Number of Deaths

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I may be being thick in that case (not for the first time), but if we're testing (as a trend, anyway), more every day, and as this is currently limited to those with symptoms, the number of confirmed new cases will naturally go up quite steeply (it's simply capturing more cases that would have not previously been captured/reported). In the most efficient nations, that's exactly what should happen as they are mass-testing so capturing far more people that are negative. I'd still point to the number in hospital as the clearest indicator.

I just heard the home secretary say there have now been around half a million tests. But the criteria for testing isn't clear to me. I know that many of those with a positive diagnosis have not had a proper test, and have nothing more than a 'clinical' diagnosis (which means the doc or nurse makes a judgement call down the phone). And yet with 150,000 confirmed cases this must mean that at least 350,000 who have actually been tested (with a proper blood test) were found to be negative. Did they have symptoms? I have no idea.

God, I wish I were part of the press lobby sometimes. Rather than asking cockamamie questions about masks and how long the lockdown will last, I'd ask them to explain where the numbers come from, who is tested and why, and how they were tested and when.

So I can't answer your questions, and am confident that with the data available, and the clarity of its provenance, nobody can.

 

[dazzer6666]

I just heard the home secretary say there have now been around half a million tests. But the criteria for testing isn't clear to me. I know that many of those with a positive diagnosis have not had a proper test, and have nothing more than a 'clinical' diagnosis (which means the doc or nurse makes a judgement call down the phone). And yet with 150,000 confirmed cases this must mean that at least 350,000 who have actually been tested (with a proper blood test) were found to be negative. Did they have symptoms? I have no idea.

God, I wish I were part of the press lobby sometimes. Rather than asking cockamamie questions about masks and how long the lockdown will last, I'd ask them to explain where the numbers come from, who is tested and why, and how they were tested and when.

So I can't answer your questions, and am confident that with the data available, and the clarity of its provenance, nobody can.

Indeed..........as I understand it, though, testing has basically been limited (very largely - celebs and footballers etc excepted) to hospitalised patients until very recently - and now extended to key workers showing symptoms - so yes, virtually all tested would have had symptoms, and in most cases severe symptoms - that accounts for the 500k tests and 150k positive high %. I don't think any are blood tested - it's all swabs from the nose and throat.

 

[Birdie Boy]

I was blood tested about 4 weeks ago, before lockdown. I don't think there was a swab test then. Also, I'm not sure how accurate the blood tests were, anyway, I think all of the early testing was a blood test.

 

[Swansman]

Dont know the reason over there but here the reasoning is that testing people without symptoms or who are not working in healthcare is no longer interesting because at this stage, when a lot of people who were infected are rid of the virus, it just wont give much valuable information compared to the resources it would take to do extensive testing.

 

[Bodian]

It can't only be those who turn up to hospital pretty ill who are/were being tested - otherwise surely that would mean something like 150k in hospital. I don't think we'e reached those numbers. Or have we?

 

[Weststander]

Dont know the reason over there but here the reasoning is that testing people without symptoms or who are not working in healthcare is no longer interesting because at this stage, when a lot of people who were infected are rid of the virus, it just wont give much valuable information compared to the resources it would take to do extensive testing.

A better day in Sweden too, with fewer deaths than days a week or two ago.

 

[Swansman]

A better day in Sweden too, with fewer deaths than days a week or two ago.

Nope, numbers are lower on Saturdays, Sundays and Mondays here because reports from the weekend are slow. We've steadily been 45-65 deaths per day for two-three weeks. Some days 100+ deaths are reported (i.e. tomorrow) and some days 20-40, but it always ends up being somewhere 45-65 deaths when everything is counted and sorted. Our curve has been flat for a long time.

 

[darkwolf666]

Right, please excuse me if I am being thick, but...

Who are all these people who are dying of the virus?

My understanding is that the majority of the dead have underlying health issues, in which case why weren’t they “shielding”, or are there health issues not considered as dangerous as those being shielded, yet still bad enough to kill them if they get the virus?

If so, why weren’t they advised to shield... I’m a little confused, and probably a lot ignorant/stupid!

 

[dazzer6666]

It can't only be those who turn up to hospital pretty ill who are/were being tested - otherwise surely that would mean something like 150k in hospital. I don't think we'e reached those numbers. Or have we?

It isn't now, but it was earlier in the process (certainly during March and into early April). On April 8th (poss around the peak date), there were just over 16,500 CV19 patients in hospital (England only) so the total admitted over the time period would make logical sense based on that number...................depending on length of stay etc

https://www.hsj.co.uk/coronavirus/covid-19-hospital-admissions-flattening/7027364.article

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Dont know the reason over there but here the reasoning is that testing people without symptoms or who are not working in healthcare is no longer interesting because at this stage, when a lot of people who were infected are rid of the virus, it just wont give much valuable information compared to the resources it would take to do extensive testing.

