Last Friday, Macron floated the idea of a new general lockdown in France. Ouch. And because I’m fed up with reading so much garbage and contradictory stuff on Covid, I decided to have a hard look at the French data. A (long but important) thread.
The questions I want to answer:
How bad is the 2nd wave?
How fast is it growing?
Does it affect only young people as some claim?
Is Covid really treated better?
Is the fatality rate really going down?
Can the government stop the 2nd wave quickly enough?
All important questions.
BTW this is French data but I suspect the data looks the same all over Western Europe, with time lags.
FIRST QUESTION.
How bad is the 2nd wave? The most important thing to know is this: forget cases data, they are useless because the first wave was grossly underestimated (a factor between 10x and 20x imo).
So what can we use? Hospital data, which is consistent, homogenous, and objective. But how? There are so many data series to look at. Let’s start simply with ICU+Hospitalisations for all age groups. Image
It looks like we’re still quite away from the peak, but growing fast. Is this biased by a specific age group or another effect?
To double-check I used a PCA to identify the main factor in all hospital time series. It turns out one factor explains 80% of the variance (of 40 series!) so this is clearly the pandemic factor, and here’s what it looks like over time. Image
We’re growing dangerously fast towards the previous peak.

But how fast? That’s QUESTION 2.
You’ve all heard about R, the famous reproduction number…that no one can reproduce because it’s so complex to estimate!
See e.g. the recent thread of @gro_tsen. One main problem is again the shitty case data. Here’s what R estimates look like with EpiEstim, (state of the art) Image
If you really believe the left part of the chart I have a bridge to sell to you. How can we get around this problem? By using hospital data, again.
Sure, it’s not a proper “epidemic incidence data” per se, but if the % of people going in ICU or hospital is more or less constant, the curves have the same shape and R are the same. Here are the R estimates we get using hospital incidence data.
Daily hospital arrivals Image
Daily ICU arrivals Image
Daily deaths Image
Very interestingly, all estimates are consistent, as you can see below with a comparison of current R estimates for all series. (sorry, I’m lazy, labels still in French “réanimations” = ICU) Image
So that’s our answer: R is approximately 1.2, which means numbers double every 20 days and we should get to the (dramatic) ICU peak in 25 days.
QUESTION 3: does Covid hit mostly the young now? Short answer: No, that’s bullshit. Detailed answer now.
First clue, let’s look, for each age group, at its share of total Covid ICU, Hospi, Deaths data, compared to the demographic share. No big surprise there, except the ICU share of the very old which is important and I’ll discuss later. Image
Did that change over time? I split in three groups: all data, data before first peak and data since September. I get this.

First in hospital Image
In ICU Image
And deaths Image
If you can spot a change there… you’re good, and it’s only in ICU data for the very old. The rest is almost perfectly stable.
If you still don’t believe it, here’s a chart showing the (rescaled) hospitalization data for all age groups vs. the 20-29-year-old, per 100k. The two curves are almost perfectly superposed which means there’s no real difference in 1st wave and second wave. Image
You can use all statistics (hospitalisations, deaths, ICU) and age groups and you will get to a similar conclusion. Except one: ICU for 80+. This is the most horrible chart I know. Older people are now getting A LOT in ICU. Image
In a way it’s good, it means they get treatment, but unfortunately, what it also means is that hospitals were so swamped in the 1st wave that they had to make horrible ethical choices and had to let the oldest die without any possibility of intensive care. Grim.
What it also explains is the fact that hospitalizations grow less quickly than ICU in the second wave: that’s because we have more older people going into ICU than before.
Another relevant question: do older people in hospitals lag younger ones? In other terms, is it the young who infect the old? Here’s a cross autocorrelogram of 20-29 yo vs 80-89 yo. Image
Yes, it’s not symmetrical so the young get in the hospital first, but the effect is small (correlation weighed- lag is 2.7 days)
FOURTH QUESTION.
How bad is the disease now compared to the first wave?
It’s impossible to use fatality rates or hospitalization rates to answer that question because (AGAIN) cases data from the first wave are USELESS.
So let’s look at the other possible "transition": the share of people in the hospital going to ICU (but we have to be careful with the oldest age groups, see above). That’s what I get with all age groups. Image
The very good news is that for the same hospitalization rate, we have now approx. 25% less ICU. Clearly, hospital doctors are better equipped to deal with the disease. But it’s not true for everyone. The effect is strong for younger age groups. Image
But fades away for older age groups. Image
FIFTH QUESTION.
Does Covid kill less? I’m not a big fan of that question, because it makes the disease a kind of binary thing (you die or not) and ignores possibly long-lasting consequences.
Still, I can't deny it’s an important question.
If you look at a representative age group (70-79, other curves are similar) we get the same message as earlier: you die less (almost half less !) going to the hospital now than in the first wave. Image
However, this effect is also fading away as you’re older. Image
The reverse is true for ICU! There is no improvement in the fatality rates in ICU for the 60-69 age group, but it’s getting better for older people (which I suspect is due to the very different ICU admission policy for older people) ImageImage
The daily mortality rates in hospitals and ICU confirm this view (here for the 70-79 age group). ImageImage
Those curves also show a worrying trend: the daily mortality in hospitals is increasing, suggesting a lower quality of care as some hospitals get swamped again. (There is also obviously a lagging effect)
SIXTH QUESTION: can the government stop it quickly enough?

