Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

[redsturgeon]

Some more statistics - new daily hospital admissions due to Covid-19 in England
Week 12/9/20 to 18/9/90 (most recent data) = 1249 Admissions
Week 12/8/20 to 18/8/20 = 345 Admissions.

Perhaps we aren't quite at herd immunity.

John

[Mike4]

So what exactly is simoan's argument? That the case numbers are simply made up "propaganda"? Or that the four-fold rise in case numbers since a month ago is adequately explained by the 40% increase in tests processed over the same period?

GS

May I pick up on your language please?

"Case numbers" as I understand them, are the people admitted to hospital with a medical diagnosis of COVID-19.

Using the term 'case' for a positive PCR test result is to add confusion to the minds of many, in my view. If that is how you meant it. Plenty of people get a positive PCR test result but never develop the disease named "COVID-19".

The really interesting question we STILL don't have a consensus on is the ratio of how many are infected with SARS-CoV-2 to how many develop COVID-19.

[spasmodicus]

Some more statistics - new daily hospital admissions due to Covid-19 in England
Week 12/9/20 to 18/9/90 (most recent data) = 1249 Admissions
Week 12/8/20 to 18/8/20 = 345 Admissions.

Perhaps we aren't quite at herd immunity.

John

As with all things COVID, it seems to be regional. In some areas of London, according to the Beeb's cases vs postcode tracker, cases actually decreased in the last week.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

The map shows that most of the new infections are in the North of England, which was less hard hit in the first wave.

I'm not panicing yet. Despite assertions that the NHS is going to prioritise other potentially fatal illnesses, the main problem seems to be that if you need to get tested for anything other than COVID19, you have to get a COVID19 test first before the NHS will let you come near. When you finally snuff it from prostate/breast/other cancer it won't go down as being due to COVID19.

S

[langley59]

Julia Hartley-Brewer tackled transport secretary Grant Shapps on the false positives issue this morning on Talk Radio. He was unaware of it. She said she would forward a paper on it, I presume the same one I referred to yesterday in my post, and he said he would discuss it with his colleagues.
Final 2 minutes of this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDt8Te2 ... =talkRADIO

[swill453]

Some more statistics - new daily hospital admissions due to Covid-19 in England
Week 12/9/20 to 18/9/90 (most recent data) = 1249 Admissions
Week 12/8/20 to 18/8/20 = 345 Admissions.

Perhaps we aren't quite at herd immunity.

No, nothing like it. At today's briefing it was said 8% or less have antibodies across the country. Possibly up to 17% in London.

Scott.

[gryffron]

So, today the govt have sent out their scientist big guns to try and terrify us with a what-if scenario.

"IF cases double every week we'd have 50k a day in a month's time"

Well, true. But is there any likelihood of this happening? No. Well why mention it then?

Shock horror factoid: If deaths due to wasp stings were to double every week, they'd be at 1,000 a day by christmas.

So the question is - why? I can only guess they want us to go to school and work but cut out all socialising. But they don't actually want to tell us to do this because it would be too unpopular.

Gryff

[scotia]

"Case numbers" as I understand them, are the people admitted to hospital with a medical diagnosis of COVID-19.

No - there is no confusion if you look at the government Web Site https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk
Cases are persons tested positive for Covid-19 - whether or not they have been admitted to hospital.
And separately, there are statistics on Covid-19 patients admitted to hospital, Covid-19 patients currently in hospital, and COvid-19 patients on ventilation.

[Mike4]

So, today the govt have sent out their scientist big guns to try and terrify us with a what-if scenario.

"IF cases double every week we'd have 50k a day in a month's time"

Well, true. But is there any likelihood of this happening? No. Well why mention it then?

You didn't notice him preface that with infections ARE doubling in 7-8 days right now, then?

He mentioned it because that is the rate of doubling we have at the moment and there is no reason to expect that to change unless we take further action.

[scotia]

So, today the govt have sent out their scientist big guns to try and terrify us with a what-if scenario.

"IF cases double every week we'd have 50k a day in a month's time"

Well, true. But is there any likelihood of this happening? No. Well why mention it then?

Shock horror factoid: If deaths due to wasp stings were to double every week, they'd be at 1,000 a day by christmas.

So the question is - why? I can only guess they want us to go to school and work but cut out all socialising. But they don't actually want to tell us to do this because it would be too unpopular.

Gryff

What do you think is the current doubling rate of Covid-19 infections? And what is your source of information?
The government scientists have the latest information on new daily cases, and they also have the results of continuing sampling tests (the ONS Infection Survey). From these sources they believe their warning to be credible. Do you have statistics that prove otherwise?

[simoan]

Oh it does help!! What a piece of propaganda showing the recent rise in "positive" cases soaring up towards those in March/April. It will scare the wotsit out of the vast majority of the population, which I take as the intent with it being widely shared by those that should know better even though it shows a totally warped version of reality.

All the best, Si

So what exactly is simoan's argument? That the case numbers are simply made up "propaganda"? Or that the four-fold rise in case numbers since a month ago is adequately explained by the 40% increase in tests processed over the same period?

GS

COVID denial is "a thing";some dress it up as "common sense"
- it's an understandable reaction to what is a quite unusual situation c.f. the stages of grief
We're still learning about this and there ARE different ways to interpret the data, but not many satisfy Occam's razor

-sd

I really hope you're not implying I'm some kind of Covid denier? Nothing could be further from the truth! I don't know anyone that has isolated themselves more in the past 6 months than myself. I've not been into the office since March 12th, not been in anyone else's house since the end of February, and have not visited a pub or restaurant since March 11th. I've only been in a shop twice. Hardly the behaviour of someone who doesn't "believe". It's pretty obvious what I'm arguing - that the chart of positive cases shown on the Govt. website and widely used on the BBC and other media outlets is a gross misrepresentation of reality. It should at the very least be normalised in some way to allow for the changes in the testing regime.

