COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[ganganvince]

UK version too

UK Coronavirus Tracker

Current and historical data of the Coronavirus outbreak in the UK. Includes breakdowns by region, maps, charts, and more!

www.travellingtabby.com

Yes it was just the Scottish one I had open at the time really easy to read dashboard

 

[twosips]

Was the suggestion from anyone with any credibility or just a random person you know or from social media?

It doesn't make any sense at all, so I presume its from social media.

 

[True_Blue69]

It doesn't make any sense at all, so I presume its from social media.

Reading some of the posts in the last few pages on here, it’s clear that reporting that the virus is suddenly 70% more contagious without any proof has done its job into well and truly scaring everyone into not mixing at Xmas. It’s worked so well there are already another 2 more contagious versions, one has all of 2 cases in the country! You couldn’t make it up.

 

[BlueAnorak]

In which case, being so knowledgeable, you'll be able to provide a citation showing that

How many do you want?
First here is a non sensational news report from Canada - I could of taken a lot more damning newspaper reports:

The Flawed COVID-19 Model That Locked Down Canada | Montreal Economic Institute

Restrictions continue to be gradually eased in Canada, but as there is talk of a second wave, it is more important than ever to question the case for lockdown. This MEI publication provides a critique of Professor Neil Ferguson’s epidemiological model, which led to lockdown in this country.

www.iedm.org

Now a report on the code.

Most Devastating Software Mistake Of All Time. Why Is the Imperial Model Under Criticism?

This whole episode of Neil Ferguson exposes one thing for certain that the data scientists and policymakers can be fooled by randomness and their actions can lead to irreparable outcomes.

analyticsindiamag.com

And a relevant blog post::

Code Review of Ferguson's Model – The Daily Sceptic

by Sue Denim [Please note: a follow-up analysis is now […]

lockdownsceptics.org

And the follow up post:

Second Analysis of Ferguson's Model – The Daily Sceptic

by Sue Denim I’d like to provide a followup to […]

lockdownsceptics.org

Damming comments

Oh and here is the updated model

GitHub - mrc-ide/covid-sim: This is the COVID-19 CovidSim microsimulation model developed by the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis hosted at Imperial College, London.

This is the COVID-19 CovidSim microsimulation model developed by the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis hosted at Imperial College, London. - mrc-ide/covid-sim

github.com

It predicted 500,000 deaths with no intervention - DOUBLE subsequent analytics programs from elsewhere.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Why the fuck are people coming into the country from half way around the world?

Because the government's travel policy - driven by the London elite and chattering classes is a heap of schidt.
We should have banned all air travel to the UK in mid February and never released it.
How to lose all the avantages of being an island.

 

[Keith Moncrieff]

Was the suggestion from anyone with any credibility or just a random person you know or from social media?

Social media is what was once known as ‘a bloke was saying in the pub’

 

[kaz7]

Reading some of the posts in the last few pages on here, it’s clear that reporting that the virus is suddenly 70% more contagious without any proof has done its job into well and truly scaring everyone into not mixing at Xmas. It’s worked so well there are already another 2 more contagious versions, one has all of 2 cases in the country! You couldn’t make it up.

Not the virus, the mutation and yes they do have proof, we all know you are not sticking to the rules

 

[cleavers]

All we heard about what Germany, Germany Germany at the beginning but it’s gone pretty quiet lately. Goes to show that unless you lockdown indefinitely you can’t really escape it.

They went into lockdown about the same time we did in November, and have pretty much been in it ever since, so what's happening there is a worry, and makes you wonder if they also have our (or another) more virulent strain, but haven't said so.

 

[shemnel]

Not the virus, the mutation and yes they do have proof, we all know you are not sticking to the rules

Actually no....i think the latest position is that data and model evidence (crucial difference) points to higher transmission rate, but they are still lacking the hard evidence it actually is.

COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2): information about the new virus variant

The new variant transmits more easily than the previous one but there is no evidence that it is more likely to cause severe disease or mortality.

www.gov.uk

 

[cleavers]

Because the government's travel policy - driven by the London elite and chattering classes is a heap of schidt.
We should have banned all air travel to the UK in mid February and never released it.
How to lose all the avantages of being an island.

As I posted above, nobody on here (unless you work for an airline) knows who is on those planes, many of them will be brits that work abroad, many people work in the chemical, oil, and gas industry in the US and other countries, for companies from here and abroad.

I also know we have military personnel in the US and Canada, who have to use commercial flights, similar story in and around the Gulf.

Should we just tell them "fuck you" you can't come home, and before you say "use military aircraft" there are not nearly enough to go round given the numbers of people in posts around the world, which is why they have use commercial flights, and not to mention the civilian workers abroad.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Reading some of the posts in the last few pages on here, it’s clear that reporting that the virus is suddenly 70% more contagious without any proof has done its job into well and truly scaring everyone into not mixing at Xmas. It’s worked so well there are already another 2 more contagious versions, one has all of 2 cases in the country! You couldn’t make it up.

My god daughter is a nurse and works on an icu covid ward. I can give you her number if you wish so you can give her a call and explain to her that her occupied icu beds in her ward that is at capacity is part of a scare tactic.

The fact is we are where we are at, and we should all be doing our part to get thru this.

