Coronavirus

[Cockney Sparrow]

Lack of confidence, to put it mildly, has been expressed about the Cummings/Johnson administration - exactly my problem, but they have the levers of power. All we can do is play our part in our communities and protect ourselves and those within our sphere of influence. If you haven't been listening to (the right parts of) the Today programme (Radio 4):

Recurrance
Listening at 9 minutes past 8 this morning - the academic for this model (below - Lancet) - potential for an even higher infectivity and mortality than in the Spring past, after schools open in September:

"Determining the optimal strategy for reopening schools, the impact of test and trace interventions, and the risk of occurrence of a second COVID-19 epidemic wave in the UK: a modelling study"

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(20)30250-9/fulltext

Followed immediately by that eminently sensible and straight talking Dr David Nabarro (WHO) saying its going to be anything but easy and we really must adapt/change our behaviours to get through this.

Local public health - Liverpool, for example.
Effective local action on supressing the infection has to be the way forward. More impressive than many a Cummings/Johnson administration announcement or initiative (let alone achivement) - action in Liverpool. A contribution yesterday (3 August) on Today (Radio 4) - impressive public health action in a specific ward in Liverpool where half of the city's cases were located.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000ldd2 - (from 1 hour 51 mins).

Starts with a vox pop including some of the "they're just using this to control us, its not a mortal infection" faction (probably also anti vax, anti 5G, follows David Icke) to more informed and responsible reactions. Then they have Dr Matthew Ashton director Public Health for Sefton Council (Liverpool) outlining the effective steps taken - an intensive presence on the ground in that ward, informing, encouraging testing, explaining quarantining.

Most telling:
"Trust is main issue… we just don't have trust in a national system for people to believe in what we need to do……. much more likely to succeed if we use local community/faith leaders and volunteers who understand living and working in the area and get the message across - door to door - even the tough messages about testing and isolating….."
Also- the problem appears to originate with young people coming into multi-generational households, and the reason for resistance to testing and isolation - if there is no means of financial support when working is ruled out.
But Dr Ashton said - overall the response has been phenomenal.

[french frank]

On a quick read, the Atlantic seems well informed, clearly written. Maybe I'll trial a subscription....

I don't have a subscription but receive the newsletters with the headlines and can access the articles that attract my attention each day (there is a limit on the number you can get free, I think).

[johnb]

I just cobbled together this chart based on yesterday's data but ignoring the last three days as they are unreliable.

It plots the cases for the 170 of local authorities with the largest populations (roughly 50% of the total number of LAs).

The horizontal axis shows the number of cases per 100,000 of population.

The verticle axis gives the increase/decrease in case numbers for w/e 30th July compared with the average of the two previous weeks.



It shows that the overwhelming majority of local authorities are clustered with cases/100k between 1 and 7.

Then there are the outliers such as Leicester with a high number of cases/100k but with a decreasing number of cases and Oldham with a somewhat higher number of cases/100k but with an increasing number of cases.

Obviously, time moves on and that is only a snap shot.

(I'm not sure whether any one else finds the odd chart etc I post of any value, but I thought it interesting.)

[Simon B]

(I'm not sure whether any one else finds the odd chart etc I post of any value, but I thought it interesting.)

Me, for a start. This one is particularly informative - for the way the data is presented - a common theme as it is surprisingly hard to find certain modes of presentation elsewhere.

The drawback with this one (as you have already alluded to) is that for context you really need to see the evolution over time. An animation would be ideal but laborious to produce.

Providing the sample instant you've chosen is representative it's a striking visual snapshot - with a sense of scale - of why certain areas are currently of concern.

[oddoneout]

if there is no means of financial support when working is ruled out.

