The 9am figures not disclosed yet?

If the numbers are correct that we are potentially under reporting by up to 80% then I think the hospitalisation rate is a positive as we can’t have been ‘only’ under reporting in the last few days surely we have been under reporting for a couple of weeks, or am I being overly optimistic???
 
Andy_W said:
I'll look into that later when I've got a bit more time, but that Hospitalisation rate seems high, considering they've had 75% infected and 25% vax (with crossover in those)? Where is that coming from?

That 78k reported yesterday, is from the 14th, we've moved on two days since then (for all of today), so more like 150k now (if the testing can keep up, which it won't), but the issue is, as this is spreading so quick and there's been problems getting tests in high infection areas, it's likely we're now under-reporting on a scale not seen since early/mid 2000. Some think we're under-reporting now by 80%, so we could be at 750k today already.

Even at 500k today, that's around 700k Friday, and around 1m on Saturday. As Friday and Saturday would normally be big transmission days for the 20-29 age group which was driving this (but has now spilled over to other age groups).

1m a day, by the weekend looks possible based on the assumed doubling numbers, but it it should burn out/ slow down extremely quickly, as there's not enough immediately susceptible contacts to infect. Also behaviour will massively change once more people realise that 78k number, and the implications of it.
1m a day is a 10k/ 7 day case rate, for the whole uk, and we've not had anything more than 2k/100k localised yet, so it's still quite hard to believe.

People should hopefully be aware, that an infection on Fri/Sat, won't show up till Sun/ Mon (19th/20th), so they should end up isolating over Christmas (to the 29th/30th). People won't want to be having to isolate over Crimbo, or hopefully not risk infecting their parents, so I think this weekend could end up quite quiet (out and about). People will still have gatherings though, as for some reason people seem to think they can't catch it off asymptomatic friends and family.

Hard to say whether testing yesterday (15th) could keep up with the 14th, so todays numbers might actually go down significantly or appear level (albeit infection won't have).
Click to expand...
Not much but I'm trying to pick the positives out of this and one of them is "it should burn out/slow down extremely quickly". And I think that's the crumb of hope I'm clinging to. It seems to be spreading really fast, which is bad news but long term may be good news. With the caveats that: we can survive the current peak and re infections don't occur with any more frequency, this could be a short but brutal peak that quickly wears itself out
 
MolteniArcore said:
Posted this on the footy cancelled thread but might be better to post here for you guys who look at the stats every day:

In SA the hospitalisation rate is 38 in 1000 - so 3.8%. We are looking at 1,000,000 infections by the weekend so potentially a 38,000 hospitalisations. We currently have 7,673 in hospital now. I can see why they are worried.

Am I wildly wrong about hospitalisations here?
Click to expand...
Is that 3.8% from the cases they've detected? They're probably missing 3-4x, so the real rate is more like 1%?
 
Pak_Doo_Ik said:
If the numbers are correct that we are potentially under reporting by up to 80% then I think the hospitalisation rate is a positive as we can’t have been ‘only’ under reporting in the last few days surely we have been under reporting for a couple of weeks, or am I being overly optimistic???
Click to expand...
No, you're right.

Hospitalisation rates could seem high, ie if we show 4%, but under report cases by 4x, then the real rate is more like 1%.

Only issue with that is if we/ they get 4% (real rate 1%) in age groups which are far less susceptible. 4% for younger folk is very bad news, even with under reporting, or 1% corrected.

We're going to learn a lot in the next few days.
 
SmallTown said:
Not much but I'm trying to pick the positives out of this and one of them is "it should burn out/slow down extremely quickly". And I think that's the crumb of hope I'm clinging to. It seems to be spreading really fast, which is bad news but long term may be good news. With the caveats that: we can survive the current peak and re infections don't occur with any more frequency, this could be a short but brutal peak that quickly wears itself out
Click to expand...
Yeah, 2 day doubling is not sustainable for long. Very easy to do with low numbers, extremely difficult with high numbers.

