COVID-19

Can I bang a pan with a wooden spoon as I’m unable to clap due to the skin on my hands been cracked and sore from using too much sanitizer gloop?

#justgladimadeit

 

As I said earlier, this is a logic fail. Deaths are down nearly 90% in two months amongst over 65s. Do you think they are now shielding much much more than they did in June? Young people spreading it more should increase deaths amongst over 65s, all other things being equal, yet deaths amongst old have nearly been eliminated. Old people are coming out more, rules have relaxed, more people are ignoring rules, old people are dying much much less. Your suggestion does not make sense. Deaths are nearly zero. Will you still be saying this if it hits zero even though old are coming out more? (I do not expect it to hit zero. I expect it to end up like other cold and flu viruses which linger through summer and flare up slightly in winter. In some ways, it's already behaving like other cold and flu virus in those nations that had a bad first wave.)

 

I have had somebody suggest to me that Wales is seeing half UK hospitalisations because their figures are for suspected Covid cases, not confirmed ones. That could mean UK admisssions in the last few weeks for Covid are really more like 50 or 60 than 100. On recent deaths per admission, that might lead to maybe 4 deaths per day later in September from 1000 or so cases per day in mid-August. Now how many cases of Covid were not tested? 1000? 3000? 4 deaths per day in hospitals from at least 1000 cases per day a month go, and maybe 3000 or 4000 actual infections, is a very low mortality rate.

 

Not if young people are only spreading it among themselves which is what the Europe wide statistics seems to suggest. It's almost like they're either consciously or subconsciously risk assesing how they act around other people. Being more free around people they believe to be low risk but still being cautious around those with higher risks.

Old people are coming out more than they did during lockdown but there is less of the virus around than there was in June for them to be exposed to and the people who are actually predominantly carrying the virus aren't mixing with them. That sounds perfectly possible to me.

I would fully expect it to behave like other flu viruses, why would it not? But yes, even if deaths hit zero I will still believe that the cause of that is behavioral - unless there's evidence to the contrary - because that is the most logical outlook as it has been since the start of this.

 

This article seems to contain our discussion in miniature but for a different place. 20-29 age group jumped from 20% to 40% of new cases when lockdown relaxed but has now pretty much reverted to how it was at June 1st, as the share of young has dropped and old recovered. Hospitalisations have risen slightly but generally remain down in a period when reported new cases have doubled in the last two months from 400 to 800 and over 60s share has gone from a low of about 10% back to 15% - so a trebling from about 40 to 120 new cases per day. Hospitalisations rose from 250 to 300 in July but have eased a fraction since so where is the follow through on a trebling of old people in new cases? It suggests that the old in Minnesota are getting exposed in much greater numbers but the modest hospitalisation numbers increase suggests a big fall in the fraction of new cases amongst the old needing hospitalisation . It also suggests the "young people spreading it" tagline could be well out of date now that the end-of-lockdown party surge in June appears to have faded away. July and August have seen an over-60s surge in new cases - for Minnesota, at least - and I presume the fall in hospitalisation rate amongst them will see further falls for the mortality rate there since, generally in the US, death rates relative to hospitalisation rates have also been falling.

A 400% rise in Minnesota new cases since the mid-June low has seen 20%+ rise in hospitalisations since the early July low. The deaths rise from late July low has been 50% from a low base but it's turned down again. The lesson is the usual one, it's taking VERY big rises new cases to convert into more rises in hospital activity and deaths yet the headline in the link is suggesting to brace themselves for trouble after only a 25% in new cases in recent weeks. Previous form says little will happen, much like a 150% rise in new cases in the UK from early July lows has still seen large falls in hospitalisations and deaths since.

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/08/04/latest-on-covid19-in-mn

( I only picked Minnesota since its the only place I've been able to find such an age breadown so far, despite seeing similar a few times in the past. I'm still trying to find a similar for the UK.)

 

Sorry, where does it suggest this bit?

Theres definite studies in the UK. I saw two in the Guardian in the last few weeks.