It seems to me that this is the biggest problem that has to be faced - and one that Universal Credit in its current form simply cannot address if people are already on a knife edge - owing rent and utility bills , struggling to buy food - especially as the help to apply is lacking in so many cases with the closure of offices, and libraries for computer access.
When my workplace shut down I couldn't WFH, and waited 4 months to be told I wasn't eligible for furlough payment. I am fortunate enough to have savings, and no mortgage/rent to pay, but it did bring home how different things could be. Faced with the dilemma so many face I'm not at all sure I would be a 'responsible citizen' if told to isolate.

[johnb]

Me, for a start. This one is particularly informative - for the way the data is presented - a common theme as it is surprisingly hard to find certain modes of presentation elsewhere.

The drawback with this one (as you have already alluded to) is that for context you really need to see the evolution over time. An animation would be ideal but laborious to produce.

Providing the sample instant you've chosen is representative it's a striking visual snapshot - with a sense of scale - of why certain areas are currently of concern.

Thanks for your comments (and I agree with your reservation about it only being a snapshot at one point in time).

It looks as though it will be the last time I will be able to do anything similar because the government has, today, suddenly stopped providing a download of the data on which it is based. Instead there are "user friendly" charts on their website and with very restricted downloads (some of which don't work properly).

It also prevents me doing further updates to the "cases by local authority" Excel file that I posted a link to last week. As far as that is concerned I will do an update based on yesterday's download - then that's it.

Looking on the bright side - it means I'll have more time for what I should have been doing all along (working on the house, the garden, etc ... even listening to music).

[Bryn]

https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/116865846_3365807456773730_1273652544434086578_n.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_eui2=AeFf99uxQWY9Fsd4ZvSJ2RR8Rf1MG1secmRF_UwbWx5yZNY1gI_tVmvRGZQGHcMFvsnptkxfFz2dW6HJa6N15IFI&_nc_ohc=0FbF1IISvysAX-hDAYv&_nc_ht=scontent-lht6-1.xx&oh=d6011dd3dd05dcf12554b4eb8193208f&oe=5F50EAB8

[teamsaint]

Thanks for your comments (and I agree with your reservation about it only being a snapshot at one point in time).

It looks as though it will be the last time I will be able to do anything similar because the government has, today, suddenly stopped providing a download of the data on which it is based. Instead there are "user friendly" charts on their website and with very restricted downloads (some of which don't work properly).

It also prevents me doing further updates to the "cases by local authority" Excel file that I posted a link to last week. As far as that is concerned I will do an update based on yesterday's download - then that's it.

Looking on the bright side - it means I'll have more time for what I should have been doing all along (working on the house, the garden, etc ... even listening to music).

Hmmm...this is very concerning. There is no excuse at all for this. If they aren't collecting the data, they should be. And if they are, they can release it. New infections in the local area is a very important piece of info.
Inescapable conclusion, they are giving us what they want to, so that they can implement whatever nonsense they want.
The Spectator article ( I know, I know but from a reputable source) showing positive tests against numbers of tests was pretty revealing, and the chart very clear about the pattern.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-covid-cases-in-england-aren-t-actually-rising?utm_medium=email&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Editorial&utm_campaign=LNCH%20%2020200803%20%20House%20Ads%20%20SM+CID_d2b852f62d4564ff1672b8ad1c50afe2

We need to be very worried about what is being done to us, and taken from us under cover of a health scare.

And, yes, thanks again for your work on this Johnb, it has been really appreciated.

[Serial_Apologist]

Hmmm...this is very concerning. There is no excuse at all for this. If they aren't collecting the data, they should be. And if they are, they can release it. New infections in the local area is a very important piece of info.
Inescapable conclusion, they are giving us what they want to, so that they can implement whatever nonsense they want.
The Spectator article ( I know, I know but from a reputable source) showing positive tests against numbers of tests was pretty revealing, and the chart very clear about the pattern.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-covid-cases-in-england-aren-t-actually-rising?utm_medium=email&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Editorial&utm_campaign=LNCH%20%2020200803%20%20House%20Ads%20%20SM+CID_d2b852f62d4564ff1672b8ad1c50afe2

We need to be very worried about what is being done to us, and taken from us under cover of a health scare.

