Jump to content
Fuzzar

Corona Virus main thread

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I would prefer that they concentrate on the vulnerable personally.😁

This virus is a new beginning. Why would we want to save the less than venerable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is

I saw a couple of VD germs crossing the road the other day... almost run over they were

one said to the other

" phew, I was nearly a gonna 'ere "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

I didn't realise Venereal Disease was so widespread in Norfolk.

Bunch of non douche bags

Venerable Disease is quite common on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ricardo said:

The number of positive tests is up a bit today but still difficult to be certain if this is or isn't a function of higher testing. See latest data.

https://coronavirus-staging.data.gov.uk/

Looking at those graphs then testing has greatly increased from May through to July whereas new case numbers actually fell in the same period. The lockdown being eased in early July with a lag of 3/4 weeks and you can see the numbers increasing. I believe we can expect increases of over 1000 and probably even up to 2000 very soon. It seems that the trends are there to see for us in France, Spain....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Looking at those graphs then testing has greatly increased from May through to July whereas new case numbers actually fell in the same period. The lockdown being eased in early July with a lag of 3/4 weeks and you can see the numbers increasing. I believe we can expect increases of over 1000 and probably even up to 2000 very soon. It seems that the trends are there to see for us in France, Spain....

And what makes it worse is we never got our level of community infection sufficiently under control before we started to release. I don’t think there is much doubt what is going to happen here, our salvation will rest in whether this period has bought sufficient time to establish a decent track and trace service properly integrated with DPH, sufficient testing capacity and a governance regime that inspires confidence and compliance. Mmm...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sonyc said:

Looking at those graphs then testing has greatly increased from May through to July whereas new case numbers actually fell in the same period. The lockdown being eased in early July with a lag of 3/4 weeks and you can see the numbers increasing. I believe we can expect increases of over 1000 and probably even up to 2000 very soon. It seems that the trends are there to see for us in France, Spain....

Hospital admissions lag isn’t 3-4 weeks. 8-11 days on average between catching it, showing symptoms and being hospitalised. According to Ricardo’s graphs, infections started rising over a month ago, yet hospital admissions continue to drop.

In the same time period, the seven day average number of tests carried out has continued to go up.

So we’ve had 4 weeks of increasing infections, 4 weeks of increasing tests, but 4 weeks of reduced hospital admissions despite it taking only 1-1.5 weeks to be hospitalised after catching it (on average - so some even earlier than that).

Either suggests to me that it’s down to the increased testing, or the virus has become a lot weaker than it was before.

 

Edited by Aggy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 8-11 days between infection and hospitalisation sounds a little low to me Aggy, can I ask where those figures are from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Van wink said:

And what makes it worse is we never got our level of community infection sufficiently under control before we started to release. I don’t think there is much doubt what is going to happen here, our salvation will rest in whether this period has bought sufficient time to establish a decent track and trace service properly integrated with DPH, sufficient testing capacity and a governance regime that inspires confidence and compliance. Mmm...

Is the government learning? ...  slowly? The experience of the northern LAs  recently attests to them being treated like mushrooms. Ricardo's charts do show increasing testing numbers. And Aggy I see has just posted that hospital admissions are greatly down. The number of deaths has reduced. I'm unsure if that's because of the virus changing / weakening or its because of better treatments. My worry has always been that higher infection rates would translate later 'down the line' into worsening death rates.

@Aggy, I don't know if it is 8 to 11 days. My 3/4 weeks was based simply on my take on relaxation of behaviours (distancing), ergo increased chance for close contact (pubs, bars for example as well as some industrial food processing sources) and these leaching into community infection. Thus, we have been about 4 or 5 weeks since early July. Your 8/11 days may make sense in this time period. Though I have no wish to be pedantic.

Edited by sonyc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, sonyc said:

 

@Aggy, I don't know if it is 8 to 11 days. My 3/4 weeks was based simply on my take on relaxation of behaviours (distancing), ergo increased chance for close contact (pubs, bars for example as well as some industrial food processing sources) and these leaching into community infection. Thus, we have been about 4 or 5 weeks since early July. Your 8/11 days may make sense in this time period.

I think 2 to 3 weeks lag is what most work from

The Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling (SPI-M), a subgroup of SAGE, use several different models, each using data from a variety of sources to estimate R and growth rate. Epidemiological data, such as hospital admissions, ICU admissions and deaths, usually take 2 to 3 weeks for changes in the spread of disease to be reflected in the estimates. This is due to the time delay between initial infection and the need for hospital care. As a result, the figures published today more accurately represent the average situation over the past few weeks rather than the situation today.”

