Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus - worldwide breaking news, discussion, stats, updates and more

They have error bars showing the confidence interval, and the number of samples involved. This provides some sense of what they think in terms of reliability of different results, ie an attempt to quantify the sort of thing you are talking about.

Well, they used to have the numbers involved in that earlier report, but the format of the age-based antibody reporting graph has changed, this is the latest one (still has error bars but they can be hard to see clearly):

View attachment 231910

from https://assets.publishing.service.g...COVID19_Surveillance_Report_week_39_FINAL.pdf

The error bars are longer for the oldest age group but not by enough to erase my original point.

I'm sure - but honestly it really will almost all be the early 70s. It looks like a pretty rigourous study but they can't change the initial self-selecting nature of the cohort.
 
Indeed it has limits, like all studies. Returning to the original context of why this even came up, I never did get an answer to my question, which is a shame as I wanted to look at the data behind the claim. I think I may have also misread the claim back when I was responding to it, as the evidence I offered only deals with what proportion of different age groups in the population have already been exposed to infection, and doesnt say anything about levels of asymptomatic cases by age.

I certainly think I have heard anecdotal evidence about the number of older people, such as care home residents, who havent displayed the most obvious covid-19 symptoms but have had a positive test. But I think whatever it was I read about this was based on specific carehome outbreaks and a lot of the data was from testing for current infection, rather than antibodies.

I am envious of some countries that have done mass antibody testing, the data they end up with is interesting, and some of what it shows might provide clues that apply everywhere. But in some other respects such studies are of limited use for the UK because the nature of which parts of populations that got infected may vary wildly so far between UK locations and, for example, New York. But then their studies have their own limitations too.
 
Indeed it has limits, like all studies. Returning to the original context of why this even came up, I never did get an answer to my question, which is a shame as I wanted to look at the data behind the claim. I think I may have also misread the claim back when I was responding to it, as the evidence I offered only deals with what proportion of different age groups in the population have already been exposed to infection, and doesnt say anything about levels of asymptomatic cases by age.

I certainly think I have heard anecdotal evidence about the number of older people, such as care home residents, who havent displayed the most obvious covid-19 symptoms but have had a positive test. But I think whatever it was I read about this was based on specific carehome outbreaks and a lot of the data was from testing for current infection, rather than antibodies.

I am envious of some countries that have done mass antibody testing, the data they end up with is interesting, and some of what it shows might provide clues that apply everywhere. But in some other respects such studies are of limited use for the UK because the nature of which parts of populations that got infected may vary wildly so far between UK locations and, for example, New York. But then their studies have their own limitations too.

Ah, re the bit I bolded - that makes the age differences easily understandable, then. Even healthy over-70s are less likely to be going to work, school, uni, etc, the places where they might be exposed to the virus, plus obviously during lockdown too.

It would be interesting to see a cite for the original claim. I guess it could theoretically be true - less active immune systems are more likely to be asymptomatic.

Being on low-dose chemo drugs for years has meant that I basically never get a cold. I will presumably have cold viruses in my system sometimes (especially since I was actually living with three people who were going into big disease-spreading settings) but my body never tried to fight them, so I didn't get any symptoms. I've always wondered if that means there's some underlying damage being done, but never been able to find an answer to that.

Care home residents aren't going to be in the same cohort as over-70s who can give blood, of course.
 
Ah, re the bit I bolded - that makes the age differences easily understandable, then. Even healthy over-70s are less likely to be going to work, school, uni, etc, the places where they might be exposed to the virus, plus obviously during lockdown too.

Yeah theres quite a lot of data that ends up telling us things we already thought we knew about human behaviour rather than about the virus.

It would be interesting to see a cite for the original claim. I guess it could theoretically be true - less active immune systems are more likely to be asymptomatic.

I suppose we'd also have to allow for the possibility that more older people also have trouble noticing and communicating certain symptoms that were actually still there and that they would have recognised and talked about when they were younger.

Being on low-dose chemo drugs for years has meant that I basically never get a cold. I will presumably have cold viruses in my system sometimes (especially since I was actually living with three people who were going into big disease-spreading settings) but my body never tried to fight them, so I didn't get any symptoms. I've always wondered if that means there's some underlying damage being done, but never been able to find an answer to that.

Annoying isnt it? Whenever I've tried to research health stuff, virus stuff, pandemic stuff etc in the past, one of the main conclusions I reach is how little we know. The number of obvious questions it can be hard to even find people asking, let alone answering, can be a bit depressing.

