Corona Virus main thread

[Van wink 2,994]

2 hours ago, Mark .Y. said:

Herd immunity already ???  😉

 

Or the normal progression of an epidemic curve?

There is so much to learn from this pandemic, I know the desire to make instant judgement is a sad feature of modern society, but of all science to study epidemiology is one where you have to look at the long term, whether people like it or not. It is not impossible that there is now a considerable level of post infection immunity within the London population which will be much more resilient to a second wave on infection, when that inevitably comes, we may even find London responds better to a second wave than some of the other large conurbations in Europe. So yes maybe some form of herd immunity? We will have to wait for better data.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Van wink

[Bill 1,788]

So where now the tea leaf gazers ?

"The mathematical models underpinning the government’s Covid-19 strategy are largely informed by “educated guesswork,"

as summed up by

"He included a cartoon taken from Private Eye, the satirical magazine, as part of his lecture. It depicted a scientist standing beside a graph marked “Covid cases”. The caption read: “We have, according to the revised projection of the adjusted figures, something more or less approaching no idea.”

so the UK's guessworks was not as good as elsewhere - or maybe some of the original 'data; was skewed (Cummings) so as to point towards no lockdown......until it was too late.

As that nice Mr Starmer says we need to see the data that was fed to SAGE in February

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/models-behind-coronavirus-plans-mostly-educated-guesses-fqmpmt623

 

[sonyc 5,492]

5 minutes ago, Van wink said:

When I read about this last night, I had to read it again, because it came as quite a surprise. It is very good news. The infection rate clearly peaked in London well before the the rest of the country and undoubtedly we are seeing different pockets of infection at different points in the curve by region. It does support the argument for a more nuanced approach to releasing lockdown, unfortunately we dont have the public health infrastructure in place atm to enable that to happen.

My fear for London is that despite an apparent low R the overcrowding on public transport could soon see a rapid increase again. 

You would pray so (London over it). I'm hoping though there might be some 'natural' half-life of this virus and it mostly plays out. This is at odds with WHO statenents of course, just a hope. 

The Mirror is stating that by 30 July there is a prediction of zero deaths (interesting only for the reason that 2 months ago, maybe more, I simply looked at the China graph and extrapolated the rate onto Italy's which had the same shape, then added 2 weeks to ours. Italy"s death rate went between 0 and 10 by 14th/15th July. No science, simply amateurish modelling the graph shape...a very gradual ease off).

The more I see no new resurgence in other counties which have relaxed lockdowns, the more hope I get.

[sonyc 5,492]

4 minutes ago, Bill said:

So where now the tea leaf gazers ?

"The mathematical models underpinning the government’s Covid-19 strategy are largely informed by “educated guesswork,"

as summed up by

"He included a cartoon taken from Private Eye, the satirical magazine, as part of his lecture. It depicted a scientist standing beside a graph marked “Covid cases”. The caption read: “We have, according to the revised projection of the adjusted figures, something more or less approaching no idea.”

so the UK's guessworks was not as good as elsewhere - or maybe some of the original 'data; was skewed (Cummings) so as to point towards no lockdown......until it was too late.

As that nice Mr Starmer says we need to see the data that was fed to SAGE in February

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/models-behind-coronavirus-plans-mostly-educated-guesses-fqmpmt623

 

I reckon I'm a tea leaf gazer Bill!

But I'm not advising government, just taking a (small) risk appearing foolish on a football forum. So I will forgive myself.

[Bill 1,788]

3 minutes ago, sonyc said:

I reckon I'm a tea leaf gazer Bill!

But I'm not advising government, just taking a (small) risk appearing foolish on a football forum. So I will forgive myself.

Well. that’s half the battle - like an admittance of your problem when attending your first AA meeting

But what I have been pointing out, in a slightly satirical way, is

"Professor Medley said that it was estimated that 10 per cent of the population had been exposed to the virus so far, meaning that the UK was still at the early stage of the epidemic. One main concern was how to gather data on how small, localised outbreaks were likely to flare up as measures were relaxed.

“We are, of course, worried very much about data,” he said. “Where are we going to get the data from? What is it that we should be measuring?”