I'm sure you're right, but this is so stupid. Until we have the data to make predictions we will be in recurrent lockdowns renewed every few weeks. As Peter Cook once said, what a way to run a fcking nightclub.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Right, please excuse me if I am being thick, but...

Who are all these people who are dying of the virus?

My understanding is that the majority of the dead have underlying health issues, in which case why weren’t they “shielding”, or are there health issues not considered as dangerous as those being shielded, yet still bad enough to kill them if they get the virus?

If so, why weren’t they advised to shield... I’m a little confused, and probably a lot ignorant/stupid!

That is a very good question. Unfortunately collecting all the necessary information doesn't seem to be on any government's agenda right now. Not ours or anyone else's.

My guess is it is mostly the old and ill, with a latency of at least 2 weeks between infection and death, and dunderheaded practice (it only take one eejit to infect all and sundry in the supermarkets by not social distancing during the several days they are infectious but not ill to spread the bug happily about) is keeping it on the boil.

If people have been behaving, the number of new infections should start to fall in the next week, like in Germany. In America where they are hell bent on exercising their redneck freedoms, there will be no downturn and, in my view, they will continue to hover up there on that insane plateau, with a decline kicking in eventually only when the diligent in New York and California start to benefit from the isolation dividend. In the redneck areas the numbers won't tumble till there are too few of them left alive to add to the death toll. Ever picked a scab? It bleeds again.

Keep you head down, mate, and all the best.

 

[Weststander]

That is a very good question. Unfortunately collecting all the necessary information doesn't seem to be on any government's agenda right now. Not ours or anyone else's.

My guess is it is mostly the old and ill, with a latency of at least 2 weeks between infection and death, and dunderheaded practice (it only take one eejit to infect all and sundry in the supermarkets by not social distancing during the several days they are infectious but not ill to spread the bug happily about) is keeping it on the boil.

If people have been behaving, the number of new infections should start to fall in the next week, like in Germany. In America where they are hell bent on exercising their redneck freedoms, there will be no downturn and, in my view, they will continue to hover up there on that insane plateau, with a decline kicking in eventually only when the diligent in New York and California start to benefit from the isolation dividend. In the redneck areas the numbers won't tumble till there are too few of them left alive to add to the death toll. Ever picked a scab? It bleeds again.

Keep you head down, mate, and all the best.

Is it generally agreed that two weeks of true self isolation, going into it virus free, guarantees being covid19 free?

A 75 year old couple, nice people, a couple of doors away from us, have their kids and grandkids round every day. On 5live this morning a home visit carer called to say that she sees families visiting all the time, putting her and her colleagues lives in jeopardy. She pleaded for people to stop this.

Behind closed doors and in back gardens, a not insignificant portion of the population are refusing to play ball. The argument that it’s their risk, is flawed, as obviously they can infect strangers.

 

[dazzer6666]

That is a very good question. Unfortunately collecting all the necessary information doesn't seem to be on any government's agenda right now. Not ours or anyone else's.

My guess is it is mostly the old and ill, with a latency of at least 2 weeks between infection and death, and dunderheaded practice (it only take one eejit to infect all and sundry in the supermarkets by not social distancing during the several days they are infectious but not ill to spread the bug happily about) is keeping it on the boil.

If people have been behaving, the number of new infections should start to fall in the next week, like in Germany. In America where they are hell bent on exercising their redneck freedoms, there will be no downturn and, in my view, they will continue to hover up there on that insane plateau, with a decline kicking in eventually only when the diligent in New York and California start to benefit from the isolation dividend. In the redneck areas the numbers won't tumble till there are too few of them left alive to add to the death toll. Ever picked a scab? It bleeds again.

Keep you head down, mate, and all the best.

Agreed......was chatting to a (Manhattan based) US colleague a little while ago, they are beside themselves with anger over Trump’s policies, pronouncements and stupidity. Unfortunately, he still has a huge number of lemmings who believe what he says.

The data on deaths here that is available is stratified by age range at least (ONS data 2 weeks lagging).

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...glandandwalesprovisional/weekending3april2020

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Is it generally agreed that two weeks of true self isolation, going into it virus free, guarantees being covid19 free?

A 75 year old couple, nice people, a couple of doors away from us, have their kids and grandkids round every day. On 5live this morning a home visit carer called to say that she sees families visiting all the time, putting her and her colleagues lives in jeopardy. She pleaded for people to stop this.

Behind closed doors and in back gardens, a not insignificant portion of the population are refusing to play ball. The argument that it’s their risk, is flawed, as obviously they can infect strangers.

Exactly.

Your neighbours are being very silly.

Humans are brilliant at believing what is convenient, especially when it comes to risk assessment. I have gobbed off about this before. Let the grand kids walk to school on their own? No chance (paedos!). Have the kids go shopping among eejits then bring the grand kids round every day risking infecting us with Covid-19, which would likely be lethal to us? That would Never Happen! Fact.