 

New cases doubled in Minnesota and the share of 60-69 and 70+ in those new cases both rose/recovered in the last two months, as per the graphs given, after falling the month before. I can't put it more simply than that for you. The share of young in new cases rose sharply in a few weeks in June then went back to where it was over a couple of months. Old cases increased again yet mortality rates kept on falling. I can't say the UK is the same without finding similar data but they ran the same stories in the USA about falling mortality in the summer being down to more young people getting infected. Minnesota suggests that was wrong.

 

I just genuinely don't see in that article it says that.

The first line literally says;

"Minnesota’s COVID-19 hospitalizations continue to head the wrong way, with counts of people currently hospitalized and needing intensive care rising to levels not seen in six weeks"

and

"While current hospitalizations remain far lower than their late-May peak, they continue to climb even as the growth in new cases flattens."

So the infections went up, there was a lag, then hospitalisations went up, they there is a lag again, then they have to see what happens to deaths. Isn't that exactly what you would expect?

But if more young people are getting infected - ("Minnesotans in their 20s now make up the age group with the most confirmed cases in the pandemic") then the rates of hospitalisations and deaths won't follow the exact same percentages as before when the spread was weighted towards the more vulnerable.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-are-young-people-to-blame-for-a-new-rise-in-covid-19-cases-12039185

Dr Kyrychko said: "Younger people tend to socialise more, will tend to go into clubs and bars and restaurants and try and enjoy themselves as much as possible. Vulnerable and older people will still be shielding. In some ways, younger people don't care that much for this. They are not scared in the sense that it does not cause death rate at such a high rate of them.
So those people will have disease earlier and then... it'll obviously move into the next age group and the next age group, and then it goes on and on and on." - The extends the lag between positives going up in the young and the mortality in the old, they're not side by side in chronologically. That just makes perfect sense.

We have to remember that we're talking very small numbers here. If we take the UK numbers and consider that 4m people have been infected (I believe you think it's more but we'll go with the official figures) and 135k people have been hospitalised then it's only 3% of cases that have that result - and most of them will be old.

Any shift in the age demographic towards younger people will diminish that rate to almost a negligible change so you shouldn't expect significant jumps in hospital admissions or deaths if the spread is being focused in the younger and healthier end of the population. If you get 1,000 people infected per day but the majority are healthy and young it will result in an outcome that is very different to infecting 1,000 people who are a cross section of society.

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/13/global-report-covid-19-spikes-across-europe-linked-to-young-people

 

I did not reference the text. I referenced the figures which belie what the text is saying. Journalist have been getting it wrong in the main from the beginnng because they have chosen to scaremonger over everything. Ignore them and work the numbers yourself.

"Minnesota’s COVID-19 hospitalizations continue to head the wrong way, with counts of people currently hospitalized and needing intensive care rising to levels not seen in six weeks"

Yes - hospitalisations are now 290+ compared to 260+ 6 weeks earlier. And they're flat compared to 5 weeks ago and down on 3-4 weeks ago when they were 310+. Why did the journalist choose to compare to 6 weeks ago if the recent trend is easing down? The headline misleads.

(Minnesota is MN.)

https://public.tableau.com/profile/peter.james.walker#!/vizhome/shared/PPKCCXG7B

There's only 1 patient in ICU in Bradford after over 2000 tested new cases in July and August and all that scaremongering and lockdowns that those new cases brought. And how many mostly asymptomatic infections went untested? The household survey at the end of July suggested about 2/3rds of infections were being missed by swabbing - so 1 ICU patient (and 9 inpatients) left in hospital from 6000 Bradford infections over the 2 months? Do you think we should continue lockdown for that?

https://www.bradfordhospitals.nhs.uk/2020/09/02/information-about-coronavirus/

 

You can't reference an article and then ignore the actual text because it doesn't say what you want it to. Especially when you're having to go all the way to Minnesota because you can't find figures from anywhere else in the world that show what you want.

