Science, Statistics and Studies [SARS-CoV-2]

The former.

That's what I thought. Who needs the Edited tag when we've got Oli about.

Where is this from?
What are the other outliers?

The Source data is from the ONS all deaths data Wales and England.

Its the exact same graph from the FT
I posted here

Stolen from a research fellow at UCL on twitter and changed the formatting to make 2020 look of greater significance.
https://twitter.com/HarryKennard/status/1255060961167314944

The 1970 data point is likely the impact of the Hong Kong Flu

And the later ones Swine Flu in 2010

credited in the corner?

swine flu killed less than 400 people in the UK?

2020 looks fairly significant, however you format it?

The term 'outlier' is being mis-used here, they are entries in the dataset within 1 sigma.

Your right about swine flu, more likely the spike was the 50,000 excess deaths in 2018 from the normal season flu thought linked to an ineffective vaccine.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/south/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2018/01/high-level-flu-gp-letter-jan-18.pdf

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/excesswintermortalityinenglandandwales/2017to2018provisionaland2016to2017final

Sure, I sort of see what you mean, but compared to this time of year? We still have seasonal flu as well as this and come the end of the year there will be excess deaths well above the average

do you agree?

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04361838

Wooooah did not expect that

Amazing...

Grace...

I didn't know @tynan had gone into science.

However, what is this doing in this thread? Aren't you afraid of Chalfie's wrath? :)

Outstanding use of taxpayer dollars.

How do they ensure that no one prays/ wishes someone well from the non-prayer sample.
They could even pray for themselves without telling anyone.
(Is April fools day on 1st May in the US?)

Mosque thread alert 1 ... 2 ... 3 ...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/03/british-public-turn-to-prayer-as-one-in-four-tune-in-to-religious-services

.

Yes but that trend disappears doesn't it when you do it by date of recorded death rather than date of death reported?

.

.

Covid-19: Leading statistician slams UK’s reporting of swab tests as “travesty of science”

https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1664?utm_source=etoc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tbmj&utm_content=weekly&utm_term=20200501

Repost?

Good work by some clever Austrians.

https://www.ages.at/service/service-presse/pressemeldungen/epidemiologische-abklaerung-am-beispiel-covid-19/

could you summarise?

It's an explanation of the methodology and then some results of contact tracing in Austria. The second-to-last graph shows an estimate of how the reproduction rate went down. The last graph shows the clustering of transmissions by 'calendar week' ("Kalenderwoche"), and the last table shows different contexts in which transmission occurred (e.g. in care homes). All in Austria, natch.

Peer review of Ferguson's code behind his model currently going on in Github is savage.

Turns out what was 'open sourced' isnt the original code but a heavily refactored version by Microsoft and Github removing Fortran sections (took some of the best coders in the world a month)

https://github.com/mrc-ide/covid-sim/issues/144#

But even after this work, its still buggy as fuck.
The official docs say the output isnt reliable.

They recommend you run it multiple times until you get the results you hoped for..
https://github.com/mrc-ide/covid-sim/issues/116

Team from Edinburgh uni showing how same entry can generate a different modeled outcome

Peer review of Ferguson's code behind his model currently going on in Github is savage.

Any of the savagers come up with a better model yet?

A bad Model is far worse than no model
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZLrZc9NPVw