COVID-19 — Coronavirus

Status
Not open for further replies.
GM SCOREBOARD:

Total cases 3 weeks v 2 wks v last week v today:- 2587 v 1150 v 853 v 652 today - shows the clear fall.



Manchester 152 – down from 153. Total cases 31, 454. Weekly 972. Back sub 1000. Pop score up 27 to 5689. Weekly Pop down 6 to 175.

Bolton 80 – down from 87. Total cases 15, 307. Weekly 543, Pop score up 28 to 5323. Weekly Pop down 2 to 189.

Wigan 67 – down from 121. Matches lowest score since August. Total cases 16, 765. Weekly 620.. Pop score up 20 to 5101. Weekly Pop down 13 to 189. Almost all of GM now have pop scores sub 200. Much as I am OK with it tier 3 is not justified on these falling numbers.

Oldham 65- up from 56. Total cases 14, 957. Weekly 460, Pop score up 27 to 6308. Weekly Pop up 1 to 194.

Rochdale 61 - down from 96. Total cases 12, 853. Weekly 507. Pop score up 27 to 5779. Weekly Pop down a massive 39 to 228. And GM is well on the way to be entirely sub 200 weekly Pop scores.

Bury 59 – down from 92. Total cases 9920. Weekly 425. Pop score up 31 – most in GM today - to 5194. Weekly Pop stays at 222. Bury having the most difficult time in GM right now for some reason.

Stockport 58 – up from 57. Total cases 10, 672. Weekly 359. Pop score up 20 to 3637. Weekly Pop up 1 to 122. (Had 56 cases this day last week is why the rise!) Struggling to get below this level. Costing it the GM lead over Trafford in both Pop measures very soon. Whilst well down like everywhere should be doing better than it is.

Tameside 42 – down from 59. Total cases 10, 555. Weekly 322. Pop score up 18 to 4660. Weekly Pop down 8 to 142. Tameside has gone the other way and is doing much better than it was.

Salford 40 – down from 61. Total cases 13, 493. Weekly 358. Pop score up 15 to 5213. Weekly Pop down 7 to 138. The success of Salford is the big story that most have missed. From hundreds of cases a day to now less in a week almost than they had in just one day 3 weeks or so back. This is what Salford did in the Summer after wave 1 and why it was before August the borough with the lowest Pop Score in GM – not Stockport – let alone Trafford – now in pole position to take it over. They too might have to keep an eye on this city under the radar progress.

Trafford 28– up from 25. Best in GM as ever. Three weeks of sub 100 numbers. Total cases 8790. Weekly 231. Clear leader still. Pop score up 11 to 3703. Lowest in GM as usual and cut the gap to Stockport by 9 for overall Pop score to just 66. Will be top before Christmas easily at this rate. Weekly Pop down 5 to 97 the first GM borough to drop under 100 in 3 months, But Stockport not at the races with them doing so 24 hours later as was true then.

I think this is more evidence of how that time when Stockport took the exclusion from the GM restrictions in late Summer when Trafford declined the offer made a lasting difference.

But I suspect they will make the same mistake if offered an out from tier 3. Hopefully Trafford have the same sense as they did then.
 
For andyhinch - Cheshire East 60 cases - down from 81. Total cases 9175. Pop score up 15 to 2388. Weekly Pop down to 122 - exactly the same as Stockport for GM comparison.
 
Blimey, all kicking off politically.

EU now claiming the UK have not analysed all the data:

t.co

EU criticises 'hasty' UK approval of COVID-19 vaccine

The European Union criticised Britain's rapid approval of Pfizer and BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine on Wednesday, saying its own procedure was more thorough, after Britain became the first western country to endorse a COVID-19 shot.
t.co t.co

And Fauci over in the US with a quite remarkable claim that the UK hasn't done it safely:



Ruffled feathers this, hasn't it.
 
Just realised I did not get round to the England hospital deaths by date today as I had lots of phone calls. So just for completeness here it is.

2 Dec adds 48 = 48 after 1 day (Last wk 63 added = 63)

1 Dec adds 141 = 196 after 2 days (Last wk 154 added = 210)

30 Nov adds 40 = 216 after 3 days (Last wk 58 added = 253)

29 Nov adds 28 = 286 after 4 days (Last wk 28 added = 292)

28 Nov adds 14 = 281 after 5 days (Last wk 21 added = 236)

Every day bar one adds less than the equivalent day last week, with the other the same as last week, And all bar 28 Nov has a lower total than then.