I suppose if I were forced to make a quick guess about what you describe, I'd suggest your body is still fighting the colds off but on a different front, some parts of the immune system that dont generate the vlassic cold symptoms. Its either that or the virus within you is self-limited by some other means, or some other balance is changed by the drugs, or the immune system is moderated by the drug but not to the point that it cant fight the virus. Maybe the virus just takes a bit longer to clear from your system, I suppose thats one of the things to look at in a study, they could look at whether you shed more virus than average or for longer periods of time than average.
 
Yeah theres quite a lot of data that ends up telling us things we already thought we knew about human behaviour rather than about the virus.



I suppose we'd also have to allow for the possibility that more older people also have trouble noticing and communicating certain symptoms that were actually still there and that they would have recognised and talked about when they were younger.

Very true. I don't use the Zoe app because my regular symptoms overlap with covid so much that it would be pointless.

Annoying isnt it? Whenever I've tried to research health stuff, virus stuff, pandemic stuff etc in the past, one of the main conclusions I reach is how little we know. The number of obvious questions it can be hard to even find people asking, let alone answering, can be a bit depressing.

I suppose if I were forced to make a quick guess about what you describe, I'd suggest your body is still fighting the colds off but on a different front, some parts of the immune system that dont generate the vlassic cold symptoms. Its either that or the virus within you is self-limited by some other means, or some other balance is changed by the drugs, or the immune system is moderated by the drug but not to the point that it cant fight the virus. Maybe the virus just takes a bit longer to clear from your system, I suppose thats one of the things to look at in a study, they could look at whether you shed more virus than average or for longer periods of time than average.

It's extra interesting because having a depressed immune system is supposed to be riskier, but presumably that only applies to much higher doses of chemo?
 
It's extra interesting because having a depressed immune system is supposed to be riskier, but presumably that only applies to much higher doses of chemo?

If I tried to say more I would be guilty of not knowing what I was talking about at all. Everything fascinates me but I dont think I have the headspace to explore most other health topics during this pandemic. And then when I do I tend to want to know specific drugs names so I can zoom in on specifics and check whether they have the first clue how the drug actually works in detail.
 
Things are getting grim in France. :(

France will face a months-long coronavirus epidemic that will overwhelm its health system if something does not change, one of the country's top medical figures warned Sunday.


"The second wave is arriving faster than we thought," Patrick Bouet, head of the National Council of the Order of Doctors, told the weekly Journal du Dimanche.
Fresh restrictions to slow the spread of the disease in the country's worst-hit areas, including the Mediterranean city of Marseille and the Paris region, have run into local resistance.
The national & local governments seem to be out of step, slowing down getting restrictions in place, as new cases & hospital admissions are shooting up, and the average daily death total has doubled in the last week.
France's health service on Saturday recorded 14,412 new cases over the previous 24 hours -- slightly lower than the record 16,000 registered on both Thursday and Friday.

But over the last seven days, 4,102 people have been hospitalised, 763 of whom are being treated in intensive care.

Edit for correct link -

 
Last edited:
Spain has the same problem with regional governments out of step with the national one, with the biggest problem being Madrid, which has reported almost 750 new cases per 100k, over the last 2 weeks, by far the highest in Europe.

As of Friday, the Madrid region had the highest incidence rate of Covid-19 in Spain, with a cumulative 746.2 new cases per 100,000 people over the past 14 days, according to the El Pais newspaper. Spain overall has a rate of about 320, according to the European CDC.

With the situation worsening, the Spanish government and regional authorities in Madrid disagree on what action is required.

Madrid's regional government has chosen not to put the entire city and the surrounding areas under lockdown, but on Friday said it would extend restrictions on movement to another eight districts, affecting about a million people. Restrictions have now been imposed on 45 areas in some of Madrid's poorer districts, leaving residents there feeling abandoned, stigmatised and worried about the loss of income, Reuters news agency reports.

However, the Spanish government has argued that these restrictions are not sufficient, recommending an end to all unnecessary movement across the city, among other measures.

Mr Illa called on regional officials to put political considerations aside and act on the science.

"I want to repeat the call for the measures [in Madrid] to be reviewed, to listen to the science. To leave politics in the background. To put the health of citizens first," Mr Illa said.

 
This is an interesting read about how Italy have so far escaped the massive increases in cases seen elsewhere in Europe, and is well worth reading in full.

ROME: Coronavirus pandemic struck Italy first among the Western countries, but now it is an outlier in Europe with limited new cases compared with neighbours.

The question is why, and will it last?

While France reported a record 16,096 new COVID-19 infections on Thursday and Spain over 10,000, Italy's number has for weeks remained below 2,000.

