Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

The home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#461290

Postby jfgw » November 26th, 2021, 8:43 pm

The rate of increase in new cases is going down for school children. Case rates are looking better for older people, probably (I suggest) due to the boosters.
One thing that concerns me about these data is that they do not include reinfections. This is likely to be more of an issue if a new variant more effectively circumvents existing naturally acquired immunity. Hopefully, "New Cases" will be redefined if this becomes significant.
Image
My graph. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. : https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/


Julian F. G. W.

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#463665

Postby jfgw » December 6th, 2021, 10:02 pm

Cases do not include reinfections where people tested positive previously. I think that this needs to change, especially if reinfections by the Omicron variant become significant.
Image
My graph. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. : https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/

All age groups under 55 are showing a sharp rise over the previous few days.
55—59s are showing a less pronounced rise.
60—79s are still falling.
80+ age ranges are not so clear, probably due to the low numbers involved.

I do not think that the boosters alone are sufficient to explain the differences in the age groups, especially the 60s.

Image
My graph. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. : https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/


Julian F. G. W.

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8271
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4434 times
Been thanked: 3564 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#463677

Postby servodude » December 6th, 2021, 11:13 pm

jfgw wrote:Cases do not include reinfections where people tested positive previously. I think that this needs to change, especially if reinfections by the Omicron variant become significant.


Hi Julian

Is this from the cases description at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/metrics/doc/newCasesBySpecimenDate

Cases definition

COVID-19 cases are identified by taking specimens from people and testing them for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. If the test is positive this is referred to as a case. Some positive rapid lateral flow test results are confirmed with lab-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests taken within 72 hours. If the PCR test results are negative, these are no longer reported as confirmed cases. If a person has more than one positive test, they are only counted as one case. Cases data includes all positive lab-confirmed polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results plus, in England, positive rapid lateral flow tests that are not followed by a negative PCR test taken within 72 hours.

- as when I read that back in the mists of time I presumed it was so that immediate corroborating re-takes didn't skew that days figures

But if it applies to historical tests also it's a bit of a big red flag!

The deaths within 28 days of one's first test figure has been raised before as a misleading metric
- 10,515,239 cumulative cases in the UK to date most of whom can never now official die of covid
- but at least there are other data streams to qualify that

- sd

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#463683

Postby jfgw » December 6th, 2021, 11:36 pm

servodude wrote:Is this from the cases description at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/metrics/doc/newCasesBySpecimenDate

Cases definition

COVID-19 cases are identified by taking specimens from people and testing them for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. If the test is positive this is referred to as a case. Some positive rapid lateral flow test results are confirmed with lab-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests taken within 72 hours. If the PCR test results are negative, these are no longer reported as confirmed cases. If a person has more than one positive test, they are only counted as one case. Cases data includes all positive lab-confirmed polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results plus, in England, positive rapid lateral flow tests that are not followed by a negative PCR test taken within 72 hours.

- sd

Yes. Note also the definition of cumulative cases,
Total number of cases (people who have had at least one positive COVID-19 test result) since the start of the pandemic. Data are shown by the date the sample was taken from the person being tested.
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/metrics/doc/cumCasesBySpecimenDate

Julian F. G. W.

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8271
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4434 times
Been thanked: 3564 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#463685

Postby servodude » December 6th, 2021, 11:49 pm

jfgw wrote:
servodude wrote:Is this from the cases description at https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/metrics/doc/newCasesBySpecimenDate

Cases definition

COVID-19 cases are identified by taking specimens from people and testing them for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. If the test is positive this is referred to as a case. Some positive rapid lateral flow test results are confirmed with lab-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests taken within 72 hours. If the PCR test results are negative, these are no longer reported as confirmed cases. If a person has more than one positive test, they are only counted as one case. Cases data includes all positive lab-confirmed polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results plus, in England, positive rapid lateral flow tests that are not followed by a negative PCR test taken within 72 hours.

- sd

Yes. Note also the definition of cumulative cases,
Total number of cases (people who have had at least one positive COVID-19 test result) since the start of the pandemic. Data are shown by the date the sample was taken from the person being tested.
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/metrics/doc/cumCasesBySpecimenDate

Julian F. G. W.


Thanks
That does seem "quite important" to bear in mind
I wonder if it's considered in their prevalence stats?

- sd

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#463973

Postby jfgw » December 7th, 2021, 7:56 pm

servodude wrote:I wonder if it's considered in their prevalence stats?


By definition, it wouldn't. However, I haven't seen any government prevalence stats. The "7-day" case rate data are new cases, not prevalence.

The ONS and ZOE publish prevalence data.

Prevalence data are not perfect; It is possible to test positive after having fully recovered.

Patients who have recovered from COVID-19 can continue to have detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA in upper respiratory specimens for up to 3 months after illness onset. However, replication-competent virus has not been reliably recovered and infectiousness is unlikely.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html


Julian F. G. W.

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#464886

Postby jfgw » December 10th, 2021, 9:43 pm

The December monthly NHS publication has just been published.
https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/w ... -2021.xlsx

I have plotted the admissions data for the different age groups.

Image
My graph. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. : https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/


Julian F. G. W.

(Boosted today!)

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#467384

Postby jfgw » December 19th, 2021, 8:22 pm

Increases in cases seem to be starting in the 20—39 age groups, then affecting other ages.

Things are only just starting to happen in the North East,
Image

There is a bit more happening in Yorkshire and The Humber, the West Midlands, and the South West,
Image

Image

Image

The trend continues,
Image

Image

Image

Image

London cases rising rapidly,
Image

All images: My graph. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. : https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/


Julian F. G. W.

