So this is referring back to the discussion you had with MR a few days ago - I see. I'll leave it to you guysOriginally Posted by Mike T
I'd only say I'm concerned about the interpretation of the number of cases being detected. I'm in one of the areas that was identified as having a spike.
That supposed spike was way back in early July and we got the testing teams in, so they found more and it led to local restrictions as we know.
But there has been no resulting hospitalisation and the COVID ward is empty, and it covers the whole of East Lancs which have also had enhanced measures. Some areas along the M65 are still under those measures.
In other areas and other countries where they have also identified spikes the hospitals also seem unaffected.
In England, the number of COVID patients in hospital have gone from
1/4 11540 (Peaked 17172 on 12/4)
1/5 10970
1/6 5358
1/7 2289
1/8 809
1/9 472
So are these spikes really genuine, active, live COVID infections, or are they detecting residual viral fragments from early in the pandemic?
Richard Taylor
"William Tell could take an apple off your head. Taylor could take out a processed pea."
Sid Waddell
For those who like graphs, and comparing one country with another, this is one to look at. Well found, Dave
I thought I'd do a bit of number crunching looking at the Government's site.
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
I've looked at the averages of the last six weeks data for:
- Number of cases
- Number of tests processed (pillar 1 and pillar 2)
- Cases as a percentage of tests processed
- Number of hospital admissions for covid
- Number of people with covid in hospital
- Number of people on a ventilator
- Number of covid deaths
The most recent end week date is 2nd September since this is the last date that every category is available. I've only taken England rather than the UK as a whole since the Scottish figures are skewed for number of people in hospital. Apparently they include everybody who has ever had a test for covid regardless of whether they still have it. But they don't do that for their admission figures.
02-Sep-20 - 1,180 - 135,986 - 0.87% - 56 - 451 - 56 - 6
26-Aug-20 - 948 - 138,249 - 0.69% - 45 - 484 - 63 - 9
19-Aug-20 - 935 - 138,598 - 0.67% - 50 - 569 - 65 - 9
12-Aug-20 - 850 - 129,070 - 0.66% - 58 - 611 - 60 - 10
05-Aug-20 - 757 - 119,024 - 0.64% - 61 - 779 - 68 - 8
29-Jul-20 - 669 - 104,955 - 0.64% - 78 - 895 - 84 - 17
It seems pretty clear that the case numbers detected are going up even when taking account of the increased testing. But every other category is still going the right way, either dropping or stable. Possible explanations that have been suggested for this apparent contradiction are:
- Mainly young people being infected, who are less prone to the disease.
- Social distancing has meant the viral load people are getting has fallen enabling the immune system to more easily fight off the virus. So if you come into contact with somebody with the virus you may be less close to them than in the past.
- The virus test is so sensitive it is picking up fragments of old infections. More on this here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54000629
Whatever the reason, it is when hospital admissions start picking up that we should start getting more concerned rather than increased case detection numbers.
Hadn't noticed you'd post this when I did mine - some similar points.So this is referring back to the discussion you had with MR a few days ago - I see. I'll leave it to you guys
I'd only say I'm concerned about the interpretation of the number of cases being detected. I'm in one of the areas that was identified as having a spike.
That supposed spike was way back in early July and we got the testing teams in, so they found more and it led to local restrictions as we know.
But there has been no resulting hospitalisation and the COVID ward is empty, and it covers the whole of East Lancs which have also had enhanced measures. Some areas along the M65 are still under those measures.
In other areas and other countries where they have also identified spikes the hospitals also seem unaffected.
In England, the number of COVID patients in hospital have gone from
1/4 11540 (Peaked 17172 on 12/4)
1/5 10970
1/6 5358
1/7 2289
1/8 809
1/9 472
So are these spikes really genuine, active, live COVID infections, or are they detecting residual viral fragments from early in the pandemic?
I recall someone being interviewed at an early stage in all this who said one of two things would probably happen. 1) The virus would mutate and become even more serious,or 2) It would mutate and become less serious.
I wonder if in light of much reduced hospital admissions and deaths the 2nd is happening? I appreciate that many of the new cases involve younger people but that could be down to easing in lockdown or a change in the virus?
The old method assumes every person who gets infected with the virus eventually dies of it - an infection fatality rate of 100%. This method of counting is now completely discredited (although strangely not by you). So I suspect that this might be the reason the figure is hard to find.
The old method also includes those who died of Covid beyond 28 days - of whom there seem to be plenty. Funny how it was an acceptable counting method for so long. It is not perfect, but continuing to use/display it lets us compare the numbers since counting began. When they changed the counting method they did say both numbers would be shown - but the old method has quietly become harder and harder to find. A bit like getting a test in some parts of the country - harder and harder to do.
From my reading, if you allow for the age of those currently being infected, there is not a lot left to explain. Risk of infection/death at 65 is 10 times that at 45, which is 10 times that at 25. And the risk at 85 is 10 times that at 65. So a very steep increase with age. Those at high risk of exposure and of dying died early; we still have plenty who are at high risk of dying, but they are mainly able to socially distance/isolate/quarantine, so the new cases are much younger than before. There has also been some improvement in treatment - delaying ventilation, steroids, avoiding hydroxychlororquine. There is a mutation that some think is more infectious but less lethal, but it has been around for months, and it is not taking over from the other variant. The different age profile seems to be the main thing.
I'd make that very concerned - by then we will be in real trouble - that is the problem - the let's wait and see approach is so often followed by dramatic increases in the really ill.