This is very good signs that we might have peaked the deaths in this wave finally. Though things could change.

Other add ons sees these dates change: 27 Nov now 264, 26 Nov now 277, 25 Nov now 309, 24 Nov now 297, 22 Nov now 308.

The peak remains 317 on 18 November.
 
Healdplace said:
Just realised I did not get round to the England hospital deaths by date today as I had lots of phone calls. So just for completeness here it is.

2 Dec adds 48 = 48 after 1 day (Last wk 63 added = 63)

1 Dec adds 141 = 196 after 2 days (Last wk 154 added = 210)

30 Nov adds 40 = 216 after 3 days (Last wk 58 added = 253)

29 Nov adds 28 = 286 after 4 days (Last wk 28 added = 292)

28 Nov adds 14 = 281 after 5 days (Last wk 21 added = 236)

Every day bar one adds less than the equivalent day last week, with the other the same as last week, And all bar 28 Nov has a lower total than then.

This is very good signs that we might have peaked the deaths in this wave finally. Though things could change.

Other add ons sees these dates change: 27 Nov now 264, 26 Nov now 277, 25 Nov now 309, 24 Nov now 297, 22 Nov now 308.

The peak remains 317 on 18 November.
Click to expand...
Does this mean (forgive me I've never got my head round this one) that the highest number of deaths on a particular day is really 317 ?

If so how do we explain the very high numbers on some days ?

Begs the question why this is not reported rather than "daily deaths" which clearly they aren't.
 
twosips said:
Blimey, all kicking off politically.

EU now claiming the UK have not analysed all the data:

t.co

EU criticises 'hasty' UK approval of COVID-19 vaccine

The European Union criticised Britain's rapid approval of Pfizer and BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine on Wednesday, saying its own procedure was more thorough, after Britain became the first western country to endorse a COVID-19 shot.
t.co t.co

And Fauci over in the US with a quite remarkable claim that the UK hasn't done it safely:



Ruffled feathers this, hasn't it.
Click to expand...

It’s laughable, as they will all approve it anyway.
 
Someone on Twitter has plotted the all settings deaths per day versus the press conference on 31 October which created the lockdown in the country that has just ended.

On that day England deaths were averaging around 240. The different models shown then predicted really scary numbers if we did not act

The Cambridge study had us by now at 4000 a day. Imperial - the lowest - had us at 1440 or so a day. The other two were just above or below 1500 a day.

When lockdown came in on 5 Nov the average was around 270 a day. The 9 Nov peak was around 400. But it flattened off throughout the lockdown up to 18 Nov with a peak of around 420 (which coincides with what is still the hospital only peak of 317).

Since then the England average has carried on falling to around 320. That is 5 days ago. As data is not really close to fixed after that with add ons occurring daily.

This data fits the hospital only data I report and seems to support that 18 Nov is indeed the apparent peak of the second wave. And we may be on a slow fall like in the first wave from here on.

Question is will the events of the next month and the ending of lockdown putside tier 3 areas create a third wave in January.

Let us hope not. But it must be a possibility.

Though if it happens I have a feeling the focus will be further south and the north might be the one that escapes more lightly as they did in this second wave. Up to now at least.

All this is no more than a guess I should add.
 
twosips said:
Blimey, all kicking off politically.

EU now claiming the UK have not analysed all the data:

t.co

EU criticises 'hasty' UK approval of COVID-19 vaccine

The European Union criticised Britain's rapid approval of Pfizer and BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine on Wednesday, saying its own procedure was more thorough, after Britain became the first western country to endorse a COVID-19 shot.
t.co t.co

And Fauci over in the US with a quite remarkable claim that the UK hasn't done it safely:



Ruffled feathers this, hasn't it.
Click to expand...

Difference being that the UK approval comes with the caveat that each and every batch must be reviewed by the MHRA before being used. You only register one progress for making the stuff. It's only registered at so many sites and it's not like you can or would change the way it's made anyway. If anything having to have each batch reviewed individually should increase confidence.