Where the above claim (10%) is now being put out at 30% in the media

And we have advice being given by government on the basis of unproven data, and also the belief that this virus is evenly spread across the country. Whether knave or joker (a bit of both) it amounts to the same. Folk are acting on this advice believing it to be accurate. So it is now a case of,

Pack them in on the tube and train - but not on the government benches in Parliament.

odd that.......🙄

[sonyc 5,492]

2 minutes ago, Bill said:

Well. that’s half the battle - like an admittance of your problem when attending your first AA meeting

But what I have been pointing out, in a slightly satirical way, is

"Professor Medley said that it was estimated that 10 per cent of the population had been exposed to the virus so far, meaning that the UK was still at the early stage of the epidemic. One main concern was how to gather data on how small, localised outbreaks were likely to flare up as measures were relaxed.

“We are, of course, worried very much about data,” he said. “Where are we going to get the data from? What is it that we should be measuring?”

Where the above claim (10%) is now being put out at 30% in the media

And we have advice being given by government on the basis of unproven data, and also the belief that this virus is evenly spread across the country. Whether knave or joker (a bit of both) it amounts to the same. Folk are acting on this advice believing it to be accurate. So it is now a case of,

Pack them in on the tube and train - but not on the government benches in Parliament.

odd that.......🙄

Yes, the packed tube trains feels s completely wrong step, low transmission rates or not. It affects those that have to travel more than those that can afford not to. Reminds me of the northern headmaster this week  (cannot think of source now) who said he will be putting children back into his school when the House of Commons was fully sitting.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

Please please please - the London 14 or is it 24 cases a day are just modelling - as is the 19M already infected.

I suspect the two 'models' almost directly contradict each other.

Neither are likely to survive contact with reality.

None as yet are backed by solid hard evidence.

What I think we do know is that London is ahead of other regions and the 3000 or 4000 cases notified daily (we'll forget the 10 x or whatever unnotified mild ones) may well now be be focussed elsewhere in the country  and care homes in particular.

Until we know what the reservoir of infection is, and how many have actually had it it and where  (please only be a test not by lay diagnosis - normal colds and flu are just as prevalent as ever) will we be able to make an actual prediction.

Hopefully the new antibody/antigen tests will properly answer some of these questions.  The good news is that it is at present 'going down'.

Edited May 15, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[sonyc 5,492]

2 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Please please please - the London 14 or is it 24 cases a day are just modelling - as is the 19M already infected.

I suspect the two 'models' almost directly contradict each other.

Neither are likely to survive contact with reality.

None as yet are backed by solid hard evidence.

What I think we do know is that London is ahead of other regions and the 3000 or 4000 cases notified daily (we'll forget the 10 x or whatever unnotified mild ones) may well now be be focussed elsewhere in the country  and care homes in particular.

Until we know what the reservoir of infection is, and how many have actually had it it and where  (please only be a test not by lay diagnosis - normal colds and flu and just as prevalent as ever) will we be able to make an actual prediction.

Hopefully the new antibody/antigen tests will properly answer some of these questions.  The good news is that it is at present 'going down'.

I understand the antibody tests are not going to roll out as soon as thought?

Agree about modelling. I guess folk want to look for positives in this , certainly I do. You try not to be gullible and read as widely as possible but ultimately which media source does one trust! 

[Bill 1,788]

The fear (thought) is that as this R number stuff is guesswork, how difficult is it to find (appoint) 'experts; who will guess the way that echoes your wish ?

We should be able to see what data (and from whom) was presented to SAGE so as to allow the government to claim they were 'following the science' when they did not lock down. In fact their view appeared to be 'herd immunity', until it became blindingly obvious that it was a disaster in te making.

So as said, gazing at tea leaves is one of interpretation, as is with these this 'models. Fun maybe, to laugh at when it is a few numpties believing that a football game can be judged by meaningless stats. But not fun when it has cost so many lives.

The question remains, are decisions being taken for medical or economic reasons. As the shortage of PPE and staff were taken for the latter reasons. What suggests they are not now ?

[Bill 1,788]

2 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Agree about modelling. I guess folk want to look for positives in this , certainly I do. You try not to be gullible and read as widely as possible but ultimately which media source does one trust! 

or which newspaper has the horoscopes that suit you

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

Just now, sonyc said:

I understand the antibody tests are not going to roll out as soon as thought?