 

[Swansman]

I'm sure you're right, but this is so stupid. Until we have the data to make predictions we will be in recurrent lockdowns renewed every few weeks. As Peter Cook once said, what a way to run a fcking nightclub.

I think everyone was counting on a good antibody test to be ready earlier and put less focus/resources on testing for infections. Pure speculation though.

 

[beorhthelm]

I think everyone was counting on a good antibody test to be ready earlier and put less focus/resources on testing for infections. Pure speculation though.

PCR tests are (relatively) expensive and time consuming. antibody tests can be shipped out cheaply, pick them up in pharmacies or supermarkets and self test. just the part of getting a reliable one has been tricky.

 

[Bozza]

I think everyone was counting on a good antibody test to be ready earlier and put less focus/resources on testing for infections. Pure speculation though.

As I've just posted elsewhere...

[tweet]1252328734004097029[/tweet]

 

[Machiavelli]

As I've just posted elsewhere...

[tweet]1252328734004097029[/tweet]

From: https://www.theguardian.com/society...t-very-few-have-had-covid-19-without-symptoms


Only a tiny proportion of the global population – maybe as few as 2% or 3% – appear to have antibodies in the blood showing they have been infected with Covid-19, according to the World Health Organization, a finding that bodes ill for hopes that herd immunity will ease the exit from lockdown.

“Easing restrictions is not the end of the epidemic in any country,” said WHO director-general Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus at a media briefing in Geneva on Monday. “So-called lockdowns can help to take the heat out of a country’s epidemic.”

But serological testing to find out how large a proportion of the population have had the infection and developed antibodies to it – which it is hoped will mean they have some level of immunity – suggests that the numbers are low.

“Early data suggests that a relatively small percentage of the populations may have been infected,” Tedros said. “Not more than 2%-3%.”


Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, an American infectious diseases expert who is the WHO’s technical lead on Covid-19, said they had thought the number of people infected would be higher, but she stressed it was still too early to be sure. “Initially, we see a lower proportion of people with antibodies than we were expecting,” she said. “A lower number of people are infected.”

On Friday, a study carried out in Santa Clara, California by Stanford University and released as a “pre-print” without peer review, found that 50 to 85 times more people had been infected with the virus than official figures showed.

Santa Clara county had 1,094 confirmed cases of Covid-19 at the time the study was carried out, but antibody tests suggest that between 48,000 and 81,000 people had been infected by early April, most of whom did not develop symptoms.

But even those high figures mean that within the whole population of the county, only 3% have been infected and have antibodies to the virus. A study in the Netherlands of 7,000 blood donors also found that just 3% had antibodies.
Get Society Weekly: our newsletter for public service professionals
Read more

Van Kerkhove said they needed to look carefully at the way the studies were being carried out. “A number of studies we are aware of in pre-print have suggested that small proportions of the population [have antibodies],” she said. These were “in single digits, up to 14% in Germany and France”. “It is really important to understand how the studies were done.”

That would include asking how they found the people to test. Was it at random or were they blood donors, who tend to be healthy adults? They would also need to look at how well the blood tests were performed.

“We are working with a number of countries carrying out these serology studies,” she added. The WHO-supported studies would use robust methods and the tests would be validated for accuracy.

The hope will be that people who have had Covid-19 will be able to resume their lives. But Van Kerkhove last week said that even if tests showed a person had antibodies, it did not prove that they were immune.

“There are a lot of countries that are suggesting using rapid diagnostic serological tests to be able to capture what they think will be a measure of immunity,” she said. “Right now, we have no evidence that the use of a serological test can show that an individual has immunity or is protected from reinfection.”

 

[Machiavelli]

What an absolutely disgusting post. Shame on you.

It was below the belt, not least because I was its prime recipient I suspect. FWIW, I pretty much agree with the assessment you posted a week or so ago on the current (and recent) government (mixed, some good, some bad). Our motives are to get through this with the lowest possible death count and the least destruction to the economy, not to be proved right, and posters shouldn't attempt to project their own suspicions/fears of those motives onto others. But we're living through a highly stressful situation, and it's not immediately obvious what to do. I shall carry on assessing the situation, unless one of you mods want to inform me that I've over-stepped the line.

 

[WATFORD zero]

The ONS have released their total fatality figures today up to 10th April.



It looks like it's still running 30%-40% above the figures that the Government are announcing daily. (The ONS figures being a week in arrears in order to get the detailed information).

If these are updated on the COBR fatalities graph today up to day 25, (they appeared on the graph 5 days ago, but haven't been updated since) it will mean that the total fatalities on 10th April were about the same as Spain, with only US having more.



On the positive side though, although the numbers of fatalities has been underestimated, the overall curve still seems to have peaked (or be peaking). Unfortunately, we won't know what it peaked at until next Tuesday at least.