The rolling review gives the advantage of looking at some of the modules (such as S3.2 Control of Impurities) ahead of trial completion. Those impurities aren't going to change from what's predicted by the models and following the science.

Structure practically the same across all territories in the world, hence to call our review process bad is to call anyone else's review process bad.

Many of the granules relate to things that are done far before clinical trials occur and as such in this case the various Health Authorities have agreed to facilitate an early review by looking at them before the clinical trials concluded.

I think we can all agree you don't need to taste the cake to see the ingredients are correct.

Used to like Fauci, if he's actually said that verbatim then he's gone down a great many pegs in my opinion.
 
cleavers said:
Does this mean (forgive me I've never got my head round this one) that the highest number of deaths on a particular day is really 317 ?

If so how do we explain the very high numbers on some days ?

Begs the question why this is not reported rather than "daily deaths" which clearly they aren't.
Click to expand...

In terms of England hospital deaths only - yes. That is the highest in this second wave at the moment. Numbers since have been falling a little and there is no serious threat to any date going higher. But the numbers from days behind are not low enough to suggest another day will not surpass that one.

The numbers you see cited on TV are UK numbers not just England (though England is by far the biggest part of them).

It also includes 'out of hospital' deaths. N Ireland, Scotland and Wales give BOTH together (hospital and other places - such as care homes or in your own home or under the wheels of a bus if you have Covid too).

The out of hospital England data is added separately.

So every day ( post the three nations (all settings) deaths between about 12.30 and 2.30, The England hospital deaths come in somewhere in the middle of that period. So we then have a figure of everything bar the England out of hospital number for the day by around 3 pm. The out of hospital data for England then gets posted around 4 to 5 pm on the government site. But only as part of a total figure which IS the total we had from the other sources before 4 pm plus the out of hospital England deaths.

That final number is the one the evening news use and the press the next day cite as it is the final total .

But it is not even that simple. As this all settings number simply describes the number of deaths from all the above sources REPORTED that day. It often gets presented by the media as the number who died the day before as it is ascribed to that date.

But in reality - as you see from my England hospital day to day report above only 48 of the 414 deaths reported today as from yesterday occurred yesterday. The others are days or weeks (sometimes even months) old.

That is why I do this daily report on the numbers who died on the actual date.

It is the only way you can actually see if they are rising or falling. But because the add ons can trickle in for weeks it is not really anything like a firm number for any date until at minimum 5 - 7 days after the actual day by when the majority of deaths for that date will be reported.

It is complicated!
 
03 March 2002 said:
Difference being that the UK approval comes with the caveat that each and every batch must be reviewed by the MHRA before being used. You only register one progress for making the stuff. It's only registered at so many sites and it's not like you can or would change the way it's made anyway. If anything having to have each batch reviewed individually should increase confidence.

The rolling review gives the advantage of looking at some of the modules (such as S3.2 Control of Impurities) ahead of trial completion. Those impurities aren't going to change from what's predicted by the models and following the science.

Structure practically the same across all territories in the world, hence to call our review process bad is to call anyone else's review process bad.

Many of the granules relate to things that are done far before clinical trials occur and as such in this case the various Health Authorities have agreed to facilitate an early review by looking at them before the clinical trials concluded.

I think we can all agree you don't need to taste the cake to see the ingredients are correct.

Used to like Fauci, if he's actually said that verbatim then he's gone down a great many pegs in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Dead interesting, cheers once again.
 
twosips said:
Blimey, all kicking off politically.

EU now claiming the UK have not analysed all the data:

t.co

EU criticises 'hasty' UK approval of COVID-19 vaccine

The European Union criticised Britain's rapid approval of Pfizer and BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine on Wednesday, saying its own procedure was more thorough, after Britain became the first western country to endorse a COVID-19 shot.
t.co t.co

And Fauci over in the US with a quite remarkable claim that the UK hasn't done it safely:



Ruffled feathers this, hasn't it.
Click to expand...

The governments bragging approach and that utter fucking imbecile Williamson’s actions have now added fuel to the fire of conspiracy cunts.

They could have kept quiet and likely not had these accusations by the EU and that yank.

Fucking morons.
 
Take 7 days ago today: - 26 November. Last Thursday.

On that date Scotland reported 51, Wales 28 and N Ireland 8. Those 87 deaths were ALL the deaths collated on the day before (25 Nov) from those 3 countries in every setting. Not just hospitals.