Yeah, I’d really like to know the answer to that one.
First, it’s clear that the incidence data (hospi, ICU or deaths) is strongly autocorrelated as the auto correlogram below shows. You’re not stopping this overnight. Image
The best approach to see what’s going on with autocorrelated data is to use an ARIMA model, and here’s the 1-week forecast of hospital incidence taking into account the weekly seasonality. Image
The problem with that kind of model is obviously that it misses the bigger point: how does R move over time? There are two main drivers imo: the number of social contacts and precautionary measures taken during those contacts.
Hard to have a view on the second topic, but the first can be measured using Google mobility data. When I correlate GMD with rolling estimates of R I find that the key variable is “transit” (but “Home” is also very useful.)
Indeed, if you plot Transit vs R with a 12-day lag, you get this (yeah, I know, borderline chart crime, but this is not an easy thing to estimate!) Image
I’ve used another approach which is to fit an optimized VARMA model on both series and to measure the so-called impulse function, i.e. how long does it take for the changes in one variable to feed into the second variable. Image
14 days are necessary to get a full effect, 8 days will get you half the job done.
What’s the general conclusion of this?

In France, 2nd wave is like 25th march on 1st wave, growing fast (R=1.2, doubling every 20 days, ICU peak in 25 days.)

There’s no difference in the age split of the pandemic in 1st and 2nd wave expect that now older people go into ICU
Hospital care is better (25% better) but deteriorating.

There’s no big difference for older people.
Based on Google mobility data, any measure will feed into hospital data with a 10-14 lag.

We should (could?) see the impact of curfew soon in the data.

If we don’t, the government will have a week (more or less) to decide new measures.
@phl43 @Sime0nStylites @DavidKeo @spignal

(Tagging a few poor souls stranded in our forsaken land)
With better resolution sorry Image
With better resolution Image
With better resolution Image
(I should point out that all charts comparing age groups are rescaled for a size effect among each group!)
Thanks to @BiasedStats for spotting an error in this chart (and another one); I plotted the wrong column of data for deaths (the conclusion is exactly the same, though). Image
And this one had the same error Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with JohannesBorgen

JohannesBorgen Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jeuasommenulle

29 Nov
You're all going bananas about Omicron, so I think what you all should do is take a deep breath & read this balanced, informed, presentation from people on the ground (dated today). Highlights below.

sacoronavirus.co.za/2021/11/29/pre…
Hospitalization rates has been around 10%-ish in South-Af. What we should look at is this: over the next few days (because there is a lag) is that % significantly different. It's too early to tell.
Some good news
Read 6 tweets
26 Nov
The German financial stability review has lots of other interesting charts. Here are the ones I found the most compelling. A thread to wake you up on a lazy black Friday.
This is the equivalent of the ECB inflation spider chart... but for corporate insolvencies. Buba keeps predicting they'll spike.. but it just does not happen. Tbh this is seriously mysterious and somehow worrying.
And you can't blame Buba for those forecasts because we're really in extremely weird times. Here's how previous crises have looked like in terms of GDP/insolvencies.

This 2020 crisis totally inverts the GDP/insolvency regression line and makes it a >0 slope
🤪
Read 11 tweets
3 Nov
It’s finance day at the #COP26, so time to fulfill an old promise: a thread about climate change and banks!

First things first: please no debate about whether climate change is real or not, it’s boring – so let’s use it as a postulate and discuss the rest.
The topic is endless so I will only make a few important points.
1st point & THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT:

ENERGY TRANSITION WON’T HAPPEN WITHOUT THE BANKS ON BOARD.

Forget green bonds, they’re (almost) useless, for many reasons. Banks finance 70% of the European economy and bonds just a tiny fraction. So green bonds a microscopic fraction.
Read 28 tweets
19 Oct
I think I have just read the most hilarious piece of regulation ever. It's called "Duration netting rules" for leverage calculation in the AIFM (alternative funds) directive. A quick thread.
This is for funds that primarily do interest rate derivatives. So you take each derivative you have and calculate its "Equivalent underlying asset position". The definition of target duration is pure gold, but that's not my point here.
THEN, you map your derivatives into maturity buckets.
Read 7 tweets
1 Oct
Global control of your money, in three charts (all from the BIS report on CBDC and financial stability).

Step 1: your deposits go into CBDC Image
Step 2 : Oh but this is very risky, look what happened in Greece and with CBDC we won't even be able to see the bank runs. Image
Step 3: don't worry, I have a solution for you Image
Read 4 tweets
29 Sep
Ok, this is very weird.

The BIS Basel monitoring report is just out, and it has this very boring chart.

Yeah, yeah, we get it, Covid, bla bla bla, governments put so much money on the table that they bailed out the entire economy and there was almost no default.

BUT WAIT. 1/2
That's the same chart for bank exposures, i.e. exposures banks have on other banks.

WTF did happen????
The report has this cryptic footnote

"(25) The marked increase for bank exposures is due to a significant increase for one large bank."

WHICH BIG BANK(S) WENT BUST IN Q4 2020 WITHOUT TELLING ME??????
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(