It has carried out fewer tests — some 120,000 per day, versus France's 180,000 — but not enough to explain the sharp difference in new infections.

That despite British Prime Minister Boris Johnson's suggestion that infections were higher in his country than in Italy or Germany because the British were "freedom-loving".

Italian President Sergio Matarella shot back that Italians also loved freedom but "we also behave responsibly".

Ouch!

 
I'm glad someone mentioned Italy.

Although I have to say I am very concerned about their testing system, and I will be using some hospital data later to make a point. I dont know how large a point it will be until I've updated my figures.
 
OK I'm going to have to cut some corners for now but hopefully this will still be clear enough.

The impressive thing that Italy managed was in my opinion how low they managed to push their number of hospitalised cases before there was any resurgence.

But when it comes to the current trend, I think the picture is not quite so special, and positive stories about Italy that dont look at hospital data are misplaced.

Frane and Italy number of patients in hospital:

Screenshot 2020-09-27 at 12.50.28.png
Screenshot 2020-09-27 at 12.51.48.png

Although I should say that the trends could diverge at any time, and we might be starting to see this when looking at ICU data. Although I would caution that I think France has some differences in what patients and care their ICU figures actually cover, since their numbers tended to end up double those of other badly affected european countries during the first wave.

Screenshot 2020-09-27 at 12.58.11.png
Screenshot 2020-09-27 at 12.59.06.png
 
I dont have a simple herd immunity threshold in mind.

For many reasons. The starting point for a threshold isnt clear to me (not hard to find different papers talking about 50%, 60%, 70% or even higher or lower) And the percentage will vary depending on how much of a role children play, age-specific contact patterns, how long immunity lasts.

Just one example, there is a theory that if due to behaviours/risky situations/contact patterns etc, its a subset of the population who are driving things, and the immunity levels within that group matters more than the total picture.

Anyway whatever the reality turns out to be, I dont think I would look at population immunity thresholds in terms of the global population, since there will be a lot of variation between nations until the 'end game' and that end game may not be permanent. Also crossing the herd immunity threshold doesnt mean nobody else getting sick any dying, its supposed to largely prevent epidemic-sized outbreaks but not smaller ones, sporadic cases etc.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I know the percentage can be much higher (let alone being infected twice) but 60% is the number I've heard eg needing to be vaccinated for herd immunity to be reached
 
60% is certainly the sort of target they would have in mind based on how contagious they think this virus is (it would be much higher for something with a much higher R like measles).

I probably wont study this side of things more until the immunity/reinfection picture is clearer.
 
France:


"The second wave is arriving faster than we thought," Patrick Bouet, head of the National Council of the Order of Doctors, told the weekly Journal du Dimanche.

Bouet told the paper that warnings delivered this week by Health Minister Olivier Veran had not gone far enough.

"He didn't say that in three to four weeks, if nothing changes, France will face a widespread outbreak across its whole territory, for several long autumn and winter months," Bouet said.

There would be no medical staff available to provide reinforcements, and France's health system would be unable to meet all the demands placed on it, he warned.

The health workers responsible for the spring "miracle" would not be able plug those gaps, he added.

"Many of them are exhausted, traumatised."

And:

over the last seven days, 4,102 people have been hospitalised, 763 of whom are being treated in intensive care.

To compare that figure, the last '7 days admissions' figure I have for England was 1860 for the 7 days up to and including 25th September. I would like to give a UK figure but the methodology and data availability varies between the four nations so I wont.
 
Last edited:
Anecdotes and the limited stuff that is captured by official data suggests that Mexico has suffered hugely in the pandemic so far, one of the worst affected nations, and one that doesnt get as much attention as it should.

This is from the BBC live updates page at 11:25: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-54315280

“When will the final statistics on deaths from Covid-19 be ready? Most likely a few years after the first year of the pandemic,” Assistant Health Secretary Hugo López-Gatell said on Sunday.
Mexico currently has the world's fourth-highest number of coronavirus fatalities, with 76,430 deaths. The country has also registered more than 730,000 cases, according to figures from Johns Hopkins University.
However, Mexico only counts people who died after receiving a positive result for coronavirus and testing figures in the country remain low, the Associated Press news agency reports.
Earlier this month, Amnesty International reported that more health workers had died in Mexico than any other country.
 
Anecdotes and the limited stuff that is captured by official data suggests that Mexico has suffered hugely in the pandemic so far, one of the worst affected nations, and one that doesnt get as much attention as it should.

This is from the BBC live updates page at 11:25: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-54315280
my MIL works in a hospital in Mexico city... I heard it was "bad", but i guess that isn't new information. All schools are still closed there.
 
Back
Top Bottom