England hospitals then reported 351 deaths IN hospital - making a total of 438.

Later the 351 England hospital deaths became 411. This was by adding on deaths reported by care homes etc and also from time to time removing a few of the 351 rejected because they do not meet the strict criteria of testing positive within 28 days of death for instance.

So as together the 87 all settings plus the the 411 = 498.

This is what shows now as the UK death total for 26 November (though really the day before as deaths on that date will not turn up until the next day, of course!).

However, if you look now at how many people ACTUALLY died with Covid for either of these two dates neither is 498.

The 25th (the date it really refers to) has a UK covid death number now of 449. And the date the 498 is cited for by the media - last Thursday - has just 380.

They may well grow by a few over coming weeks but almost certainly neither will be near to 498 now after a week of add oms.

So creating any kind of path of how the death numbers are moving is much more complicated than it seems from that number cited on TV every evening.
 
Healdplace said:
The numbers you see cited on TV are UK numbers not just England (though England is by far the biggest part of them).
Click to expand...
Sorry I hadn't read it carefully enough, I thought it was the UK number.

Healdplace said:
It is the only way you can actually see if they are rising or falling. But because the add ons can trickle in for weeks it is not really anything like a firm number for any date until at minimum 5 - 7 days after the actual day by when the majority of deaths for that date will be reported.
Click to expand...
Which in the end is all we want to see.
Healdplace said:
It is complicated!
Click to expand...
Yes far too complicated, it's little wonder half the country no longer any notice. I think we all want to see less complicated numbers so we can gauge where we really are.

Thanks again for all you do, I've got a bit out of the habit of following it all due to the complication, and the sheer array of numbers published.

I think it's called covid fatigue.
 
Ban-jani said:
The governments bragging approach and that utter fucking imbecile Williamson’s actions have now added fuel to the fire of conspiracy cunts.

They could have kept quiet and likely not had these accusations by the EU and that yank.

Fucking morons.
Click to expand...
As much as I’ve been critical of the government throughout this pandemic, with regards to this issue I’m pretty sure Williamson’s comments - although unhelpful - came after the US and EU gobbed off that the UK cut corners in getting the Pfizer vaccine approved. I said this morning that they should provide evidence of any corner cutting rather than mouthing off. My guess is that Williamson’s comments are in response to what has been thrown our way. Bunch of bitter salty cunts should be looking at getting their own approval stamp on the vaccine.
 
03 March 2002 said:
Difference being that the UK approval comes with the caveat that each and every batch must be reviewed by the MHRA before being used. You only register one progress for making the stuff. It's only registered at so many sites and it's not like you can or would change the way it's made anyway. If anything having to have each batch reviewed individually should increase confidence.

The rolling review gives the advantage of looking at some of the modules (such as S3.2 Control of Impurities) ahead of trial completion. Those impurities aren't going to change from what's predicted by the models and following the science.

Structure practically the same across all territories in the world, hence to call our review process bad is to call anyone else's review process bad.

Many of the granules relate to things that are done far before clinical trials occur and as such in this case the various Health Authorities have agreed to facilitate an early review by looking at them before the clinical trials concluded.

I think we can all agree you don't need to taste the cake to see the ingredients are correct.

Used to like Fauci, if he's actually said that verbatim then he's gone down a great many pegs in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Might already have been mentioned, infact probably has, but good chance he's just trying to improve the level of uptake in US given there's reportedly more skepticism there than over here. If he can publicise how stringent their checks have been, then criticising other countries approach might be a small price to pay. Hopefully it doesn't hinder the confidence levels here but could have good effect over across the pond? Just thinking out loud tbh.
 
M18CTID said:
As much as I’ve been critical of the government throughout this pandemic, with regards to this issue I’m pretty sure Williamson’s comments - although unhelpful - came after the US and EU gobbed off that the UK cut corners in getting the Pfizer vaccine approved. I said this morning that they should provide evidence of any corner cutting rather than mouthing off. My guess is that Williamson’s comments are in response to what has been thrown our way. Bunch of bitter salty cunts should be looking at getting their own approval stamp on the vaccine.
Click to expand...
They did, but it's about time some of our lot "engaged brain", considering how badly we've actually done, trying to "point score" is just idiotic and unhelpful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top