The general point that young people are leading the expansion in the virus and therefore all percentages of hospitalization and mortality will be pushed down from what happened in March-June. The questions are whether that will last, can we continue to ring fence the vulnerable without any set rules and what are the long term effects are for people who don't even end up in hospital.

As for your general question, I don't believe we should be in lockdown for that level of infection but that's okay because we aren't in lockdown.

However the low number of serious cases compared to the summer show the success of restricting interactions in controlling the virus. Not necessarily that we can just do without them. If we want to keep numbers as low as you correctly point out then we keep doing what we're doing?

 

Anyone seen a recent update on the Oxford vaccine ?

 

What time are you planning said event and where are you going to ahem bang your pan

 

I can't offer a different take on statistical data? Sorry Mr Orwell.

I could only find Minnesota! If figures showing the change in age composition over time are so easy to find, you find me some examples, please.



Also , social interation limits are not limiting rhinovirus spread so they are not that likely to be limiting Covid spread

Https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/914448/National_Influenza_report_3_September_2020_week_36.pdf

It's a very small sample but rhinovirus positivity has increased greatly through July and August, from 1.2% to 9.6% of samples tested, signalliing the start to cold and flu season. I wonder if any cold bugs are giving false positives for Covid.

 

Oh, boy. Common colds testing positive for Covid? (This is blood antibody testing. Not swabs.)

Https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7381928/

" We found a high incidence of false-positive RIAT results in patients with human common coronavirus pneumonia. "

 

the miracle cure for Coronovirus.

 

I'm sure they're smart enough to know the difference between flu and covid.

Of course you can take a different view on data but you should at least say ignore all the commentary and just look at that one graph. Otherwise it will lead to the confusion where I'm looking for things in the article which actually say the opposite of what you say.

As for the age composition changing, I mean, it's not hard to find. It's basically all anyone is talking about on this front.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/eddie-mair/coronavirus-young-people-spread/
"Virologist Dr Chris Smith explained that while case numbers rise the data is not showing a parallel escalation in mortality as more young people are catching it and are less at risk of dying from the disease"

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-are-young-people-to-blame-for-a-new-rise-in-covid-19-cases-12039185
"The World Health Organisation's Europe director has said that a higher proportion of new cases are being seen among the young"

https://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/18697219.young-people-cause-wales-coronavirus-spike-phw-say/
"Public Health Wales believe people in their 20s and 30s are to blame for a recent rise in coronavirus cases in Wales"

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/coronavirus-warning-young-people-devon-4481464
“More people in their 20s are testing positive for COVID-19 than any other age group.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/13/global-report-covid-19-spikes-across-europe-linked-to-young-people
"Surges in Covid-19 cases in countries across Europe are due largely to a rise in infections among young people, data from national agencies shows"

France - The incidence rate has climbed from from 6.1 to 26.5 in the 30 to 39 age group. Over the same period, the infection rate among 80- to 89-year-olds halved, while in the over-90 age group it fell from 60 to 13.

Belgium - Young people aged 20 to 39 now account for more than 38% of new infections, while the proportion of those over 80 has fallen from nearly 30% to 5.5%.

https://www.northumberlandgazette.co.uk/health/coronavirus/why-more-younger-people-are-catching-coronavirus-northumberland-average-age-cases-plummets-25-county-2961568
“What is noticeable is the decrease in average age, so where at the end of June the average age for cases in that particular week was 50, in the last week the average age has dropped to 25.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-54011740
Lucy Wightman, Director of Public Health Northamptonshire, said many of the new cases were found in young people.
"It is a younger age group, between 25 and 29, and up to 35," she said.

 

I see you have put some effort in but maybe had the same problem as me. A few of those are repeating similar superficial arguments with little or no data. I was finding that a lot. The 5th link has some snippets about Europe but not really a timeline like I wanted. Only your second link has what was looking for - an age progression over time. I think I can work with that, though. It's what I was after for the UK. Well done for finding it. Thanks. I'll get back to you.