That's why the best charts to follow are the log charts, the changes stand out a mile.
 
Andy_W said:
Is that 3.8% from the cases they've detected? They're probably missing 3-4x, so the real rate is more like 1%?
Click to expand...

The quote reads:

  • Omicron causing 38 admissions per 1,000 cases compared to Delta's 101 per 1,000, first real-world study said

I just turned that into a % to work out the cases per 1,000,000 that would end up in hospital. I've probably seriously over simplified it hence my post for you guys to check it.
 
MolteniArcore said:
The quote reads:

  • Omicron causing 38 admissions per 1,000 cases compared to Delta's 101 per 1,000, first real-world study said

I just turned that into a % to work out the cases per 1,000,000 that would end up in hospital. I've probably seriously over simplified it hence my post for you guys to check it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, good that it says cases, not infections, so it will be lower proportional to their under reporting of cases. Obviously the hospitalisations won't get under reported. Effectively it's a denominator issue.
 
MolteniArcore said:
The quote reads:

  • Omicron causing 38 admissions per 1,000 cases compared to Delta's 101 per 1,000, first real-world study said

I just turned that into a % to work out the cases per 1,000,000 that would end up in hospital. I've probably seriously over simplified it hence my post for you guys to check it.
Click to expand...
That headline is probably misleading too, Delta came at a time of low infection/ vaccination, this has come at a time of high previous infection/ vaccine coverage. i.e it's likely not much milder, just people are a lot better prepared for it.
 
Andy_W said:
No, you're right.

Hospitalisation rates could seem high, ie if we show 4%, but under report cases by 4x, then the real rate is more like 1%.

Only issue with that is if we/ they get 4% (real rate 1%) in age groups which are far less susceptible. 4% for younger folk is very bad news, even with under reporting, or 1% corrected.

We're going to learn a lot in the next few days.
Click to expand...
Cheers Andy, a concern I have is (I think concern is the right word) is that we seem to have been saying ‘we’ll learn more in the next few days’ a lot recently but don’t really seem to move on from its transmits much easier than Delta and we are facing a tsunami, avalanche, tidal wave (use whichever natural disaster you prefer) of cases.
 
Andy_W said:
Yeah, good that it says cases, not infections, so it will be lower proportional to their under reporting of cases. Obviously the hospitalisations won't get under reported. Effectively it's a denominator issue.
Click to expand...

Ah right, that makes sense. So the actual % is much lower as they weren't reporting every infection so it they weren't classed as cases.

Cheers Andy (y)
 
Pak_Doo_Ik said:
Cheers Andy, a concern I have is (I think concern is the right word) is that we seem to have been saying ‘we’ll learn more in the next few days’ a lot recently but don’t really seem to move on from its transmits much easier than Delta and we are facing a tsunami, avalanche, tidal wave (use whichever natural disaster you prefer) of cases.
Click to expand...
We have learned a lot over the past two weeks though, we've pretty much nailed down how much more transmissible it is, and the vaccine escape for two jab, and then three jabs, and various timeframes of those.

The last piece is hospitalisations, and deaths, but because of lag, that's always weeks behind. We probably thought we could rely more on SA for that, but their makeup of infections/ vaccinations is very different to ours, as is the age groups. We need to figure out how those work out for us, and then how that works out in older boosted age groups.

There's always more to learn, but within a week we will know how bad it's going to get with reasonable accuracy.

I'm still optimistic we won't top 2k hospitalisations per day, sustained for a period of a few weeks, or we get a shorter spike of 4k (but nothing like last Jan), and we should come back down from the mountain extremely quickly.

Obviously 2k per day, for a few weeks is bad, but it's about the best we can hope for considering what we're up against, there's no stopping it, just the timing of it is extremely bad for families and Christmas etc.
 
It is absoloutely going to screw with folks christmas arrangements, lockdown by default for huge numbers. Stay safe all for another week so you can enjoy your christmas, whatever that entails.
 