Si

[sg31]

Does it really matter whether reported figures are infections or cases. The dividing line may be very small. If someone is infected they can spread the virus. They might develop mild symptoms, a high temperature for instance or they might not, they aren't going to trouble the NHS. They would not be asymptomatic, they are a case.

Hospital admissions are obviously a special category as are deaths.

I'm not sure why it matters if someone is defined as an infection or a case if they don't trouble the health service. Feel free to explain to me why it matters. (as if you would hesitate)

[Bouleversee]

FWIW (which may not be much) my opinion is that just becoming infected makes you a case, regardless of how the infection develops and whether there is hospitalisation. After all, it is not yet known what all the long term effects of this very complex viral infection will be. Even people who did not go to hospital are suffering from very serious fatigue and other problems many months after contracting the virus. Some people who were quite ill chose not to go to hospital though it might have been better if they had done so. We need to know just how many people have been infected (and might retain at least short-term immunity) and their progress should be monitored to get a better understanding of the disease. Hospitalisation should not be a sine qua non as regards case determination.

[GoSeigen]

So what exactly is simoan's argument? That the case numbers are simply made up "propaganda"? Or that the four-fold rise in case numbers since a month ago is adequately explained by the 40% increase in tests processed over the same period?

GS

May I pick up on your language please?

"Case numbers" as I understand them, are the people admitted to hospital with a medical diagnosis of COVID-19.

Thanks Mike4, I'm sure I used the term far too carelessly. I simply meant the number of positive test results which has quadrupled: it's the increase I was interested in and how it can be deemed fake, rather than the precise meaning of the numbers. Sorry!

GS

[XFool]

So, today the govt have sent out their scientist big guns to try and terrify us with a what-if scenario.

"IF cases double every week we'd have 50k a day in a month's time"

Well, true. But is there any likelihood of this happening? No. Well why mention it then?

Shock horror factoid: If deaths due to wasp stings were to double every week, they'd be at 1,000 a day by christmas.

Wasp stings are infectious? I didn't know that...

[scotia]

Some more statistics - new daily hospital admissions due to Covid-19 in England
Week 12/9/20 to 18/9/90 (most recent data) = 1249 Admissions
Week 12/8/20 to 18/8/20 = 345 Admissions.

Perhaps we aren't quite at herd immunity.

John

As with all things COVID, it seems to be regional. In some areas of London, according to the Beeb's cases vs postcode tracker, cases actually decreased in the last week.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51768274

The map shows that most of the new infections are in the North of England, which was less hard hit in the first wave.

I'm not panicing yet. Despite assertions that the NHS is going to prioritise other potentially fatal illnesses, the main problem seems to be that if you need to get tested for anything other than COVID19, you have to get a COVID19 test first before the NHS will let you come near. When you finally snuff it from prostate/breast/other cancer it won't go down as being due to COVID19.

S

I also looked at the Covid-19 daily hospital admissions numbers for the London NHS region.
Week 12/9/20 to 18/9/90 (most recent data) = 193 Admissions
Week 12/8/20 to 18/8/20 = 41 Admissions.

[dealtn]

Could this be a site for an unbiased, impartial and accurate source of information

Its certainly an alternative to the definitely biased, partial and inaccurate agenda pushing mainstream media in my honest opinion.

Why bother either of these alternatives? Look at the Data - https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk
Then do a bit of number crunching to determine the facts.

I'm struggling so please help me.

Where on this website can I determine what the false positive percentage is please. I think that is a crucial "fact" to know.

If its 1% and we are testing 200,000 each day then there are 2,000 false positives being reported as new daily cases, which isn't helpful given that is 50% or so of what is being reported as fact.

[Bouleversee]

I think the 1% relates to the no. of positives not the no. of tests.

[Mike4]

FWIW (which may not be much) my opinion is that just becoming infected makes you a case, regardless of how the infection develops and whether there is hospitalisation.

I totally understand and agree, but the medics and epidemiologists seem to use the term "case" to mean something far more specific than when you or I use it in general conversation. They mean only people medically diagnosed with the disease of COVID-19, whereas you and I might mean a person who have been tested positive but remains asymptomatic.

In this discussion the difference is moot as others have pointed out, as it is the trend that matters. In other discussions the difference can be critically important.

I am reminded of the nice Mr Dumpty saying something on the subject....

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

~Lewis Carroll

[johnhemming]

Hospital admissions across England went down by 1 on Saturday.

Figures for England.

last week 143, 153, 172, 183, 199, 205, 204.

Prior to that 67, 94, 85, 84, 99, 136, 143, 135

To me the most likely situation is a plateau, but it could be a gradual increase. It is not, however, exponential.

Looking at the individual regions I think the North East and North West are the only ones that show a reliable trend of increase.

Please note that the people doing the press conference today were saying that the numbers of admissions were doubling every week. (even though they showed a chart with if anything a linear pattern of increase).

[johnhemming]

I totally understand and agree, but the medics and epidemiologists seem to use the term "case" to mean something far more specific than when you or I use it in general conversation. They mean only people medically diagnosed with the disease of COVID-19, whereas you and I might mean a person who have been tested positive but remains asymptomatic.

Sadly they use all sorts of different definitions for cases including asymptomatic cases.

The only figures that I think are reliable are hospital admissions.