And, yes, thanks again for your work on this Johnb, it has been really appreciated.

Strongly agree. It seems the JohnB's of this world are to be sidelined as constituting [sic] too much information, thank you.

[Simon B]

...The Spectator article (I know, I know but from a reputable source)...

This can be obtained directly from the CEBM, at:

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

This (obtain directly from source) is likely to be the case for a large proportion of material produced by anyone whose scientific opinion might be worth the paper it is(n't) written on. That said, in common with most such current material of whatever stance, it suffers from not having been peer reviewed at this stage. While this may be for good practical reasons, it is still a big "take it all with a pinch of salt" warning sign.

[johnb]

Hmmm...this is very concerning. There is no excuse at all for this. If they aren't collecting the data, they should be. And if they are, they can release it. New infections in the local area is a very important piece of info.
Inescapable conclusion, they are giving us what they want to, so that they can implement whatever nonsense they want.
The Spectator article ( I know, I know but from a reputable source) showing positive tests against numbers of tests was pretty revealing, and the chart very clear about the pattern.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-covid-cases-in-england-aren-t-actually-rising?utm_medium=email&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Editorial&utm_campaign=LNCH%20%2020200803%20%20House%20Ads%20%20SM+CID_d2b852f62d4564ff1672b8ad1c50afe2

We need to be very worried about what is being done to us, and taken from us under cover of a health scare.

And, yes, thanks again for your work on this Johnb, it has been really appreciated.

They are definitely collecting the data and it is, presumably, stored in a large database. What they have done is created a website that is more accessible to the general public but at the same time restricting the amount of in depth data that is available.

There is a section of the website for "developers" which explains how to use APIs to access the data more fully, and gives examples. However, even then there is a limit of 1000 records per API query whereas the most recent of the previously available "csv" downloads of cases by day, by local authority, had 56,193 records.

The article by Carl Heneghan is very interesting and it does raise questions. I need to give it some thought.

I think he is using a download of positive cases by earliest specimen date. There is another download which gives the number of tests, number confirmed positive, etc for each pillar, by date reported and that shows a decrease in Pillar 1 confirmed/100,000 tests but a marked increase in Pillar 2 confirmed /100,000 tests - but it looking at slightly different things.

(These two downloads are still available, for now.)

One thing that seems to have very little, if any, media attention is the very low percentage of the mailed out kits that are actually processed. What on earth happens to them?

[johnb]

This can be obtained directly from the CEBM, at:

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

This (obtain directly from source) is likely to be the case for a large proportion of material produced by anyone whose scientific opinion might be worth the paper it is(n't) written on. That said, in common with most such current material of whatever stance, it suffers from not having been peer reviewed at this stage. While this may be for good practical reasons, it is still a big "take it all with a pinch of salt" warning sign.

I agree with that. CH does seem to have a tendency to "shoot from the hip" at times.

[Dave2002]

https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net...8f&oe=5F50EAB8

Where do the numbers come from? Also, which date is it?

Need a source reference for credibility.

One notion, re heat and coronavirus may have gone out of the window, now that we see that Iran under reported by a factor of around 10, so the low number of deaths and cases in a hot country doesn’t look so “obvious” now.

[Globaltruth]

They are definitely collecting the data and it is, presumably, stored in a large database. What they have done is created a website that is more accessible to the general public but at the same time restricting the amount of in depth data that is available.

I wonder why?

Difficult not to be suspicious of this lot....

[Bryn]

Where do the numbers come from? Also, which date is it?

Need a source reference for credibility.

One notion, re heat and coronavirus may have gone out of the window, now that we see that Iran under reported by a factor of around 10, so the low number of deaths and cases in a hot country doesn’t look so “obvious” now.

The immediate source was this character: https://twitter.com/StefSimanowitz . His website is given by The Guardian as StefanSimanowitz.com but that's just a standard Guardian misprint, it seems.