The 9am figures not disclosed yet?

Notes - Although there was a significant rise in new infections, almost 50% were NHS and other key workers. That said, even if we strip those out, hospital reported infections increased by over 1,000 from the previous day.

I have decided to adopt the government's new definition of deaths, which includes all those who have died following a positive test, regardless of setting (i.e. both hospital and non-hospital deaths). Whilst this creates some issues with international comparisons, it is swings and roundabouts, as although Spain do not count non-hospital deaths, both Italy and France do count them.

I have taken the opportunity to recalibrate the comparison to a days since 100th death basis. This appears to be the standard adopted by the majority of analysts.
 
As of 9am on 1 May, there have been 1,023,824 tests, with 122,347 tests on 30 April.

762,279 people have been tested, of whom 177,454 have tested positive.

As of 5pm on 30 April, of those who tested positive for coronavirus in the UK, 27,510 have died. This new figure includes deaths in all settings, not just in hospitals. The equivalent figure under the old measure would have been 23,229.

Approximately 3.2% increase in positive tests, of which a half after NHS hospital attendees.
 
As I've posted in another thread over 39000 of those tests have only been posted out NOT actually performed. But to 'prove' the govt has met its target they have been included apparently along with ppl who did more than one test????.

100000.png
 
Today's headline analysis:

• 6,201 new infections in 24-hour period, up from yesterday's 6,032
• 4-day average for new infections increases by 10.3%, following 9.3% increase yesterday
• 739 new deaths in all settings reported in 24-hour period, up from 674 yesterday
• 4-day average for new deaths in all settings increases by 14.8%, following 10.3% increase yesterday
• We are tracking significantly above both Italy and Spain on a days since 100th death basis. We have been tracking above Italy for the past 30 days and above Spain for the past 10 days.
• We are approximately 2.5 days behind Italy’s numbers (from 3.5 days behind yesterday)
• We are approximately 3.5 days ahead of Spain’s numbers (from 3 days ahead yesterday)
 
It's partly caused by the weekend effect in recording deaths. Because they report lower numbers for Saturday and Sunday, these depress the 4-day average for a few days and then, when they drop back out of the 4-day average, it jumps up again. I'm thinking of moving to a 7-day average instead to try and smooth this effect.

Also, the government has changed how it's reporting deaths, which now include everyone who has died after testing positive for Covid-19 (previously they only included those who had died in hospital). Not only has this increased the overall numbers, but it has also moved the peak in new deaths, from around 7-10 April to around 15-18 April (so about a week later). Because of this, we are a bit further back up the curve than we thought we were, so are likely to experience higher numbers for a bit longer.
 
And then another reason after that period aswell no doubt to keep is locked down. 😒

Oh well I've accepted it now, the little island that thought it could is now well and truly ****ed.

40 something days in lockdown, cases still going up, deaths still good up, politicians of every colour with no idea what's happening, scientists the same and no sign of a vaccine till next year which we will be at the back of the line for.

It could literally only be worse if we lived in Brazil.
 
If both the UK and Italy both continue to report deaths at the same rate as in the past week, the UK would overtake Italy as the country in Europe with the highest death toll from Covid-19 in 3 days' time. The UK would pass 30,000 deaths in 4 days' time, which would make us only the second country in the world to surpass that milestone.
 
RandySavage said:
And then another reason after that period aswell no doubt to keep is locked down. 😒

Oh well I've accepted it now, the little island that thought it could is now well and truly ****ed.

40 something days in lockdown, cases still going up, deaths still good up, politicians of every colour with no idea what's happening, scientists the same and no sign of a vaccine till next year which we will be at the back of the line for.

It could literally only be worse if we lived in Brazil.
Click to expand...
You can't have it all ways unfortunately Randy.
The government has been criticized for not reporting deaths in care homes and other settings so now that they are doing so we have to accept that the figures will be a lot worse.
It's better to report all deaths and infections so that we can better manage coming out of lockdown by having more data.
Based on my experience this week, and that reported by others on here, social distancing practices are falling by the wayside so it is almost certain that we will be back in lockdown at some point because the public diligence is slipping.
Unlike yourself, I don't think this virus has made huge inroads into the population yet and there will be another massive spike if we rush into reopening AND people just go back to normal as seems to be the case to me this past week.
 
As of 9am on 2 May, there have been 1,129,907 tests, with 105,937 tests on 1 May.

825,946 people have been tested of which 182,260 tested positive.

As of 5pm on 1 May, of those tested positive for coronavirus in the UK, 28,131 have sadly died. This new figure includes deaths in all settings not just in hospitals. The equivalent figure under the old measure would have been 23,701.

Approximately 2.8% increase in infections, 60% were hospital presentees.
 
Billy, Bear (I feel like a ham sandwhich now) The deaths being reported now include all deaths of folks that have tested positive for covid-19. So what about folks that have died but were never tested, even if the doctor/coroner put covid on the death certificate?

Or am I just misinterpreting your comment Billy?
 
dooderooni said:
You can't have it all ways unfortunately Randy.
The government has been criticized for not reporting deaths in care homes and other settings so now that they are doing so we have to accept that the figures will be a lot worse.
It's better to report all deaths and infections so that we can better manage coming out of lockdown by having more data.
Based on my experience this week, and that reported by others on here, social distancing practices are falling by the wayside so it is almost certain that we will be back in lockdown at some point because the public diligence is slipping.
Unlike yourself, I don't think this virus has made huge inroads into the population yet and there will be another massive spike if we rush into reopening AND people just go back to normal as seems to be the case to me this past week.
Click to expand...
I think there is a reason that diligence is going by the wayside, reports of having bubbles of people. Members on the wife’s sid ‘it’ll alright soon, we’re getting our social bubbles’ and they’ve all of a sudden become more relaxed about it, even though it hasn’t been announced and the nature of covid hasn’t changed.

