it's a while since I've given you the age breakdown of English cases (sorry, it's been a busy couple of weeks at work and at home). and it's looking OK I think: overall cases are pretty flat, maybe even slightly falling. and the falls continue where it matters most (in 60+) 🧵
digging into the detail, starting with the younger age groups: these now all look fairly stable, maybe just slightly over the peak. (and note I'm being cautious by truncating 3 days on the specimen date series - the next day looks slightly better again, on a sneak peek).
there's still a little bit of growth in the 20-40s, mostly from the 30-40s:
and the 40-60s look fairly stable overall, with (gentle) growth in the 40-50s balancing (gentle) falls in the 50-60s:
the 60-80s continue to fall - although it would be good to see some faster declines in the 60-64s as more boosters take effect:
I never like to see cases in 90+ growing, but I have to keep reminding myself how volatile/noisy that series is. 🤞 that if we can sustain case reductions in the younger ages, that might feed into bigger falls here also (since the older groups tend to be infected by younger)
and if we look at the raw case date for 90+, it doesn't look particularly dramatic / worrying - more just a bit of a plateau.
PS I haven't said much about omicron yet because there isn't much for me to say: others with much greater expertise in viruses and variants have done some helpful threads, which I will continue to RT as I find them. once we get a better handle on omicron's transmission...
...advantage vs. delta, and its likely degree of immune evasion vs. prior infection and vs. vaccines, as well as its severity profile, then it may be possible to say something about its potential impact in the UK. but we're a way from having that data, so I'll wait patiently.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
only three graphs today: one bad, and two good (which is probably a fair summary of how I'm feeling). firstly the bad: cases in 5-9s appear to have hit an all-time high, which isn't ideal: 1/4
the better news is that growth seems to be fading in the younger age groups (but with cases still growing, for now at least), and cases are already falling in the older (60-80 and 80+) age groups: 2/4
even better to see this feeding through into hospitalisations: we can see the orange line (65-84s) clearly trending down. I'd like the blue line (85+) to have a steeper downward trend over the next week 🤞: 3/4
Honestly not a big fan of the case trends in the last couple of days. Here’s the overview: with the kids still driving the growth, but other groups also starting to pick up. (and I wouldn’t take too much cope from the flattening on the last day – that will get revised up) 🧵
Looking in more detail at the under-20s, we can see the power coming from the 5-9s, but with 0-4 and 10-14 not far behind, and even 15-19s now back into positive territory (i.e. cases growing)
The headlines from today’s case data are concerning, and it’s certainly not great news. But there are some glimmers of hope in the detail by age, so let’s have a dig in. The overview doesn’t look too bad, with case rates stable in the under-40s, and still falling in the 40+ 🧵
But that is a slightly lagged view of what’s going on, and obscures some useful detail. So I’ve built some new graphs which break down each of those lines into 5-year age groups, with no averaging, and using data up to specimen date 9th Nov – NB this date will get revised up.
Here’s the under-20s, to start with – we can see growth re-emerging in the 5-9s and 10-14s, but not so much in the 15-19s. The 0-4s were already bouncing around, close to stability – and that looks to be continuing here.
The case trends remain hard to read, but with a bit of age-group case ratio analysis, I think we can see a bit further into the fog. Let’s start with the overview: cases still falling in the under-20s and over-60s, but not the 20-60s. But that hides some important detail. 🧵
Looking first at the older (60+) age groups., we can see some very steep (and welcome) declines in the 75+, a gentle decline in the 70-74s, and gentle increases in the 60-69s. Exactly what you might expect if we were giving boosters to the most elderly first, for example.
So – good news overall. But also a reminder that if we leave the 60-69s unboosted for too long, we might see those case rates drift upwards, which would be very unhelpful.
There been something bugging me for a while about how my model (and others) works. And I think I’ve finally pinned it down. It’s subtle and technical, but I think might turn out to be surprisingly important. And it’s all to do with the “leakiness” of the immunity model. 🧵
The difference between a “leaky” vaccine and an “all-or-nothing” vaccine has been well-covered by others – my favourite explanation is in this thread:
As it happens I’m not particularly happy with the “leaky” terminology – it could mean a number of different things, and so could be misinterpreted. I prefer to think about this in terms of the variability of the vaccine effectiveness (VE) at individual level.
I’ve been thinking a bit about optimism and pessimism, and how that might affect our views on whether additional restrictions (such as the government’s “Plan B”) should be imposed. It’s not quite as simple as it might first appear. Let me explain…. 🧵
The first thing to note is that optimism and pessimism can operate on different timescales. So you might think that things are going to get worse over the next couple of months, but that 2022 will be a more positive experience, due to boosters and improved treatments.
Or you might be relatively optimistic about the next couple of months, but concerned about the potential for a resurgence in early 2022 as we reach the depths of midwinter, and as waning immunity hits the populations in their 40s and 50s who may not have had a booster yet.