Agree about modelling. I guess folk want to look for positives in this , certainly I do. You try not to be gullible and read as widely as possible but ultimately which media source does one trust! 

I think this is my concern - the media 'want' to publish eye catching and often hopeful headlines about model predictions  - but without the caveats an often for political spin as well!

All of these 'models' need to be ground tested. 

As per the first tranche of actual random antigen results yesterday you have to ask how they 'stack' up against 19M - it seems unlikely - and only a few days ago when directly asked was it Whitty who said 5 % generally and 10% in London - I guess he has seen more ground truths than us! 

London due to its density is likely to harbour unseen many a case for many a month! 

[Bill 1,788]

1 hour ago, Van wink said:

Or the normal progression of an epidemic curve?

There is so much to learn from this pandemic, I know the desire to make instant judgement is a sad feature of modern society, but of all science to study epidemiology is one where you have to look at the long term, whether people like it or not. It is not impossible that there is now a considerable level of post infection immunity within the London population which will be much more resilient to a second wave on infection, when that inevitably comes, we may even find London responds better to a second wave than some of the other large conurbations in Europe. So yes maybe some form of herd immunity? We will have to wait for better data.

or you trying to defend your 'betters' as usual

 

[Mark .Y. 351]

1 hour ago, Van wink said:

Or the normal progression of an epidemic curve?

There is so much to learn from this pandemic, I know the desire to make instant judgement is a sad feature of modern society, but of all science to study epidemiology is one where you have to look at the long term, whether people like it or not. It is not impossible that there is now a considerable level of post infection immunity within the London population which will be much more resilient to a second wave on infection, when that inevitably comes, we may even find London responds better to a second wave than some of the other large conurbations in Europe. So yes maybe some form of herd immunity? We will have to wait for better data.

You're coming over a bit condescending VW.

I could argue that you are saying a second wave is inevitable.........but the Danish CMO or Chief Epidemeologist (one of those type of people  🙂 ) said quite clearly the other day that he does not expect a second wave and yet you are announcing it as "inevitable" ??

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,778]

4 hours ago, Mark .Y. said:

That is a fair point, I honestly don't know how many there are. Spain, despite having that similar cultural thing as Italy, has a lot though. One thing I did see was the huge care home in (I think) Milan, that suffered 200 deaths amongst a total of 1000 residents - that is some size place, I don't think we have any on that scale do we ???  

I actually fact-checked before making my post, and my basic googling told me that there are 'more than 15,000' in the UK but 6,000-and-something in Italy. This sounds about right, as there doesn't seem to be many at all where I am in the south of Italy. Either their children look after them or they get a housekeeper from Eastern Europe.

[Van wink 2,994]

1 hour ago, Mark .Y. said:

You're coming over a bit condescending VW.

I could argue that you are saying a second wave is inevitable.........but the Danish CMO or Chief Epidemeologist (one of those type of people  🙂 ) said quite clearly the other day that he does not expect a second wave and yet you are announcing it as "inevitable" ??

So sorry, not intended to be condescending, my opinion, shared by many epidemiologists.

( it’s iol not eol by the way )😗

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Interesting discussion of epidemic waves here :

 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-19-epidemic-waves/

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Also has anyone seen any update on how Covid is affected by the weather ?  I've found some discussion on the accuweather site about it being mainly found in temperate bands, which would imply it will drop away over the summer but could return in the autumn.  But the stuff I found was from March so now very dated, it would be really interesting to find something more recent.

 

I think the "second spike" risk for Covid is different from historical pandemics because in the past (eg 1918-20) no real steps were taken to contain the outbreak AFAIK so it was just the natural course of the virus spreading through the population.  Given the widespread lockdowns have artificially reduced that spread, there must be a risk that loosening them will allow it to spread again.  Fortunately, there doesn't seem much sign of that yet but clearly there have been some flare ups in places like Singapore so it will be important not to be complacent.

 

RIght, back to work I'm afraid....

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

You're coming over a bit condescending VW.

I could argue that you are saying a second wave is inevitable.........but the Danish CMO or Chief Epidemeologist (one of those type of people  ) said quite clearly the other day that he does not expect a second wave and yet you are announcing it as "inevitable" ??

So why has the Chancellor extended furlough until October? That would indicate they feel the virus could take a long time to reach a "safe" level or they fear a second wave in autumn.