I imagine is being replicated across the country and it’s idiotic.....like you say I can see another spike
 
Today's headline analysis:

• 4,806 new infections in 24-hour period, down from yesterday's 6,201
• 7-day average for new infections decreases by 0.3%, following 2.5% increase yesterday
• 621 new deaths in all settings reported in 24-hour period, down from 739 yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths in all settings decreases by 4.7%, following 5.3% decrease yesterday (and 8th consecutive daily decrease)
• We are tracking significantly above both Italy and Spain on a days since 100th death basis. We have been tracking above Italy for the past 31 days and above Spain for the past 11 days.
• We are approximately 1.5 days behind Italy’s numbers (from 2.5 days behind yesterday)
• We are approximately 4 days ahead of Spain’s numbers (from 3.5 days ahead yesterday)
 
Laughing said:
Billy, Bear (I feel like a ham sandwhich now) The deaths being reported now include all deaths of folks that have tested positive for covid-19. So what about folks that have died but were never tested, even if the doctor/coroner put covid on the death certificate?

Or am I just misinterpreting your comment Billy?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's absolutely correct. The problem with reporting all Covid-19 deaths (including those without any testing confirmation) is a matter of timing.

The deaths which the government reports on a daily basis are (relatively) straightforward to record as they all have tested postive for Covid-19, so all the government needs to know is whether/when that individual has subsequently died. As a consequence, they can be reported fairly swiftly.

For deaths which have occurred in the absence of a positive test, we are reliant on the clinical judgement of a doctor to include Covid-19 on the death certificate. It takes up to five days for a doctor to certify a death and then a further few days for that death to be registered.

Although the ONS does then report this data on a weekly basis (every Tuesday), because of the time lag described above, it takes two weeks for this information to become available publicly. The ONS has also begun to report data direct from care homes on suspected Covid-19 deaths in its weekly publication, although there is still about a week's delay in those numbers and they are unconfirmed until the death registration process is complete.

So, it's an imperfect system, but it's also difficult to see how it could be speeded up by much (certainly without jeopardising the accuracy of the data).
 
The more observant amongst you may have noticed that I've started using the 7-day average for infections and deaths, rather than the 4-day average. This is to smooth the curve and to remove the weekend effect (particularly when reporting deaths) from the average. It was helpful to look at the 4-day average when we we trying to determine when we were approaching the peak but, now that we are past that point and have much more data, it makes more sense to look at a slightly longer-term average.

For the benefit of @spanishman I thought it might be helpful to copy and paste my chart which shows the numbers of new infections and new deaths over time. Now that I've changed the averages from a 4-day to a 7-day basis, it has smoothed those lines considerably (you can see the significant variance in the daily numbers in the dotted lines).

I thought the developing shape of the 7-day average for new deaths (solid red line) might remind him of a certain large eared animal.

1588454470903.png
 
Billy Horner said:
The more observant amongst you may have noticed that I've started using the 7-day average for infections and deaths, rather than the 4-day average. This is to smooth the curve and to remove the weekend effect (particularly when reporting deaths) from the average. It was helpful to look at the 4-day average when we we trying to determine when we were approaching the peak but, now that we are past that point and have much more data, it makes more sense to look at a slightly longer-term average.

For the benefit of @spanishman I thought it might be helpful to copy and paste my chart which shows the numbers of new infections and new deaths over time. Now that I've changed the averages from a 4-day to a 7-day basis, it has smoothed those lines considerably (you can see the significant variance in the daily numbers in the dotted lines).

I thought the developing shape of the 7-day average for new deaths (solid red line) might remind him of a certain large eared animal.

View attachment 2388
Click to expand...
The elephant in the room?

Updated: Glad to see the UK coming out the other side of phase 1. Fingers crossed we all do well in future phases.
 
Billy Horner said:
The more observant amongst you may have noticed that I've started using the 7-day average for infections and deaths, rather than the 4-day average. This is to smooth the curve and to remove the weekend effect (particularly when reporting deaths) from the average. It was helpful to look at the 4-day average when we we trying to determine when we were approaching the peak but, now that we are past that point and have much more data, it makes more sense to look at a slightly longer-term average.

For the benefit of @spanishman I thought it might be helpful to copy and paste my chart which shows the numbers of new infections and new deaths over time. Now that I've changed the averages from a 4-day to a 7-day basis, it has smoothed those lines considerably (you can see the significant variance in the daily numbers in the dotted lines).

I thought the developing shape of the 7-day average for new deaths (solid red line) might remind him of a certain large eared animal.

View attachment 2388
Click to expand...
The increase in cases with key worker tests makes the blue line look more pessimistic than it is. Is it worth plotting the Pillar 1 only as that would be interesting to see how far the deaths are lagging falling numbers of cases?
 
bear66 said:
The increase in cases with key worker tests makes the blue line look more pessimistic than it is. Is it worth plotting the Pillar 1 only as that would be interesting to see how far the deaths are lagging falling numbers of cases?
Click to expand...
I tend to ignore the cases. I focus on the deaths. Although there is lag involved I think it gives the clearest picture.

PS I feel this is a very sad comment.
 
bear66 said:
It's the cases which will, in some way, determine the length of lockdown and the measures that will be relaxed coming out . . . . and then tightened again if transmission increases.
Click to expand...
Good point. Just that my current focus is the sad number of deaths in this first phase.

The issue for future phases of this pandemic is going to be how we measure success. Plus perhaps some way of getting good figures to analyse in the future. To help us when other pandemics happen in the future. Sadly there will be more. Hopefully not in my lifetime.

This is me being glass half empty again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top