 

[True_Blue69]

My god daughter is a nurse and works on an icu covid ward. I can give you her number if you wish so you can give her a call and explain to her that her occupied icu beds in her ward that is at capacity is part of a scare tactic.

The fact is we are where we are at, and we should all be doing our part to get thru this.

Where did I mention ICU beds? If they were saying the virus was a lot less dangerous without any scientific evidence I’m sure people would be questioning it. I was talking only about the new variants that seem to be suddenly happening that are miles more contagious based on nothing more than a hunch. It may well prove to be the case but until then they shouldn’t be talking as if it’s fact.

 

[Nightmare Walking]

Where did I mention ICU beds? If they were saying the virus was a lot less dangerous without any scientific evidence I’m sure people would be questioning it. I was talking only about the new variants that seem to be suddenly happening that are miles more contagious based on nothing more than a hunch. It may well prove to be the case but until then they shouldn’t be talking as if it’s fact.

How do you know it is not a fact?

 

[True_Blue69]

Not the virus, the mutation and yes they do have proof, we all know you are not sticking to the rules

You know nothing about me so don’t talk rubbish. I’ve pretty much stuck to the rules throughout.

What proof do they have?

 

[True_Blue69]

How do you know it is not a fact?

Well until it’s a proven fact, it’s not a fact. Fact.

 

[Nightmare Walking]

Well until it’s a proven fact, it’s not a fact. Fact.

So you don't know, thanks for clarifying that.

 

[True_Blue69]

Actually no....i think the latest position is that data and model evidence (crucial difference) points to higher transmission rate, but they are still lacking the hard evidence it actually is.

Sky News said it though, we all know that’s the only place Karen gets her news.

 

[Healdplace]

I don’t follow the numbers as closely as you do. Do the government genuinely use data that’s a week old to form the basis of their decision making? That’s just mind blowing if true. No wonder it’s a shit show.

Case data published daily and you see mentioned on the news is the number from the tests processed in the past 24 hours. But those tests may date back to one of several days over the past week as to when they were done.

So the number cited is correct as is the overall running total of cases in any location but they are 'assigned' to the day before reporting when in reality they will have been split across several of the past days.

Much the same happens with the deaths. Today in England 416 hospital deaths were reported and is the number on all the media reports. But only 55 of those happened yesterday. And 190 of them happened on 21 December. And 64 of them on 20 December and so on back across quite a few dates. Some today as far back as April.

Obviously this can get very confusing as these add ons mean you could wait months to report the true number who died the day before. These are recorded but they are never really final numbers -although after a week or so they tend not to increase a great deal - just in ones or twos now and then.

So the number of deaths across the pandemic in the UK - 69, 051 as of today in the UK IS accurate. But the 744 in the news today is the number REPORTED as if it occurred yesterday although only a handful of them did. In a week or so you will get a fairly accurate count of how many DID die yesterday in England hospitals. It will not be 744 and could be a lot less or a lot more and still might go up with more added even into January.

With the cases the number reported today is the number of positive tests reported back yesterday but hardly any will actually be tests DONE yesterday and will be from several dates added together. But again like deaths the overall number of cases for any area or region reported as a total today will still be correct as of today. So that number get reported as if they happened yesterday when like the deaths most will not have.

Both sets of data are recorded and tell you different things but for one you have to wait five or six days before the actual number on that date is reasonable clarified. With the other you know immediately.

They both have things to tell you but if you are tracking how fast a place is building up cases (the Pop Score data which records this) then your choice is to track the accurate numbers that will have to be 6 days or so old to be reasonably accurate. Or the share of the correct total number allocated to yesterday that creates today's totally accurate cumulative number of cases.

The government usually base their graphs and statements on the best accurate 5 day old data so are running 6 days back on reporting cases. I report here on the as reported today from yesterday total cases because they give you a picture of what is happening this week. Not 100% accurately day to day. But in terms of now (as in past few days) more up to date than the accurate numbers that are always from last week

Scientists love accuracy - and of course I see why that matters so do look at it too. But I post what is happening now because I feel in a pandemic it often clues you up days ahead of the picture visible from the other data that is literally so last week.

 

[True_Blue69]

So you don't know, thanks for clarifying that.

Watch or read some news ffs.

‘The figure mentioned by Prime Minister Boris Johnson was that the variant may be up to 70% more transmissible. He said this may be increasing the R number - which indicates if an epidemic is growing or shrinking - by 0.4.

That 70% number appeared in a presentation by Dr Erik Volz, from Imperial College London , on Friday.

During the talk he said: "It is really too early to tell… but from what we see so far it is growing very quickly, it is growing faster than [a previous variant] ever grew, but it is important to keep an eye on this."

There is no "nailed on" figure for how much more infectious the variant may be. Scientists, whose work is not yet public, have told me figures both much higher and much lower than 70%.

But there remain questions about whether it is any more infectious at all.

"The amount of evidence in the public domain is woefully inadequate to draw strong or firm opinions on whether the virus has truly increased transmission," said Prof Jonathan Ball, a virologist at the University of Nottingham.’

They know nothing concrete yet.

 

[kaz7]

Actually no....i think the latest position is that data and model evidence (crucial difference) points to higher transmission rate, but they are still lacking the hard evidence it actually is.

COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2): information about the new virus variant

The new variant transmits more easily than the previous one but there is no evidence that it is more likely to cause severe disease or mortality.

www.gov.uk

He said not more contageous and it is , read better