GrahamPlatt
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2059
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:40 am
Has thanked: 1032 times
Been thanked: 822 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#467425

Postby GrahamPlatt » December 19th, 2021, 10:24 pm

Difficult to decipher, those graphs. e.g. that last one, London cases; the third highest line seems to have a green + sign as identifier, but I can’t see that in the legend. Is it 30-34?

servodude
Lemon Half
Posts: 8271
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 4434 times
Been thanked: 3564 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#467427

Postby servodude » December 19th, 2021, 10:29 pm

GrahamPlatt wrote:Difficult to decipher, those graphs. e.g. that last one, London cases; the third highest line seems to have a green + sign as identifier, but I can’t see that in the legend. Is it 30-34?


yes that's how I read it
- i think the horizontal bar of the cross gets hidden in the legend by the line

- sd

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#467438

Postby jfgw » December 19th, 2021, 11:07 pm

GrahamPlatt wrote:Difficult to decipher, those graphs. e.g. that last one, London cases; the third highest line seems to have a green + sign as identifier, but I can’t see that in the legend. Is it 30-34?

Yes, it is 30—34.

I have wondered about merging age groups but it would mean losing information as well as requiring the effort of looking up populations.

I think that the London graph is worth keeping an eye on.


Julian F. G. W.

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#467841

Postby jfgw » December 21st, 2021, 4:37 pm

If you look at a short enough timeframe, there is evidence of an impending peak among the most heavily infected age groups in London. I think this is one to keep an eye on for the next few days (until Christmas disrupts the flow of data) to see which way it continues.
Image
My graph. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. : https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/


Julian F. G. W.

jfgw
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2539
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:36 pm
Has thanked: 1097 times
Been thanked: 1146 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#468116

Postby jfgw » December 22nd, 2021, 10:10 pm

CORRECTED GRAPH
London cases by age. The previous graph showed absolute case numbers for the 80+ age groups. I have corrected this and included another day's data. My apologies for any confusion. This error exists in my other "cases by age" spreadsheets — I will correct these.
Image
My graph. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. : https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/


Julian F. G. W.

MrFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2284
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 553 times
Been thanked: 1115 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#468398

Postby MrFoolish » December 24th, 2021, 5:11 pm

Maths question.

If 1 in 35 people have covid, how many people do you need in a room for it to be more likely than not that someone has covid?

monabri
Lemon Half
Posts: 8396
Joined: January 7th, 2017, 9:56 am
Has thanked: 1539 times
Been thanked: 3427 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#468403

Postby monabri » December 24th, 2021, 5:22 pm

390 million tests carried out in the UK. Where has the waste gone?

CryptoPlankton
Lemon Slice
Posts: 786
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 1544 times
Been thanked: 873 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#468404

Postby CryptoPlankton » December 24th, 2021, 5:24 pm

MrFoolish wrote:Maths question.

If 1 in 35 people have covid, how many people do you need in a room for it to be more likely than not that someone has covid?

24 (assuming everyone is equally likely to have it - a big assumption!)

MrFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2284
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 553 times
Been thanked: 1115 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#468405

Postby MrFoolish » December 24th, 2021, 5:34 pm

CryptoPlankton wrote:
MrFoolish wrote:Maths question.

If 1 in 35 people have covid, how many people do you need in a room for it to be more likely than not that someone has covid?

24 (assuming everyone is equally likely to have it - a big assumption!)


I've long since forgotten my stats. How do you work it out?

dealtn
Lemon Half
Posts: 6072
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 441 times
Been thanked: 2324 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#468407

Postby dealtn » December 24th, 2021, 5:49 pm

MrFoolish wrote:
CryptoPlankton wrote:
MrFoolish wrote:Maths question.

If 1 in 35 people have covid, how many people do you need in a room for it to be more likely than not that someone has covid?

24 (assuming everyone is equally likely to have it - a big assumption!)


I've long since forgotten my stats. How do you work it out?


Assuming there is true independence any person is 34/35 probability free of Covid. So ask the question how many times do you need to multiply 34/35 by itself to be less than 0.5. That is the chance of at least 1 person being infected is greater than the chance all are free of Covid.

34/35 to the power of 24 is just below 0.5

Mike4
Lemon Half
Posts: 7084
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 1637 times
Been thanked: 3791 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#468409

Postby Mike4 » December 24th, 2021, 5:50 pm

CryptoPlankton wrote:
MrFoolish wrote:Maths question.

If 1 in 35 people have covid, how many people do you need in a room for it to be more likely than not that someone has covid?

24 (assuming everyone is equally likely to have it - a big assumption!)


Also to muddy the waters it depends on what is meant by 'has covid', I'd have thought. "Infectious with covid" is what I'd be most interested in, were I in the room.

People in the earliest stages of incubating it are not necessarily infectious yet, and those who are in late stages of recovery might still return positive PCTR tests even though not infectious.

MrFoolish
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2284
Joined: March 22nd, 2020, 7:27 pm
Has thanked: 553 times
Been thanked: 1115 times

Re: Coronavirus - Numbers and Statistics

#468412

Postby MrFoolish » December 24th, 2021, 6:15 pm

dealtn wrote:
MrFoolish wrote:
CryptoPlankton wrote:24 (assuming everyone is equally likely to have it - a big assumption!)


I've long since forgotten my stats. How do you work it out?


Assuming there is true independence any person is 34/35 probability free of Covid. So ask the question how many times do you need to multiply 34/35 by itself to be less than 0.5. That is the chance of at least 1 person being infected is greater than the chance all are free of Covid.

34/35 to the power of 24 is just below 0.5


Thanks. I tried raising 1/35 to the power of 24 and obviously just ended up with a nonsense tiny number. It didn't occur to me to try something with 34/35. Is there a name for this sort of calculation?


Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests