Coronavirus - Global and National trends
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
in Purgatory
This is the "numbers" thread. On the big tent thread a significant number of posts have been focused on what the numbers are, both globally and nationally, and how the pandemic is trending, both globally and nationally.
The easiest source of raw data is to be found on the worldometer site. This also gives links to various national and regional sites.
Another source often quoted on the big tent thread concerns R numbers in the USA States. You can find that here.
Both links update continuously.
Other sites may be used for data, including this one at Johns Hopkins University.
Please use this thread in the future for posts re global and national trends.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
The easiest source of raw data is to be found on the worldometer site. This also gives links to various national and regional sites.
Another source often quoted on the big tent thread concerns R numbers in the USA States. You can find that here.
Both links update continuously.
Other sites may be used for data, including this one at Johns Hopkins University.
Please use this thread in the future for posts re global and national trends.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
Comments
I've got professional statistical qualifications as have a number of others. The accuracy issues of the major sources, and the reasons for them, have been pretty well documented, not least by the sources themselves.
So, sure, the stats need to be taken with a pinch of salt. Doesn't mean they are without value as trend indicators, just because they aren't perfect, or free from different standards, or free from political interference.
And all such alleged or proven criticisms will be perfectly valid as posts on this thread.
So say the National trust states in a press release x songbirds are killed by cats a year - they’ll contact them, NT might say oh it was y study- they’ll go read the original study or talk to the authors about the research etc.
They will also follow up queries from their listeners.
Despite political attempts to interfere with daily reports, Brazil is now by far and away the country with the second most recorded cases and the second largest recorded death total. It is regularly recording more new cases and deaths than any country in the world.
In terms of new cases, India is rising rapidly up the global "league table".
The USA is still totalling on average over 20,000 new cases a day, and daily death totals of about 800. There is wide variation amongst the States. The daily death total has come down. Whether that represents a permanent trend remains to be seen.
The daily total of new cases globally is now averaging about 140, 000, a significant increase in the past couple of weeks. Daily deaths total about 5,000 on average, down from previous peaks earlier in the pandemic.
There are no signs of the pandemic going into any general decline. There are certainly signs of decline in Western European countries but they have been more than counterbalanced by growth elsewhere.
Yes, it an excellent show and consistently debunks the myth that you can prove anything with statistics and rather affirms the power of stats to find truth.
Sadly I don't manage to catch it often but have always been impressed when I have.
AFZ
I generally listen as a podcast - something about Tim Hartford’s tone of voice makes it quite relaxing to listen to when you are falling asleep.
There is now no doubt that new case numbers are surging in USA. At midnight GMT as the date changes to 20 June, 26 States are showing R numbers of 1 or more. The USA death total is now over 120k. Although the USA daily death count is currently down significantly, numbers requiring hospitalisation are increasing in several States. Given the usual lag effects, daily death numbers seem set to rise again in the next 10-20 days.
That is bad enough but pales into insignificance compared with what is happening in Brazil.
(Late edit).Here is the latest Reuters report. Things are also looking bad in Peru and Chile.
All qualifications about the accuracy of the raw data are accepted. The raw data trends look discouraging at best.
My arithmetic tells me that there have been 200k new diagnosed cases in the USA in the last 7 days (worldometer raw data). When last I looked, the R number was 1 or above in 31 States. That is a lot of potential spreading and represents a massive amount of tracking and tracing if attempts are being made to do that.
Currently the Trump Administration seems to be focusing on the declining USA daily death rate. That's of course good news. The real issue is whether the good news is temporary. I wouldn't bet the house on it.
Although increased testing has increased discovery, these raw data show that the first wave of the pandemic is very much ongoing.
The second brief point is that I checked the R numbers by State in the USA and the website is still showing 31 States at 1 or above. The surest sign that the virus is spreading at an increasing rate. That is reflected by the new case numbers.
Link to R numbers.
There are some exceptions to that, but if you click the option for '3 Months ago' it's striking how much the red shifts to the left of the graph and the green shifts to the right.
That probably shouldn't be surprising. Support for distancing measures, lockdowns and so on varies a lot - both politically, and regionally (and there's a lot of overlap between politics and location).
Places that weren't badly hit in the beginning didn't really see the problem, were annoyed by the lockdown measures, and have gone quite far back to normal. In places that were more badly hit, I think people are in general being more careful about contacts.
These graphs represent several months of experience. In terms of epicentres, it is clear that those States which have suffered the most have very largely learned from that, with greater emphasis on isolation, social distancing and cautious relaxation of controls. What I think is a cause for concern is when those who have not suffered so much have discounted or ignored the suffering and learning of others. And that is a concern that crosses national boundaries.
The numbers are painting a stark picture of this continuing pandemic but they are also showing the success of remedial action. Those who discount the lessons do so at danger to themselves and others.
A footnote. More or Less is very helpful, thanks to all who recommended it. I join with their recommendations.
Here's a bunch of UK Happy Campers who look like they've decided it's all over. I'm personally rather glad that Bournemouth is 300-ish miles from here - but if it gets going again, that won't help.
What I think is significant is that they announce that "if you've been to <location> between <dates> you may have been exposed". Most of our cases now are related to funerals, stores, substandard housing.
Mask wearing is low. I'm being very very careful and obeying the rules which means I basically don't go places where there are any crowds at all: my father is 92 and I have agreed to be careful as his designated visitor. About 61,000 tests conducted. Tracing and testing is ongoing.
There is nearly no coercion here in Saskatchewan. There is force of law behind various aspects but it is all the authorities (public health or police) showing up and telling people they're doing it wrong. People are complying except for a rare few, who have been arrested and confined in a hotel in a secondary city for their 14 days. No fines, no other sanctions.
What really concerns me is people travelling here. You cannot go to a provincial park and use facilities if you're out of province, but that's basically the only restriction. The USA-Canada border is closed and we want it to stay closed.
More or Less were discussing why the recent protests haven’t led to a case spike. Observation suggests that superspreader events have been crowded spaces *indoors*, especially in lower temperatures - hence the apparent risk around meat factories.
The virus is thought to die quite fast on surfaces outside.
The daily death rate is being watched carefully and with some trepidation. And tracking and tracing capability is questionable in many places. There is growing concern about loss of control because of public resistance to any reintroduction of more restrictive measures.
It doesn't look good.
To be fair to the politicians it's something J Corbyn was requesting (at least on the S.E front) in the time before lockdown, and R Sumak did get something promised moderately quickly and actually got out (though I think that's now expiring).
True, although I don't think surfaces is the big difference between indoor and outdoor transmission. AIUI, most transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is probably via airborne droplets, and those (along with other airborne contaminants) disperse much faster outside. Compare the experience of being in a park near someone smoking, and sitting in a room with someone smoking.
Lots of people hate UBI because they're hung up on the idea of deserving and undeserving poor, and don't want to pay "lazy people" to "watch TV in their underwear".
Re UK. What's the deal with 1 metre distance? Sounds like politics looking for justification. Anyone heard of the inverse square law?
I remember models in March (can't find a link) showing on-off-on-off lockdown arrangements going on until a vaccine. I'm waiting for the next lock down soon.
Appreciating that hot spots and most seriously affected countries dominate the global figures, the evidence suggests that the pandemic is, overall, getting worse.
In the USA, the R number is now at 1 or above in 33 States, at 0.9 and above in 41 States. Included in those between 0.9 and 1 is New York State. It is not surprising that States which have suffered the most, applied the most stringent controls, are seeking to discourage and where necessary quarantine visitors from current most dangerous zones.
R number link again. A reminder that it is regularly updated and the above paragraph is based on data at 9.30 GMT on 26 June.
Here is a CNN link to the EU/USA comparison. If anything, the daily average of USA new cases is now worse than in the clip.
(Late edit. I have found CNN's Sanjay Gupta to be a considered, sane and helpful voice throughout this pandemic.)
A record 47k new cases have been diagnosed in USA. The R numbers by State are as they were 24 hours ago. With 33 States with an R number of 1 and above, we can expect that the diagnosed new cases per day will continue to rise.
Based on what? The increases correlate a hell of a lot more with places where people aren't wearing masks and where government officials didn't take the virus seriously than with the locales of public protests. Public protests took place practically everywhere, but the increases are primarily in the sunbelt.
Our peak week was the w/e 26 April with 660 deaths, last week (w/e 21 June) there were 49 deaths. The weekly number of Covid deaths has reduced each week for eight consecutive weeks. We are coming out of lockdown more slowly than England, but I think it's going to be hard for the Scottish government to maintain rules here which have been relaxed in England.
What does appear to be a more significant factor is when people gather in enclosed spaces, and for a longer period of time - for example bars. And, where hygiene measures such as regular hand washing and wearing masks in more crowded places are not followed widely.
Based on exposure to risk. So far as that goes, I agree with Alan Cresswell. You and Dave W are right to draw regional distinctions. If protesters were careful, observed social distancing, wore masks, then there is no reason to believe they increased the risk. And it is also likely that people living in States hardest hit by the pandemic are more likely to be more careful.
The media coverage I saw showed many people observing the advice on safe behaviour. And the vast majority of protesters behaved peacefully. The media did show shots of some unprotected people in close proximity with themselves and police/national guard, some close face to face jostling. That would have increased risk regardless of where it happened. Alan's qualification about outdoors/indoors probably doesn't apply to that kind of close proximity. And it was those types of incidents that I was thinking about.
The R numbers certainly confirm the point about regional variations.
We don’t learn from looking at the problems of other states/countries. The calamity needs to be imminent and catastrophic before we act.
It’s partly political - the Right like to be seen as ‘strong’ and not cowed by any foe, even a virus. Thus people like the potus thinking mask wearing is a sign of weakness.
But it’s not all political - it’s human nature. I’m left wing, socialist - and I did the same (Looked at Italy and thought ‘that can’t happen here’)
Mask wearing is a good idea the scientists now say - they weren’t saying that at the beginning, so they have learned as time as gone on. That’s fair. I think masks should be mandatory everywhere the public gather indoors. I don’t think pubs and bars should open until there’s a vaccine.
I don't know if that was intentional, but it seems apposite.
Florida, population around 21.5 million, had more new cases in a single day than Australia, population around 25.5. million, has had entirely. That's just nuts.
There's a close correlation between Johns Hopkins confirmed data and worldometer raw data. The raw data is normally about a day to a day and a half ahead. They use pretty much the same sources but I think Johns Hopkins takes a more critical look at sources. Plus there are timing issues.
The truth is more complex than that. Many States, cities and districts have been led by responsible governors and mayors who have behaved intelligently and responsibly. They have been led by science and the numbers.
But the President is not led by science and the numbers. As usual the truth has been bent to serve his self protecting political needs. Governors and mayors who have followed his lead (or lack of lead) have endangered their people. That's by no means a criticism which should be applied to all.
What is worrying is that after restrictions have been eased, there were 47 new cases yesterday. That's quite a jump.
Hygiene, safe distancing, mask wearing, self isolation mitigate the spread of the virus, reduce significantly the numbers of new cases. Relaxing these controls increases the risk of restarting or increasing the spread of the virus from a low and containable level to a high and difficult to contain level.
The truth is that you can see this demonstrated in different ways in differing places. The virus knows neither national, state, regional nor district boundaries. It will spread or decline depending on the extent to which preventative measures are applied.
The truth is even more complex than that. Governors and mayors who are doing their best to follow the science are also under enormous pressure to reopen the economy because of the appalling state of what passes for a social safety net in the US. A lot of folks spent the $1200 we got from the federal government on rent in April and don't know where the July rent money is going to come from. The only way we'd have been able to stay closed up longer would have been for the federal government to print money like there was no tomorrow and give it to people, and even with a competent executive in the White House that would be difficult to do.
I worry about those protesting about the stricter rules in Scotland on the basis that if it's safe to relax lockdown in England it must also be safe in Scotland. It doesn't seem to me that it is safe to relax the rules in England.
Quite. Just compare how your clothes smell after having been outdoors near someone smoking vs in a room with someone smoking. Now imagine that they're smoking virus.
That's not too bad a proxy for thinking about airborne droplets.
Science should be based on data, not hunches.
The trouble is that now the figures you quoted are not headline news, you have to dig a little (not much, but a little) to find them. So people don’t ‘own the figures.
It should, but if you're going to consider hunches, at least have them based on stuff you already know.
The states that are getting battered right now are Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, Texas, Arizona, Nevada, and some parts of southern California. These aren't all red states; Nevada and California have Democratic governors. So what do the hard-hit places have in common? They have people concentrated in urban and suburban areas (the parts of the sunbelt that are struggling but not as much tend to be somewhat more rural), they have hot climates, and they weren't hit hard earlier in the pandemic. Another thing we know is that people under 40 are testing positive in much bigger numbers than a month ago. We also know that breathing other people's air indoors is the most dangerous thing the average person can do (leaving aside the folks intubating covid patients and the like). Putting all these things together, I wouldn't look at people going to protests or even to beaches; I'd look at younger people in these states' cities feeling like they're going to be okay and gathering in bars and other indoor places with air conditioning.
In so far as there are more detailed data, they would be uncovered by tracers and trackers looking at the origins of newly diagnosed cases. I'm not sure whether anything has been published, one way or another, from those sources, about connections between attending protests and catching the virus. The incidence of new cases argues against protests being significant sources of new clusters in the Northern States. Which is not to say that nobody has been infected there through attending a protest.
To put some meat on the bones, there have been close to 6k new diagnosed cases in New York State in the past week. That's a lot of tracking and tracing work to determine sources of infection and any possible clusters.