@Andy_W Word going round after an anonymous whistleblower commented, is that we are back to testing at 40 cycles to find proof of infection. Would that be because Omicron is harder to find in lower number cycles?
 
It doesn’t look good
Randy said:
@Andy_W Word going round after an anonymous whistleblower commented, is that we are back to testing at 40 cycles to find proof of infection. Would that be because Omicron is harder to find in lower number cycles?
Click to expand...
Lab analysers run at whatever cycles the manufacturers recommend. Running them at 1000 cycles wouldn’t make any difference.

what matters is the Ct value. There are thresholds for +ve, re-run test, -ve.

@Swaledalemutton is your man for PCR on twitter if you need definitive answers.
 
Jonny_Rondos_Disco_pants said:
It doesn’t look good

Lab analysers run at whatever cycles the manufacturers recommend. Running them at 1000 cycles wouldn’t make any difference.

what matters is the Ct value. There are thresholds for +ve, re-run test, -ve.

@Swaledalemutton is your man for PCR on twitter if you need definitive answers.
Click to expand...
I remember Fauci saying 24 was enough otherwise you start finding remnants of past infections and even evidence of other previous infections. I'll check that twitter page out.
 
Today's headline analysis:

• 88,376 new cases reported in 24-hour period, up from yesterday's 78,610
• 7-day average for new cases increases by 9.3% to 63,197 per day, following 7.2% increase yesterday (and 15th daily increase in the past 16 days)
• 7-day average for new cases is 31.4% higher than one week ago (from 19.1% higher yesterday) and 41.8% higher than two weeks ago (from 32.6% higher yesterday and 11.0% higher 7 days ago)
• 146 new deaths within 28 days of a positive test reported in 24-hour period, down from 165 yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths within 28 days of a positive test decreases by 0.2% to 114.6 per day, following 0.4% increase yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths within 28 days of a positive test is 6.1% lower than one week ago (from 5.1% lower yesterday) and 5.4% lower than two weeks ago (from 5.9% lower yesterday and 2.3% lower 7 days ago)

So...

Highest ever reported daily new cases in the UK
Highest ever 7-day average for new cases in the UK (previous highest was 59,660 on 9th January)
Highest % daily increase in 7-day average since 28th June.
 
Billy Horner said:
Today's headline analysis:

• 88,376 new cases reported in 24-hour period, up from yesterday's 78,610
• 7-day average for new cases increases by 9.3% to 63,197 per day, following 7.2% increase yesterday (and 15th daily increase in the past 16 days)
• 7-day average for new cases is 31.4% higher than one week ago (from 19.1% higher yesterday) and 41.8% higher than two weeks ago (from 32.6% higher yesterday and 11.0% higher 7 days ago)
• 146 new deaths within 28 days of a positive test reported in 24-hour period, down from 165 yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths within 28 days of a positive test decreases by 0.2% to 114.6 per day, following 0.4% increase yesterday
• 7-day average for new deaths within 28 days of a positive test is 6.1% lower than one week ago (from 5.1% lower yesterday) and 5.4% lower than two weeks ago (from 5.9% lower yesterday and 2.3% lower 7 days ago)

So...

Highest ever reported daily new cases in the UK
Highest ever 7-day average for new cases in the UK (previous highest was 59,660 on 9th January)
Highest % daily increase in 7-day average since 28th June.
Click to expand...
😲
 
That’s a little lower than what I expected to be honest, I really thought we could top 100k today, I assume that testing capacity has now been reached
 
Jonny_Rondos_Disco_pants said:
It doesn’t look good

Lab analysers run at whatever cycles the manufacturers recommend. Running them at 1000 cycles wouldn’t make any difference.

what matters is the Ct value. There are thresholds for +ve, re-run test, -ve.

@Swaledalemutton is your man for PCR on twitter if you need definitive answers.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Graham really knows his onions! The fact that all his beers often back him up says a lot also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top