Edited by Van wink
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Hospital admissions lag isn’t 3-4 weeks. 8-11 days on average between catching it, showing symptoms and being hospitalised. According to Ricardo’s graphs, infections started rising over a month ago, yet hospital admissions continue to drop.

In the same time period, the seven day average number of tests carried out has continued to go up.

So we’ve had 4 weeks of increasing infections, 4 weeks of increasing tests, but 4 weeks of reduced hospital admissions despite it taking only 1-1.5 weeks to be hospitalised after catching it (on average - so some even earlier than that).

Either suggests to me that it’s down to the increased testing, or the virus has become a lot weaker than it was before.

 

If increased testing is the cause we should see the  % positive falling. 

As to the vitus being weaker, possibly though unlikely I reckon. More likely the disease is not spreading to the most vulnerable groups anymore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a curious thing that parts of Liverpool are subject to emergency restrictions as numbers of infections have risen some 4/5 weeks after the title celebrations.

Reading about it reminded me of the breakouts in infections earlier this year in Italy and Spain after  football matches. 

Coincidence or not? I suppose it's impossible to corroborate (like Cheltenham racing). Leeds will be interesting to watch if numbers increase in a week or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, sonyc said:

It's a curious thing that parts of Liverpool are subject to emergency restrictions as numbers of infections have risen some 4/5 weeks after the title celebrations.

Reading about it reminded me of the breakouts in infections earlier this year in Italy and Spain after  football matches. 

Coincidence or not? I suppose it's impossible to corroborate (like Cheltenham racing). Leeds will be interesting to watch if numbers increase in a week or so.

Yes the Leeds area numbers do seem to be accelerating. Hopefully quick action will be taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well at least Ipswich won't have such virus related concerns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Van wink said:

The 8-11 days between infection and hospitalisation sounds a little low to me Aggy, can I ask where those figures are from?

The pic below is from patient info. I have a feeling you may have posted this during a tete a tete with Bill a while back. It’s from mid April so possibly out of date but the best I can find. Would also say though that from a quick google, the American cdc.gov website also suggests most hospitalisation happens during the second week of infection. The 2/3 week lag is the number I’ve heard for deaths - and by that logic 8-11 days also sounds about right for hospitalisation.

 

1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

If increased testing is the cause we should see the  % positive falling. 

 

1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:


If increased testing is the cause we should see the  % positive falling. 

 

Using Ricardo’s chart, and using 7 day rolling averages here for fairness. Infections rose from early July, so I’ve compared 30 June and 31 July (because the charts don’t seem to have full data for August yet).

30 June - 132,779.9 is the 7 day rolling average number of tests carried out. 749.1 is the 7 day rolling average number of cases. I make that 0.56 per cent. 

31 July - 163,180.9 is the 7 day rolling average number of tests carried out. 789 is the 7 day rolling average number of cases. I make that 0.48 per cent.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Aggy said:

The pic below is from patient info. I have a feeling you may have posted this during a tete a tete with Bill a while back. It’s from mid April so possibly out of date but the best I can find. Would also say though that from a quick google, the American cdc.gov website also suggests most hospitalisation happens during the second week of infection. The 2/3 week lag is the number I’ve heard for deaths - and by that logic 8-11 days also sounds about right for hospitalisation.

 

Using Ricardo’s chart, and using 7 day rolling averages here for fairness. Infections rose from early July, so I’ve compared 30 June and 31 July (because the charts don’t seem to have full data for August yet).

30 June - 132,779.9 is the 7 day rolling average number of tests carried out. 749.1 is the 7 day rolling average number of cases. I make that 0.56 per cent. 

31 July - 163,180.9 is the 7 day rolling average number of tests carried out. 789 is the 7 day rolling average number of cases. I make that 0.48 per cent.

 

So sounds possible that at least some of the increase in confirmed cases  is due to increased testing

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Aggy said:

The pic below is from patient info. I have a feeling you may have posted this during a tete a tete with Bill a while back. It’s from mid April so possibly out of date but the best I can find. Would also say though that from a quick google, the American cdc.gov website also suggests most hospitalisation happens during the second week of infection. The 2/3 week lag is the number I’ve heard for deaths - and by that logic 8-11 days also sounds about right for hospitalisation.

 

Using Ricardo’s chart, and using 7 day rolling averages here for fairness. Infections rose from early July, so I’ve compared 30 June and 31 July (because the charts don’t seem to have full data for August yet).