 

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

Also I think it's logical that New York and London are the two cities that have been hit hardest by this once it spread globally. They are the two true international hubs with diverse populations and people coming and going from all corners of the globe, and both are densely populated - obv there are plenty of huge cities around the world but I think NY and London remain unique in this respect. 

[ron obvious 1,501]

Couple of alternative views. Probably not popular.

 

https://unherd.com/2020/05/the-hypocrisy-of-safetyism/

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/05/15/we-could-open-up-again-and-forget-the-whole-thing/

[Herman 9,716]

The Welsh leader seems like a decent chap. Clear and concise rules of what can and can't be done. Well done. 

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

18 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Only a couple of points. Our known new infections ramped up to circa 6000/day in mid March, stayed at that level in April and are only now dropping to circa 3000/day

The 2.1M you quote is I guess is a global figure.

The trouble with the known infections number is that it's just the tip of the iceberg.  If you test more, you should be seeing more of the iceberg, so a plateau of known infections during April when testing was being ramped up clearly points to the total number of cases dropping, which is consistent with other measures such as hospital admissions and (after a lag) deaths.  "Known infections" simply isn't comparable from a time when we were doing under 20,000 tests per day to doing around 100,000 per day.

 

I think your projection would be useful if you'd allowed for a substantial peak around the start of April

 

My 2.1m number came from this website :

https://covid.joinzoe.com/data#levels-over-time

 

It's a projection of infection numbers across the UK based on people self-reporting their symptoms via the app. It shows a national peak for the UK at the start of April at approx. 2.1m.  A very rough number but it's probably about as meaningful as anything out there.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

3 hours ago, sonyc said:

I understand the antibody tests are not going to roll out as soon as thought?

This is the one thing which I've never grasped about our and indeed other countries responses.

It is obviously possible to do, albeit at a university or research institute, a good antibody test (else how do you know if your 'cheap' test works) - indeed there are few examples of such smatterd around the world (all tend to give much lower levels than thought).

2 months ago I would of made it a priority - indeed instructed (with payment) such facilities to begin such sampling  - weekly - across the UK. Yes it would no doubt be time consuming  and laborious as it would be in a research not commercial setting.

It's not intended to tell who has/hasn't the antibody but just to inform policy makers the true level and extent of the disease.

I remain amazed that even today - the question remains open and publicly unanswered as to as to 5%, 15%, 25% or 60%.

Even the 'models' as at Cambridge seem to only 'back calculate' complete with all sorts of assumptions the true number. By example in the study released yesterday they had 'calculated' 200,000 infections/day in London at the time of the lockdown (obviously not confirmed as we only had very limited antigen testing of a few thousand per day). Even if we assume  say 10 days of this - that's 2M infections in London alone and with a mortality of say 1% 20,000 London deaths. Not sure that stacks up with reality.

Let's get at the very least some proper random sample antibody data - send it to Roche if need be! Then we can make evidence-based decisions on facts not wild assumptions.

[Bill 1,788]

20 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

Couple of alternative views. Probably not popular.

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/05/15/we-could-open-up-again-and-forget-the-whole-thing/

oh look, this naughty man is agreeing with Bill

"Wittkowski: They have the scientists on their side that depend on government funding. One scientist in Germany just got $500million from the government, because he always says what the government wants to hear. "

and further adds

"Scientists are in a very strange situation. They now depend on government funding, which is a trend that has developed over the past 40 years. Before that, when you were a professor at a university, you had your salary and you had your freedom. Now, the university gives you a desk and access to the library. And then you have to ask for government money and write grant applications. If you are known to criticise the government, what does that do to your chance of getting funded? It creates a huge conflict of interest. The people who are speaking out in Germany and Switzerland are all independent of government money because they are retired."

or, as we have on here

the shoe is the sign

 

 

[sonyc 5,492]

27 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

Couple of alternative views. Probably not popular.

 

https://unherd.com/2020/05/the-hypocrisy-of-safetyism/

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/05/15/we-could-open-up-again-and-forget-the-whole-thing/

I found both of these fascinating actually. Especially the second article (though the safer we become the less tolerant we are to risk, the issue of institutionalised insularity and declining trust in public authority in the first really struck home with me). 

