One thing we’ve learnt about #COVID stories:
Often something that looks too scary to be true isn’t quite true when you look at the small print.
Often something that looks too good to be true isn’t quite true when you look at the small print.
There have been a few scary stories in recent weeks about “hotspots” of #COVID19 around the UK.
Partly inspired by maps like this (this one from @PHE_uk) which compare local case levels with the national avg. The reddest area here is Barnsley
One problem with heatmaps is that while they do a good job of depicting regional variation, they don’t give you much context.
And they can look more dramatic when the national avg is low (as it is right now). So.
Here are three “hotspots”: Clackmannanshire, Corby & Barnsley:
Look at actual case levels and you see 3 v different stories:
Barnsley had a surge in autumn
Corby avoided the autumn peak but had a massive surge in Jan
Clackmannanshire v different again. No big surge but small bounces (prob local clusters)
As of now, cases falling in each area
Now, there may well be hotspots in the future. These things can spiral quickly. But I’m not sure these would currently meet anyone’s definition of dangerous hotspots.
That said, even when you take a step back and look at the national picture sometimes things can be distorted.
Consider this viral tweet from the @spectator yesterday. Is it true that the UK has had the biggest peak-to-now fall in #COVID cases?
Well, yes if you just look at the figures and ignore the small print. But if you look at the small print?
Not quite...
The @spectator table is based on figs on cases per million over the most recent 7 days, taken from @OurWorldInData, which are in turn taken from CSSE Johns Hopkins who in turn compile figs reported by each country.
Use those numbers and UK cases per m do indeed fall 97.4%! BUT...
Here’s the thing: go into the @OurWorldInData spreadsheet and look closely at daily case numbers and here’s what you find: a -4.8k figure for the UK dating from Friday.
What happened? The UK removed some old positive test results. It was barely reported, but here’s the note:
Remove that negative number (which is anyway a statistical adjustment to HISTORIC cases) from the rolling 7 day average and UK cases per million go up from 22.7 to 38.8.
This number is prob a better picture of where the UK is.
It’s a MASSIVE improvement on recent months.
But alas this piece of small print means the headline on the @spectator piece is not quite right.
The UK is actually not in first but in second place in this table.
Since when you use the adjusted case rate the peak-to-now fall is actually about 95.6%.
This is still AMAZING.
None of this is intended as a criticism of the @spectator’s excellent data hub or indeed @OurWorldInData’s excellent database and charts.
But sometimes the small print is so small no-one notices. And sometimes that has a bearing on the numbers (even if only barely)...
Still: the overall picture in the UK remains really promising. Cases falling fast, as are hospitalisations. On basis of my rough and ready dot plot which completes the SPI-M projections from Feb, things are still looking good.
Real question is how these look 1/2 months from now
Here’s a video we made abt this last night.
NB: most other broadcasters try to steer clear of deep data analysis and charts like these.
They think viewers will switch off.
Not @SkyNews, who care about this stuff and think their viewers do too.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Ed Conway

Ed Conway 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 @EdConwaySky

6 Apr
Breaking: latest IMF World Economic Outlook is out.
Having flicked through, strikes me this is the most positive outlook since the onset of the pandemic (with some important provisos).
- UK, US and most advanced economies get a big vaccine-related upgrade this year & next
Here are the latest IMF GDP forecasts for G7 members. As you can see, an awful 2020 followed by pretty strong growth in 2022. UK actually strongest in G7 in 2022 (and given the OBR thinks 2022 GDP could be over 7% it’s poss the IMF is undercooking it slightly)
But look at the LEVEL of GDP growth and it’s a somewhat different story. The UK is the second last in the G7 to get back to its pre-crisis peak (Italy the slowest).
Read 9 tweets
1 Apr
Only one of these countries, ranked here by the number of #COVID19 cases, population adjusted, is NOT on the UK govt’s “red list” which stipulates that British travellers should quarantine in a govt-approved hotel upon arrival in the UK.
Can you guess which one?
You guessed it: the answer is France.
Now, cards on the table: I left Uruguay off that chart even though it IS on the red list because, well, I was trying to make a point. Here you can see the full chart of red list countries vs France.
But as for that point…
Clearly case numbers shouldn’t be the only determinant of which countries are on or off the red list.
Clearly some of those countries on the list have dodgy data on COVID.
Clearly this isn’t just about cases but also abt VARIANTS of the virus.
Even so…
Read 4 tweets
29 Mar
Remember when the PM announced the easing of lockdown it was going to be about data not dates? Well now we’ve had a bit more data in this feels like as good a time as any to see how we’re doing (Thread)
Strictly speaking “data not dates” meant a few crucial datapoints, as laid out in the documents at the time. In particular, there were four tests, roughly as follows:
1. Are enough people being vaccinated?
2. Are vaccines “working”?
3. Are infections surging?
4. New variants 😱
Test one: Are vaccines being deployed successfully?
Seems to be going very well. Over 90% of those aged over 70 have been vaccinated which is beyond what many expected. Over 80% for all but those aged over 100 interestingly
Read 14 tweets
25 Mar
Short answer?
Because the population was ageing in that period. It's DEMOGRAPHY!
I'm a big fan of @dannydorling but he's got this one wrong.
As @ActuaryByDay will tell you, once you age adjust the death rates you'll see they kept falling from 2012 to 2019. This is important.
Here are some charts that illustrate the point.
First off is simple deaths per year (England & Wales).
Yes, deaths crept up post 2010, reversing a long trend of falls.
But now recall that a) the population is ageing and b) these demographic trends matter enormously
More old people in a bigger population means, all else equal, that deaths will tend to rise each year. Because older people are more likely to die than younger people. That's why actuaries age adjust their data. And if you age adjust the data here's what it looks like:
Read 4 tweets
25 Mar
Thread: Since the UK has just released its latest data on greenhouse gas emissions, this feels like as good a time as any to look at the numbers and ask: what’s really going on? The broad picture is v promising (see these headlines from earlier): emissions falling fast.
Before we go any further, this is not a thread about “the science”. It’s not a debate abt climate change. Feel free to debate that elsewhere. This is abt the DATA. And while there are some interesting question marks over the data, the overarching aim of govt right now is v simple
The UK has committed, in law, to get greenhouse gas emissions down to zero in net terms by 2050. If you consider the starting point for that effort to be 1990, it’s now nearly (but not quite) halfway there. This is quite something…
Read 14 tweets
23 Mar
Since it’s a year on from lockdown and the second wave of excess mortality now seems to be over, a few datapoints on #COVID19 mortality in the UK.
Starting with this: we’re now at 149k deaths according to the @ONS measure (deaths where COVID mentioned on certificate)
Important to note this isn’t the only measure though: excess deaths, which is deaths from ALL causes vs 5yr historical average, puts the toll at 123k. We’ll get to why there’s a big difference in a moment. Even so: however you measure it we’re talking about high numbers of deaths
Strikingly, on the basis of the most comprehensive @ONS #COVID19 figures, total #COVID19 deaths (149k in total). The second wave was far bigger than the first wave. 91k in the latest wave vs 58k in the first.
Read 7 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 Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!