30 June - 132,779.9 is the 7 day rolling average number of tests carried out. 749.1 is the 7 day rolling average number of cases. I make that 0.56 per cent. 

31 July - 163,180.9 is the 7 day rolling average number of tests carried out. 789 is the 7 day rolling average number of cases. I make that 0.48 per cent.

 

There is no picture below Aggy.? Did you see the quote I posted earlier referring to the 2/3 week lag on admissions?  It was from a report published on 31 July. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Van wink said:

And what makes it worse is we never got our level of community infection sufficiently under control before we started to release. I don’t think there is much doubt what is going to happen here, our salvation will rest in whether this period has bought sufficient time to establish a decent track and trace service properly integrated with DPH, sufficient testing capacity and a governance regime that inspires confidence and compliance. Mmm...

Getting past the sensationalism in the headline, there are concerns about T and T, schools re-opening and more people going back to offices.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/second-coronavirus-wave-could-twice-22464251?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

The article speaks of trade offs to manage increasing infection rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Getting past the sensationalism in the headline, there are concerns about T and T, schools re-opening and more people going back to offices.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/second-coronavirus-wave-could-twice-22464251?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar

The article speaks of trade offs to manage increasing infection rates.

I’m really concerned sonyc. As I have repeated like a broken record, we opened up too soon, the opportunity we had/have was/is a period when the sun would shine and people would be outside, reduced infection rates,  when we could build capacity for what for me is the inevitable surge. I fear we may be at risk of blowing this opportunity. I know that T and T is not what it should be, my experience has been of a very poorly managed system with very little communication and dogged by a lack of human resources to support those on the front line. I know of several people appointed to tier 2 who have given up,  its incumbent on Government to keep these people on board so that they are ready and able to go when needed.

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Van wink said:

There is no picture below Aggy.? Did you see the quote I posted earlier referring to the 2/3 week lag on admissions?  It was from a report published on 31 July. 

Attached.

Even if you extend it to 2/3 weeks - the infections started rising 4.5 weeks ago now and hospital admissions continue to go down, not up.

The other point is that the large majority of tests being done are still people showing symptoms or even going into hospitals  (because why would a member of the public order a test if they don’t show any symptoms?). The lags usually take into account that you often don’t show symptoms for a few days up to a week or so - so if the positive test results started rising  around 4 weeks ago, that suggests people were showing symptoms around 4 weeks ago, which then suggests many of the infections were probably “caught” 5-6 weeks ago, before restrictions were lifted.

So it’s either (1) a very long lag of potentially 5/6 weeks between infection and hospitalisation and increased infections were occurring before restrictions were lifted, or (2) it’s getting weaker, or (3) it’s as a result of the increased testing. As per BB’s point on percentages and my back of a fag packet maths, there are more tests being done and proportionately fewer testing positive, but number of infections going up.

 

image.jpeg

Edited by Aggy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should say, there’s probably an option (4) which is that it’s a mix of increased testing and increased infections from less social distancing, but given the percentage of positive tests is going down, I think chances are it’s far more to do with increased testing than the latter.

I don’t think people realise how many extra tests are being done even when you compare with a month ago. It’s an extra 20-30,000 a day (on the seven week average). If you do an extra 20-30,000 tests a day, chances are you will find an extra 200 cases, which is what we’re seeing now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Should say, there’s probably an option (4) which is that it’s a mix of increased testing and increased infections from less social distancing, but given the percentage of positive tests is going down, I think chances are it’s far more to do with increased testing than the latter.

I don’t think people realise how many extra tests are being done even when you compare with a month ago. It’s an extra 20-30,000 a day (on the seven week average). If you do an extra 20-30,000 tests a day, chances are you will find an extra 200 cases, which is what we’re seeing now. 

I was encouraged by the number of tests reading the latest figures.  Plus I'm one of the people more inclined to believe your 'option' 4. I've not read anything about the virus weakening as yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Should say, there’s probably an option (4) which is that it’s a mix of increased testing and increased infections from less social distancing, but given the percentage of positive tests is going down, I think chances are it’s far more to do with increased testing than the latter.

I don’t think people realise how many extra tests are being done even when you compare with a month ago. It’s an extra 20-30,000 a day (on the seven week average). If you do an extra 20-30,000 tests a day, chances are you will find an extra 200 cases, which is what we’re seeing now. 

I would certainly agree that the increased testing and release of lockdown will inevitably show a rise in numbers. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...