Indy, one of the posters here early on spoke about the economy and the effects of lockdown. 

Lately too, I have started to wonder whether the virus will ebb away or fade naturally. Yet, that is purely intuitional and not scientific! I don't know anymore. 

Thanks for posting. It's good to read different sources. And I am someone not impressed with the approach and style of messaging of the present government. It would be refreshing and if (like Sweden (and Denmark) in some respects we had a better debate nationally and openly. It would create better level of trust between people. We don't have to agree but the conversation becomes enriched and not governed / dictated by desperate defense of one's position or party line. This pandemic ought not to be a campaign by a party to shout success, but to be adult .....death is the other side of coin (of life). And in that respect, we are all in the same queue.

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

3 minutes ago, It's Character Forming said:

The trouble with the known infections number is that it's just the tip of the iceberg.  If you test more, you should be seeing more of the iceberg, so a plateau of known infections during April when testing was being ramped up clearly points to the total number of cases dropping, which is consistent with other measures such as hospital admissions and (after a lag) deaths.  "Known infections" simply isn't comparable from a time when we were doing under 20,000 tests per day to doing around 100,000 per day.

 

I think your projection would be useful if you'd allowed for a substantial peak around the start of April

 

My 2.1m number came from this website :

https://covid.joinzoe.com/data#levels-over-time

 

It's a projection of infection numbers across the UK based on people self-reporting their symptoms via the app. It shows a national peak for the UK at the start of April at approx. 2.1m.  A very rough number but it's probably about as meaningful as anything out there.

I appreciate that - my calculation was a simple 'sanity' check on the numbers.

Another way of getting to the same rough number was to say the 150,000 actual positive antigen over 2 weeks (actually last 2 weeks of April when tested more or less) actually corresponds to infections across the peak (early April) - it takes several weeks to 'clear' the virus - so 150,000 may well have a lot of the peak counts in them i.e. it is at or near the 'worst'.

The rest of my simple calculations just assumes these numbers extended fortnightly (it's an over- exageration) from all of March onwards for 12 weeks at 150,000 every 2 weeks - and I get a number of the order of 2 to 4 %. - vaguely in-line with Whitty.

What I don't think the real-number is or was is 10 x greater!

What I want is some proper numbers!

[Bill 1,788]

6 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Let's get at the very least some proper random sample antibody data - send it to Roche if need be! Then we can make evidence-based decisions on facts not wild assumptions.

oh dear,

the one variable that over rides all of this is local outbreaks - which no random sample will reflect, so we have the wide divergence of data

do these samples factor in age,  proximity of  living - or most important possible susceptibility to the virus, if not they are worse than useless, as they will mislead

however progress on here is being made - albeit exceedingly slow

and the almost fanatical devotion to astrology is being questioned

[Yellow Fever 3,749]

11 minutes ago, Bill said:

oh dear,

the one variable that over rides all of this is local outbreaks - which no random sample will reflect, so we have the wide divergence of data

do these samples factor in age,  proximity of  living - or most important possible susceptibility to the virus, if not they are worse than useless, as they will mislead

however progress on here is being made - albeit exceedingly slow

and the almost fanatical devotion to astrology is being questioned

Yes Oh dear Bill.

I can agree with you on many things but you are asking a different statistical question.

I'm just interested in what proportion of the populations as whole or indeed regionally may have had the virus via well established standard sampling theory that's been around for > 100 years. (Blame Guinness for that 😉).

Edited May 15, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[T 190]

Isn’t it like the economist asked to give a forecast though. If you asked to give a forecast don’t and if you do make sure it is far enough into the future so people forget. Hopefully we will know the infection rates fairly soon if UK can get round to buying and using the antibody tests. Everything is just playing with numbers. 

[Mark .Y. 351]

2 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

You're coming over a bit condescending VW.

I could argue that you are saying a second wave is inevitable.........but the Danish CMO or Chief Epidemeologist (one of those type of people  ) said quite clearly the other day that he does not expect a second wave and yet you are announcing it as "inevitable" ??

So why has the Chancellor extended furlough until October? That would indicate they feel the virus could take a long time to reach a "safe" level or they fear a second wave in autumn.

 

They may well feel that, I was just pointing out that not everybody is of the same opinion.