advertisement


Coronavirus - the new strain XX

Status
Not open for further replies.
mandryka said:
Yes -- and that's why everyone says R is about 1.
Click to expand...

On average - case numbers are being driven by the hotspots again so the overall R isn't necessarily a good measure just now. Hospital numbers have been rising gently for a little while amid the reporting fluctuations so we can assume that cases were following a similar pattern a couple of weeks behind.
 
The weekly surveillance report

Overall case rates remained stable in week 32. Case rates increased slightly in most age groups and in some regions and ethnic groups. Overall Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 positivity remained stable compared to the previous week.

The number of reported acute respiratory incidents in the past week remained similar to the previous week.

COVID-19 hospitalisations remained stable in week 32.

The map is on page 14 highlighting the worst areas (the usual suspects plus popular holiday areas e.g. in Devon and Cornwall)

Outbreaks remain high in care home settings 247/472
 
mandryka said:
You're forgetting the people with covid who don't get a PCR test.
Click to expand...

How do they know they have Covid if they don't get a PCR test? How do we know they have Covid if they don't know they have Covid because they didn't get a PCR test done?

In other words we, me, you and the dog next door determine our take on the situation based on the current data which is itself predicated on proving positive by means of a PCR test which is then incorporated into the governments stats and displayed on the GOV.UK website for dweebs and CEVs such as myself to read and then argue about on internet forums.
 
gavreid said:
The weekly surveillance report

Overall case rates remained stable in week 32. Case rates increased slightly in most age groups and in some regions and ethnic groups. Overall Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 positivity remained stable compared to the previous week.

The number of reported acute respiratory incidents in the past week remained similar to the previous week.

COVID-19 hospitalisations remained stable in week 32.

The map is on page 14 highlighting the worst areas (the usual suspects plus popular holiday areas e.g. in Devon and Cornwall)

Outbreaks remain high in care home settings 247/472
Click to expand...

I think of particular interest is the chart on Page 24 showing location of incidents by setting. Still high in care homes, but restaurants is clearly a problem (about twice the figure for workplace). I'm certainly not using restaurants at present, nor bars. I don't really understand just why so many people are willing to roll the dice on that one. Given the apparent waning of protection from vaccination, it's very clear that C19 is a major problem now and for the foreseeable future. Not exactly breaking news to this forum, but the wider population is definitely of the opinion that it's all over.
 
Spraggons Den said:
How do they know they have Covid if they don't get a PCR test? How do we know they have had Covid if they don't know they have had Covid?
Click to expand...


ONS do reports of their best estimate of covid cases in the UK, they take PCR tests form a large random sample of people, and extrapolate from the data in all sorts of clever mathematical ways.

Here's the most recent, which goes to w/e August 7th. If you look at Table 1 you'll see their estimates for the number of people in England with COVID. If you go to the .gov.uk dashboard you'll see the number of positive PCR tests in England for that week is less.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey, UK - Office for National Statistics


(It's interesting that the pundits haven't taken this enormous gap between ONS and .gov.uk up. I think it's newsworthy.)
 
simon g said:
Given the apparent waning of protection from vaccination, it's very clear that C19 is a major problem now and for the foreseeable future. Not exactly breaking news to this forum, but the wider population is definitely of the opinion that it's all over.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how much waning is a problem at the moment but we are seeing that protection is less with age. I fully agree, we're nowhere near the edge of the woods yet

36 572 cases today, 113 deaths and 832 admissions - as I observed yesterday, hospitalisations are back to matching the July peak (and seem to be accelerating.)
 
Spraggons Den said:
How do they know they have Covid if they don't get a PCR test? How do we know they have Covid if they don't know they have Covid because they didn't get a PCR test done?

In other words we, me, you and the dog next door determine our take on the situation based on the current data which is itself predicated on proving positive by means of a PCR test which is then incorporated into the governments stats and displayed on the GOV.UK website for dweebs and CEVs such as myself to read and then argue about on internet forums.
Click to expand...
This misses the point, a bit though. Cases of Covid constitute opportunities to spread the virus. So if somebody is unknowingly Covid-positive, they may contribute to ongoing spread, and to the numbers of hospitalisations and deaths. But they’re not counted, so the figures in relation to the ratio of cases to hospitalisations/deaths, is skewed. In some ways, I suppose, it is skewed on the side of safety inasmuch as it suggests the virus is more infectious and virulent than it might actually be.
 
On the subject of waning protection from vaccination, even if being jabbed doesn’t mean you won’t get Delta, it might still be the case that any infection is much less likely to put you in hospital, or worse. I don’t think we have reliable figures or trends on that, yet?
 
Yes, I get that but, apart from the first wave when there was no testing regime in place, we have at least been able to compare apples with apples by using the daily case numbers (of people who have tested positive by means of a PCR test) and in full knowledge that the actual number is significantly more due to asymptomatics, peolple who mistake Covid for a cold, people who cant be arsed etc but that there is no accurate way of quantifying this number. For sure the ONS have a go at this and I am one of their victims who has snot and blood taken once a month (sperm next) but their resulting data is extrapolated and not as useful as the daily case numbers for tracking the disease imho.
 
Spraggons Den said:
For sure the ONS have a go at this and I am one of their victims who has snot and blood taken once a month (sperm next) but their resulting data is extrapolated and not as useful as the daily case numbers for tracking the disease imho.
Click to expand...

I think ONS is a more accurate estimate of incidence.
 
Seanm said:
You are getting extremely thin-skinned, if I may say. The advice seemed necessary because you seemed to be pouncing on a response to a Tweet as if it invalidated the point being responded to. Not how you get the most out of that kind of exchange.
Click to expand...

You may not say because it isn't true (and serves as reminder why I said I wasn't going to engage any more) - oh and the last time I pounced on anything was a slip catch in a cricket match about 25 years ago.

You present a twitter thread as a good source of expert information which happens to support your narrative. I gently point out that one of the posts has a scientific misunderstanding albeit from someone with medical credentials, which I then put into context. I instantly become guilty of over-interpretation, of being thin-skinned and pouncing on stuff. Not true, not true, not true.

Just trying to help people on here to tiptoe through a mass of confusion...
 
IanW said:
I don't know what background / expertise you have so you would need to decide who would count as experts for you.

But I would suggest Debs (a Virologist) and hc25036 (a Biochemist) would be a good starting point.
Click to expand...

A virologist will do, thank you.
So we have one.
Not sure what difference my background makes though.
 
Personally I think all this emphasis on experts is sad. Intellectuals are much deeper. Not that I want to make any claims in that direction for myself . . .
 
mandryka said:
Personally I think all this emphasis on experts is sad. Intellectuals are much deeper. Not that I want to make any claims in that direction for myself . . .
Click to expand...
You use whatever term you want, I am looking for people to post who actually have useful content, that helps inform others, which might be termed as intellectual or expert.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top