 50 year olds and so on.
Most people in the UK are fat and lazy, and it shows, but even healthy people can end up suffering with this.
Assuming your %s are materially accurate, why was there so much BS about those under 40 "not needing to worry", and the disease "only killing the elderly"??? (especially on here)Most people in the UK are fat and lazy, and it shows, but even healthy people can end up suffering with this.
havoc said:
Vanden Saab said:
Data
spikeyhead said:
Relatively, they don't need to worry, that's why so few are dying.... but a few youngsters still get ill, 20% of 20 year olds have an underlying health condition, 30% of 30 year olds do, 50% of 50 year olds and so on.
Most people in the UK are fat and lazy, and it shows, but even healthy people can end up suffering with this.
Assuming your %s are materially accurate, why was there so much BS about those under 40 "not needing to worry", and the disease "only killing the elderly"??? (especially on here)Most people in the UK are fat and lazy, and it shows, but even healthy people can end up suffering with this.
Haven't seen this "dashboard" before
https://www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavir...
Cases and admissions by age are nice and clear
https://www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavir...
Cases and admissions by age are nice and clear
NoddyonNitrous said:
Are there any officially published data on Long Covid?
Out today https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus...
LONDON (Reuters) - Over 2 million people in England might have had long COVID and suffered one or more COVID-19 symptoms that lasted at least 12 weeks, one of the biggest surveillance studies of the coronavirus found on Thursday.
The REACT-2 study, led by Imperial College London, found that more than a third of people who have had COVID-19 reported symptoms that lasted at least 12 weeks, with one in ten reporting severe symptoms which lasted that long.
Back in April, the ONS calculated 1.1 million
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunit...
havoc said:
Vanden Saab said:
Data
spikeyhead said:
Relatively, they don't need to worry, that's why so few are dying.... but a few youngsters still get ill, 20% of 20 year olds have an underlying health condition, 30% of 30 year olds do, 50% of 50 year olds and so on.
Most people in the UK are fat and lazy, and it shows, but even healthy people can end up suffering with this.
Assuming your %s are materially accurate, why was there so much BS about those under 40 "not needing to worry", and the disease "only killing the elderly"??? (especially on here)Most people in the UK are fat and lazy, and it shows, but even healthy people can end up suffering with this.
Full breakdown https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.24...
Everybody is at some risk of COVID.
The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
Elysium said:
Everybody is at some risk of COVID.
The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
That's great, and seems about right from what we know per news etc, so reassuring. But of course, all those stats come on the back of what has been quite a draconian "Covid Managment" plan, (ie extended lockdowns), without that, previously, it may well have been different, ..and going forward, it will be different. Of course it also wont include a long period of no vaccines, so let's hope it is better going forward because of them. The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
Elysium said:
Everybody is at some risk of COVID.
The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
Agreed.
I think my main challenge was at those, mainly on social media and on here, who claimed that effectively "no-one under 40 needed to worry" (statistics can lead to some rather nasty simplifications), and that age group should just carry on with their lives* (inaccurate due to the highly-infectious nature of Covid, as we've seen repeatedly).
My wife and I are generally healthy (can't remember the last sick-day either of us took, despite two young kids at home), BUT we both have one risk-factor/co-morbidity which puts us at increased risk from Covid (but interestingly not from many other diseases/conditions, at least in my case).
...now that's almost certainly not enough for Covid to kill either of us, but a hospital stay really didn't appeal, while having young kids, with little ready support around to care for them if we were both hospitalised, focused the mind somewhat last year.
Statistically it appears we aren't even outliers for our age group, and you certainly wouldn't tell from looking at us (IYSWIM). But being told you "don't matter" statistically (my bold above - everyone is focused on deaths and ignoring Long-Covid risks and intense hospitalisation), and that you should accept such a risk so everyone else can go back to the pub is frankly rather offensive...
* And indeed we're seeing many many people from all age groups (but especially younger and near-middle-age) now doing just that...hence the infection/hospital stats.
Elysium said:
Everybody is at some risk of COVID.
The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
All agreed, but you would want to avoid the long symptoms if at all possible (which some reports claim can be as high as 1/5)The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
the-photographer said:
Elysium said:
Everybody is at some risk of COVID.
The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
All agreed, but you would want to avoid the long symptoms if at all possible (which some reports claim can be as high as 1/5)The best way I have seen this explained is that an individuals risk of dying from COVID is broadly similar to their risk of dying from anything else in a given year. COVID deaths and non-COVID deaths follow a very similar pattern:
62% of the population are under 50 and they account for just 5% of COVID deaths
The idea that a very large proportion of people under 50 are at serious risk from this disease just does not stack up.
The proportion of confirmed cases aged under 50 who have died from COVID is around 18 per 10,000 (0.18%)
Under 25 its 1 in 10,000
Over 75 its 247 in 10,000
Of course death is not the only issue. But the risk of hospitalisation and death move in tandem.
He know that the risk of death in under 50's is low and that this will be focused in the people who have the most significant vulnerabilities. We know it begins to increase around 50 and that it is dramatically higher for the elderly.
A 20 year old infected with SARS-CoV-2 is 2,000 times less likely to die than an 80 year old.
Feels like the same manipulation to me which based on history will be massively downgraded, but ignored in the media reporting, when it suits...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff