Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

The big shed shop I work in was dead quiet on the first day of lockdown 2.0 but things are now busier. Loads of people love shopping or maybe feel at a loose end if they can't shop. Where I live there's not much else to do anyway.
 
Last edited:
Well yes, because much less people are flying, the airline would fill that up much more if they could. This only works if enough of us think flying is a bad idea or are prevented from doing so.
Of course . I think there are some countries now where you have to have proof of a negative test before you can fly .
 
The list of 67 additional locations for mass testing provides some guide as to what locations they are most worried about at the moment. It is included in the latter part of this article.


Looking at the London boroughs there is also a crossover with where they have existing drive thru testing facilities as well which can be scaled up. Which makes sense.
 
Ah, that's why my brother was saying my parents might get back from Slovakia in time to be tested again (they're in Enfield)
 
Looking at the London boroughs there is also a crossover with where they have existing drive thru testing facilities as well which can be scaled up. Which makes sense.

Yes, various practicalities are the other consideration I suppose.

My focus on hospital infection control means I was also pleased to hear Hancock mention twice weekly testing for staff being rolled out, although I dread to think how long it will take to make that comprehensive. Should have been in place months ago really.

 
Anyone got any ideas what's going on with the daily new cases numbers?

For the last 3 weeks they've hovered between 20,000 and 25,000 per day. It looks like new cases have leveled off, which would be great. But other things might be going on.

The new cases figure has always reflected the testing system. The number of tests processed in that time dropped significantly before going back up again. Could it be that the current testing system has reached the limit of new cases it can detect.

Could it be that while new cases are dropping in some badly affected areas - parts of the north? universities? - that masks rises in other areas - London? the south?

These figures will be for people who caught the virus before the new national 'lockdown'. That only came in 5 days ago, about the incubation period of the virus, so people who caught it since then will only be showing up from now. Did the regional lockdowns have an impact, either by working as intended, or by causing people to change their behavior or take more care in those areas?

Something else?

Obviously time will tell but while we wait, any speculation or insights?
 
What you mean is 625 (and 80.5) new positive test results in the past 7 days per 100,000 population, isn't it?

Not cases.

According to Zoe (if you believe it), NE Lincs is currently estimated at about 2400 active cases per 100,000 population, and Worthing at about 500.

Meanwhile most of London seems to be wobbling around between about 600 and 800.
 
Anyone got any ideas what's going on with the daily new cases numbers?

For the last 3 weeks they've hovered between 20,000 and 25,000 per day. It looks like new cases have leveled off, which would be great. But other things might be going on.

The new cases figure has always reflected the testing system. The number of tests processed in that time dropped significantly before going back up again. Could it be that the current testing system has reached the limit of new cases it can detect.

Could it be that while new cases are dropping in some badly affected areas - parts of the north? universities? - that masks rises in other areas - London? the south?

These figures will be for people who caught the virus before the new national 'lockdown'. That only came in 5 days ago, about the incubation period of the virus, so people who caught it since then will only be showing up from now. Did the regional lockdowns have an impact, either by working as intended, or by causing people to change their behavior or take more care in those areas?

Something else?

Obviously time will tell but while we wait, any speculation or insights?
The Zoe project - again, if you believe it's getting it right, as these are estimates - seems to think there has been a drop off in total active cases in the past wee or so.

Screen Shot 2020-11-10 at 21.33.25.jpg
 
Obviously time will tell but while we wait, any speculation or insights?

I dont think I have anything new to add, I already talked about that stuff for weeks.

Use the weekly surveillance reports to look at positive cases broekn down into age ranges and by region, and to see things like positivity rate.


And even then, dont rely on positive case data alone, since like you said we wont nevessarily be able to tell the difference between cases plateauing and the system reaching the limits of how many cases its likely to pick up. Although some clues can be found by looking into the case data in more detail, as per my previous point with the weekly surveillance report.

Augment the picture by using survey-testing type surveillance, such as zoe covids figures and the weekly ONS report.



At times like these I end up paying more attention to hospital data, although admissions stats arent perfect either and they can be influenced by multiple factors. All the same they indicate what is happening at the sharp end of things.

I dont find it that easy to pick the right moments to try to describe the picture accurately. There is always a fair chance that tomorrows data will leave me with a different impression than the data I have now, especially when searching for signs of a levelling off or meaningful and sustained drop.

I will still force myself to talk about the hospital admissions picture at some point in the coming days, because there are some indicators there of a picture that has been changing in the last few weeks, but the detail matters and there is some notable regional variation. I can see why some have described a levelling off in recent times, but when I look deeper it is no way near that simple and so I think such a characterisation ends up being quite inappropriate. I will try to explain better when I have a graph or two on a regional basis, and several days more data.
 
And yes just to put it bluntly, it is reasonable to think there may have been a peak and subsequent fall in younger people very much including uni students, and that this may obscure the infection picture in more vulnerable age groups. I tend to talk about it on a Thursday or Friday, once the weekly surveillance report is out and I have time to look at it.
 
one thing i must give the BBC is that during there reporting of quick testing in british uni
they managed to reach out to the albino monk from the the da vinci code

good to see that guy get some extra work


:thumbs:
 
Bad; so even with the 28 day stipulation that's >50k dead.
God know what the true figure is now. :mad:

If I use ONS figures where Covid-19 is mentioned on death certificate, and where they added other organisations figures for Northern Ireland and Scotland to their publication since the ONS only covers England and Wales, then the highest UK number I get is 63005. Thats for the period up to 30th October.

If I try to use excess deaths as a guide then there are some complications, such as less people dying of other things during some parts of the year, including before the pandemic deaths started because the winter flu season was early and so deaths were lower than normal early on. If I fiddle around a bit with the time periods I use for excess death, to avoid the pre-pandemic period, then I can get very close to 69,000 excess deaths so far. But its not possible for me to account for everything, including less deaths of various sorts than normal due to lockdown, reduced economic activity, reduced pollution etc. I know people were often looking for more deaths of other sorts due to lockdown, and there may have been some of those, but the documents from experts trying to predict this stuff thought there would initially be a decrease in non-covid deaths rather than an increase, since thats what happens at the start of recessions etc, less death not more. Longer term the economic consequences make that flip eventually. And then there is also the picture with people not seeking or receiving the same medical care they would have without the pandemic.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom