Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): The Disease & Its Spread (Per Se)

[Trevp666]

The ONS has released it's latest data today, which gives all the numbers on C19 up to May 8th.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/…/deathsregistere…/weekending8may2020

This is their graph for C19 deaths in all settings;

..... and then the same graph with a projection line added.

So as you can see - C19 pretty much gone in about 6 days time. (+/- a day or two)
It's a pretty simplistic projection I know, and it should have a little bit of a curve to it, and we will definitely still get a few cases here and there, but this clearly shows how the numbers are really tailing off now.

 

[ramonmercado]

Learning from the past.

Past plagues offer lessons for society after the coronavirus pandemic

It was an optimistic time. A healthy economy showered wealth on elites and allowed many ordinary citizens to live comfortably. Local goods and exotic imports filled shops and markets. Political leaders ruled a vast network of cities and trade routes.

Then the enemy attacked. An infectious disease leapfrogged from one population center to another. People died in droves. Political leaders scrambled to recover from a dizzying sucker punch to public and economic health.

This is not a tale about the United States or any other nation besieged by the new coronavirus. Instead, it’s a story about the ancient Roman Empire, where a contagion known as the Antonine Plague felled victims throughout the realm, from Egypt to continental Europe and the British Isles in the late 160s.

Accurate mortality data for the Antonine Plague don’t exist. But written accounts from that time point to mass deaths. Physician and philosopher Galen described victims as suffering from open sores in the windpipe, rashes of dark blisters, vomiting, diarrhea, fever and other symptoms of what may have been smallpox. Perhaps 7 million to 8 million people perished in what some consider to be history’s first pandemic, says Kyle Harper of the University of Oklahoma in Norman. Harper is a historian of the Roman Empire and ancient epidemics.

The Antonine Plague and other epidemics and pandemics that struck before 20th century vaccines and medical knowledge hold lessons, but no easy answers, for governments and people today grappling with COVID-19.

One lesson looms large: Societies can’t indefinitely avoid outbreaks, but they can withstand even severe pandemics. Past political systems have found ways to bounce back from mass illness and unthinkable numbers of deaths.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-covid-19-ancient-plagues-pandemics-lessons-society

 

[Trevp666]

This is the same green line (the lying little bugger).
He's rocked up on a new graph, full of beans, really sure of himself this time.
We'll see.

 

[Ringo]

This is the same green line (the lying little bugger).
He's rocked up on a new graph, full of beans, really sure of himself this time.
We'll see.

I'd expect that green line to start smoothing and curving out into a horizontal line around the 18th. I predict there will be a long drawn out small number of cases for a few more months (if you don't see a spike during June).

 

[Ogdred Weary]

Learning from the past.

Past plagues offer lessons for society after the coronavirus pandemic

It was an optimistic time. A healthy economy showered wealth on elites and allowed many ordinary citizens to live comfortably. Local goods and exotic imports filled shops and markets. Political leaders ruled a vast network of cities and trade routes.

Then the enemy attacked. An infectious disease leapfrogged from one population center to another. People died in droves. Political leaders scrambled to recover from a dizzying sucker punch to public and economic health.

This is not a tale about the United States or any other nation besieged by the new coronavirus. Instead, it’s a story about the ancient Roman Empire, where a contagion known as the Antonine Plague felled victims throughout the realm, from Egypt to continental Europe and the British Isles in the late 160s.

Accurate mortality data for the Antonine Plague don’t exist. But written accounts from that time point to mass deaths. Physician and philosopher Galen described victims as suffering from open sores in the windpipe, rashes of dark blisters, vomiting, diarrhea, fever and other symptoms of what may have been smallpox. Perhaps 7 million to 8 million people perished in what some consider to be history’s first pandemic, says Kyle Harper of the University of Oklahoma in Norman. Harper is a historian of the Roman Empire and ancient epidemics.

The Antonine Plague and other epidemics and pandemics that struck before 20th century vaccines and medical knowledge hold lessons, but no easy answers, for governments and people today grappling with COVID-19.

One lesson looms large: Societies can’t indefinitely avoid outbreaks, but they can withstand even severe pandemics. Past political systems have found ways to bounce back from mass illness and unthinkable numbers of deaths.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-covid-19-ancient-plagues-pandemics-lessons-society

That was a proper pestilence like you used to get in the Good Old Days, not like this snowflake virus.

 

[Min Bannister]

That was a proper pestilence like you used to get in the Good Old Days, not like this snowflake virus.

Not enough pustules or haemorrhaging for you eh? Better luck next time! :dpoo:

 

[Trevp666]

Todays (19/5/20) NHS England 'new deaths' figures released.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

Todays figures and notable statistics;
174 reported 'new' deaths today;
Daily actual totals now dropping below 100 per day
136 of the 202 trusts today reported 0 new deaths (That's 67%)
For the 5th day, no trust reported more than 10 deaths (highest amount is 9).
No single trust stands out as reporting a greater number than any other.
3 deaths are over a week old.
The oldest reported 'new' death is one from April 1st from Norfolk Community Health And Care NHS Trust (That's 7 weeks ago)

Todays deaths by age group;
0-19 = 1
20-39 = 0
40-59 = 11
60-78 = 71
80+ = 91

We are well beyond the 'peak' now, which occurred around the 4th - 8th April.
Monday this week (yesterday) showing 29 - however, as the daily figure is communicated to NHS England at 5pm each day the total for the whole of yesterday is not complete.

Below I show my running totals for;
Existing deaths + New deaths = New totals (If no 'new' to add then no calculation has been entered)
(since Thursday April 2nd, the date I started logging the numbers officially released).

T 811
F 615
S 1107 (Saturday April 4th)
S 1094
M 940
T 808
W 889
T 778
F 734
S 770 (April 11th)
S 714
M 689
T 643
W 682
T 631
F 604
S 567 (April 18th)
S 518
M 556
T 479
W 486+1=487
T 445
F 431
S 385 (April 25th)
S 373
M 339
T 338
W 319
T 301
F 299
S 263 (May 2nd)
S 243
M 246
T 243
W 246+1=247
T 239
F 195
S 188 (May 9th)
S 183
M 152
T 170
W 141
T 144+4=148
F 114+15=129
S 92+33=125
S 27+67=94
M ----------29

(Figures supplied by NHS England date back to the beginning of March when the UK recorded it's first day with more than 50 deaths.
The figures released daily include deaths from the day on which they happened, so can be from any previous day NOT from just within the past 24 hours)

 

[Trevp666]

I'd expect that green line to start smoothing and curving out into a horizontal line around the 18th. I predict there will be a long drawn out small number of cases for a few more months

Yes that's what you'd expect to see, but the numbers are already in for the NHS for England for that period (see above) and no, it isn't becoming a horizontal line, it's still tailing off and quite significantly too. Care Homes deaths (the red bit on the graph) lag behind hospital deaths by a few days, and add on about another 40%, so the numbers we are seeing in hospitals for this past weekend (currently 125 & 94) will have a few more added on during the next couple of days, then when the ONS release it's dataset relating to this week you can expect to see the care homes deaths of around another 40 to add on too.

Over the next couple of weeks I expect to see the reporting of numbers of new deaths to become even lower but not actually reaching zero, we will still get C19 deaths but they will become less and less frequent.

 

[Ringo]

Over the next couple of weeks I expect to see the reporting of numbers of new deaths to become even lower but not actually reaching zero, we will still get C19 deaths but they will become less and less frequent.

That's what I meant - it won't go straight down to 0. It will gradually reduce and smooth out to a few cases per day.

 

[EnolaGaia]

The 6-foot / 2-meter rule of thumb for social distancing may be insufficient where there's air movement. Newly published research indicates saliva aerosol droplets can carry much farther downwind.

Yikes! Saliva Droplets From Mild Cough Travel Up to 18 Feet

Current social distancing guidelines of 6 feet may be insufficient, because a mild cough occurring in low wind speeds of 4-15 kph can propel saliva droplets 18 feet.

Airborne transmission of viruses, like the virus causing COVID-19, is not well understood, but a good baseline for study is a deeper understanding of how particles travel through the air when people cough.

In a paper published in Physics of Fluids, from AIP Publishing, Talib Dbouk and Dimitris Drikakis discovered that with even a slight breeze of 4 kph, saliva travels 18 feet in 5 seconds. ...

Saliva is a complex fluid, and it travels suspended in a bulk of surrounding air released by a cough. Many factors affect how saliva droplets travel, including the size and number of droplets, how they interact with one another and the surrounding air as they disperse and evaporate, how heat and mass are transferred, and the humidity and temperature of the surrounding air. ...

FULL STORY:
https://scitechdaily.com/yikes-saliva-droplets-from-mild-cough-travel-up-to-18-feet/

PUBLISHED ARTICLE:
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/5.0011960

 

[Victory]

For those football fans amongst us, tests conducted within the last week (15 - 19 May), of English Premiership players and club staff, have produced six positives.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52726278

What troubles me are these two questions -

The lockdown came in in stages in the UK, from 16 March onwards but in it's fullest form early evening on 23 March.
Covid 19 has an official incubation period of up to 14 days, but some sources claim 24 days.
Symptoms (if there are any) begin to appear up to seven days after the last day of incubation.
This means symptoms can appear as long as 31 days after infection.

So if we allow for 24 days incubation, plus seven days to show symptoms, that should give us people showing symptoms and/or proof of infection at the latest around the 24 April, if they were infected when lockdown came in on 23 March.

1.) These positive tests were in mId-May. So does it mean these six football players/staff they were infected after lockdown started?

We are told that Burnley Assistant Manager Ian Woan has tested positive, and is asymptomatic.

2.) So just how long does this virus hang around in the body, and how long is it infectious for?

 

[Min Bannister]

1.) These positive tests were in mId-May. So does it mean these six football players/staff they were infected after lockdown started?

We are told that Burnley Assistant Manager Ian Woan has tested positive, and is asymptomatic.

2.) So just how long does this virus hang around in the body, and how long is it infectious for?

They could easily have been ignoring the lockdown. I have read a few reports of footballer, coaches etc doing just that.

 

[David Plankton]

They could easily have been ignoring the lockdown. I have read a few reports of footballer, coaches etc doing just that.

I can't remember who it was as I have no interest in football, but one story on the Beeb recently told of a player who had ignored lockdown and jetted off to France for a 'sex party'. And he was very sorry about it too.

 

[EnolaGaia]

FWIW ... The epidemiological projections for the USA are currently looking worse, not better, than expected.

The Latest US Coronavirus Death Predictions Are Even Worse Than Expected Before

Coronavirus-related deaths among Americans are projected to surpass 113,000 by mid-June, a modeling average released Tuesday showed, underlining the US status as the nation worst affected by the pandemic.

The United States has recorded more than 1.5 million confirmed COVID-19 infections and 91,600 fatalities as of Tuesday, but a projection compiled from nine models from separate institutions predicted roughly 22,000 more Americans would succumb to the disease over the next 25 days.

"The new forecast for cumulative US deaths by June 13 is about 113,000, with a 10 percent chance of seeing fewer than about 107,000 and a 10 percent chance of seeing more than 121,000," the COVID-19 Forecast Hub at the University of Massachusetts said on its website.

The specific ensemble forecast average is 113,364 deaths by that date. ...

FULL STORY: https://www.sciencealert.com/models-suggest-us-virus-deaths-could-top-113-000-by-mid-june

 

[Trevp666]

Todays (20/5/20) NHS England 'new deaths' figures released.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

Todays figures and notable statistics;
166 reported 'new' deaths today;
Daily actual totals now dropping below 100 per day
149 of the 202 trusts today reported 0 new deaths (That's 74%)
1 trust reported more than 10 'new' deaths - Luton and Dunstable University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust reports 14, all of which are from between May 4th and May 10th.
(Maybe the person who did the reports was off that week?).
24 'new' deaths are over a week old.
The oldest reported 'new' death is from March 24th from London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust (That is OVER 8 WEEKS AGO!)

Todays deaths by age group;
0-19 = 0
20-39 = 1
40-59 = 8
60-78 = 56
80+ = 101

We are well beyond the 'peak' now, which occurred around the 4th - 8th April.
Tuesday this week (yesterday) showing 31 - however, as the daily figure is communicated to NHS England at 5pm each day the total for the whole of yesterday is not complete.

Below I show my running totals for;
Existing deaths + New deaths = New totals (If no 'new' to add then no calculation has been entered)
(since Thursday April 2nd, the date I started logging the numbers officially released).

T 811
F 615
S 1107 (Saturday April 4th)
S 1094
M 940
T 808
W 889
T 778
F 734
S 770 (April 11th)
S 714
M 689
T 643
W 682+1=683
T 631
F 604
S 567 (April 18th)
S 518
M 556+1=557
T 479
W 487
T 445
F 431
S 385+1=386 (April 25th)
S 373
M 339+2=341
T 338
W 319
T 301
F 299
S 263 (May 2nd)
S 243
M 246+1=247
T 243+1=244
W 247+1=248
T 239+241
F 195+4=199
S 188+3=191 (May 9th)
S 183+4=187
M 152
T 170+1=171
W 141+4=145
T 148+4=152
F 129+8=137
S 125+15=140 (May 16th)
S 94+17=111
M 29+63=92
T ----------31

(Figures supplied by NHS England date back to the beginning of March when the UK recorded it's first day with more than 50 deaths.
The figures released daily include deaths from the day on which they happened, so can be from any previous day NOT from just within the past 24 hours)

 

[Lb8535]

Thank you for your meticulous work on these numbers. In order to really evaluate where we are, It would be most useful to have the number of hospitalizations, and also the statistical number of infections by area . The last is not possible without organized widespread testing. The first requires that there actually be space at each medical center to hospitalize everyone who needs it, which at one point in the US has not been available uniformly in all areas. I also believe that one of the reasons for the high deathrate is that hospitals were not taking people in early enough to treat them to avoid very serious complications. (Which is also the reason for the many uncounted deaths at home. ) I believe that once hospitals stop refusing people until they are near respiratory distress, there will be a lower deathrate. Once that freely-available hospitalization rate drops, it should be an indicator of improvement.

Of course, 14 days from last Friday all bets are off.

 

[Trevp666]

Yep it'd be good to have more info, unfortunately you'll have to source that yourself.
I produce this from NHS figures, just to give us a steer on the 'curve' and an overview of the statistics relating to the daily reports, and it takes me an hour, I don't think I have time to go around widespread testing as well, organised or not!
The ONS figures released on a Tuesday in the UK have a whole wealth of data, and graphs etc, and is massively accurate and useful, and I encourage anyone to check it each week, however for my purposes it's only any use as a tool to add to my workings from 2 weeks ago, as it is itself giving us info which is, at best, 2 weeks old.

Oh and thank you for recognising my efforts Lb8535, it's appreciated.

 

[Victory]

They could easily have been ignoring the lockdown. I have read a few reports of footballer, coaches etc doing just that.

A handful of footballers did ignore the lockdown and get caught.
Perhaps a few more ignored it and did not get caught.

But not all of them are jetting off to Paris for trysts.

 

[Trevp666]

I'm not exactly sure how they arrive at this number, but "worldometer" now today showing -525 new cases for the UK.
Eh?

 

[Trevp666]

Todays (21/5/20) NHS England 'new deaths' figures released.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

Todays figures and notable statistics;
187 reported 'new' deaths today;
The trend is a consistent daily 10% drop in 'new deaths' (albeit with a little +/- to smoothe)
142 of the 202 trusts today reported 0 new deaths (That's 70%)
1 trust reported 10 'new' deaths - Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS FoundationTrust , the oldest of which is from May 15th
10 'new' deaths are over a week old.
The oldest reported 'new' deaths are 2 from London Northwest University Healthcare Trust from March 29th.

Todays deaths by age group;
0-19 = 1
20-39 = 0
40-59 = 16
60-78 = 58
80+ = 112

We are well beyond the 'peak' now, which occurred around the 4th - 8th April.
Wednesday this week (yesterday) showing 44 - however, as the daily figure is communicated to NHS England at 5pm each day the total for the whole of yesterday is not complete.

Below I show my running totals for;
Existing deaths + New deaths = New totals (If no 'new' to add then no calculation has been entered)
(since Thursday April 2nd, the date I started logging the numbers officially released).

T 811
F 615
S 1107 (Saturday April 4th)
S 1094
M 940
T 808
W 889
T 778
F 734
S 770 (April 11th)
S 714
M 689
T 643
W 683
T 631
F 604+1=605
S 567 (April 18th)
S 518
M 557
T 479
W 487
T 445
F 431
S 386 (April 25th)
S 373+1=374
M 341
T 338
W 319
T 301
F 299+1=300
S 263 (May 2nd)
S 243
M 247
T 244
W 248
T 241
F 199
S 191 (May 9th)
S 187+1=188
M 152
T 171
W 145+4=149
T 152+2=154
F 137+7=144
S 140+12=152 (May 16th)
S 111+13=124
M 92+26=118
T 31+73=104
W -----------44

(Figures supplied by NHS England date back to the beginning of March when the UK recorded it's first day with more than 50 deaths.
The figures released daily include deaths from the day on which they happened, so can be from any previous day NOT from just within the past 24 hours)

 

[Trevp666]

And because the "7 day rolling figure" chart that they roll out for the daily briefings is so inaccurate (by using the previous 7 days when the numbers are dropping), here is my chart which shows the actual 7 day rolling figure by combining the numbers for 3 days either side of the date and averaging those instead.

 

[Cochise]

I know I have said this before , but the government are either deliberately lying to us about 'daily deaths' or they are too stupid/idle/ignorant to enquire into the statistic.

How can we then have any faith in anything else they announce?

 

[maximus otter]

The regime can have a man at your door if you watch an unlicenced telly; their cameras & computers can drop a fine through your letterbox for speeding five counties away; police will knock at your door if you’re perceived to have been rude on TwitFace; yet they can’t collate a list based on one simple criterion:

“This individual would not have died were it not for him contracting C19.”

Really?

maximus otter

 

[Trevp666]

Unfortunately the people giving the presentations are not the ones providing the statistics.
Otherwise it might be presented in a slightly more accurate way.
Or at least clarified a little bit.

 

[Lobeydosser]

As predicted - see, your "green line " wasn't fibbing after all - you should apply for a job as the Government Science advisor - just be more discrete with any affairs than the last one was

 

[Lb8535]

The regime can have a man at your door if you watch an unlicenced telly; their cameras & computers can drop a fine through your letterbox for speeding five counties away; police will knock at your door if you’re perceived to have been rude on TwitFace; yet they can’t collate a list based on one simple criterion:

“This individual would not have died were it not for him contracting C19.”

Really?

maximus otter

Just add exactly that as a check box on the death certificate that someone has to sign - attending doctor, emt crew, whoever. Trust their judgment. (Well perhaps add "at this time" as universally we will all die of something.). Done.

 

[EnolaGaia]

The mysterious runaway inflammation syndrome found in some children with COVID-19 (multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C)) is now being found in young adults. The inflammatory riot seems to be worse in these older patients.

Mysterious inflammatory syndrome tied to COVID-19 is showing up in adults in their early 20s

The syndrome doesn't just affect young children, as previously reported.

A mysterious inflammatory syndrome tied to COVID-19 that has been reported in children is now also turning up in young adults in their early 20s, according to news reports.

Doctors have now diagnosed the syndrome in a 20-year-old in San Diego and a 25-year-old in Long Island, New York, according to The Washington Post. Several additional cases have been reported in patients in their early 20s who are hospitalized at New York University's Langone Medical Center in New York City, the Post reported.

Symptoms of the syndrome — dubbed multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) — can vary. But patients tend to have symptoms similar to those found in Kawasaki disease, a rare childhood illness that causes inflammation in blood vessel walls, and in serious cases can cause heart damage, Live Science previously reported. Symptoms can include fever, abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea, neck pain, rash, bloodshot eyes and fatigue, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In young children, symptoms of the syndrome seem to more classically resemble Kawasaki disease, but teens and young adults appear to have more of an overwhelming inflammatory response involving their heart and other organs, the Post reported.

"The older ones have had a more severe course," Dr. Jennifer Lighter, a pediatric infectious diseases doctor at NYU Langone, told the Post.

There is concern that the syndrome may be underdiagnosed in adults, in part because many doctors outside of the pediatric setting have never seen cases of Kawasaki disease. ...

Many patients with MIS-C have antibodies against the new coronavirus, rather than an active infection, which suggests that the syndrome may be the result of a delayed immune response to the virus. ...

SOURCE: https://www.livescience.com/covid-19-inflammatory-syndrome-mis-c-young-adults.html

 

[Trevp666]

Todays (22/5/20) NHS England 'new deaths' figures released.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

Todays figures and notable statistics;
121 reported 'new' deaths today;
The trend is starting to level out at around a 8% daily drop in 'new deaths' (albeit with a little +/- to smooth)
155 of the 202 trusts today reported 0 new deaths (That's 77%)
No trust reported 10 or more 'new' deaths - the most is 6 'new' deaths
5 'new' deaths are over a week old.
The oldest reported 'new' death is 1 from University Hospitals Of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust from April 20th (This is the only death this trust has reported in todays figures).
Thursday this week (yesterday) showing 27 - however, as the daily figure is communicated to NHS England at 5pm each day the total for the whole of yesterday is not complete.

Todays deaths by age group;
0-19 = 0
20-39 = 0
40-59 = 9
60-78 = 40
80+ = 72

Below I show my running totals for;
Existing deaths + New deaths = New totals (If no 'new' to add then no calculation has been entered)
(since Thursday April 2nd, the date I started logging the numbers officially released).

T 811
F 615
S 1107 (Saturday April 4th)
S 1094
M 940
T 808
W 889
T 778
F 734
S 770 (April 11th)
S 714
M 689
T 643
W 683
T 631
F 605
S 567 (April 18th)
S 518
M 557+1=558
T 479
W 487
T 445
F 431
S 386 (April 25th)
S 374
M 341
T 338
W 319
T 301
F 300
S 263 (May 2nd)
S 243+1=244
M 247
T 244+1=245
W 248
T 241
F 199
S 191 (May 9th)
S 188
M 152
T 171
W 149+1=150
T 154+1=155
F 144+1=145
S 152+3=155 (May 16th)
S 124+3=127
M 118+5=123
T 104+16=120
W 44+61=105
T--------------27

(Figures supplied by NHS England date back to the beginning of March when the UK recorded it's first day with more than 50 deaths.
The figures released daily include deaths from the day on which they happened, so can be from any previous day NOT from just within the past 24 hours)

 

[Trevp666]

Todays (23/5/20) NHS England 'new deaths' figures released.

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/

Todays figures and notable statistics;
157 reported 'new' deaths today;
Apparently what has driven todays number higher than we were expecting to see is the 99 deaths in the 80+ age group.
The trend is starting to level out at around a 8% daily drop in 'new deaths' (albeit with a little +/- to smooth)
144 of the 202 trusts today reported 0 new deaths (That's 71%)
No trust reported 10 or more 'new' deaths - the most is 6 'new' deaths
14 'new' deaths are over a week old.
The oldest reported 'new' death is 1 from Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust from April 22nd.
Friday this week (yesterday) showing 30 - however, as the daily figure is communicated to NHS England at 5pm each day the total for the whole of yesterday is not complete.

Todays deaths by age group;
0-19 = 1
20-39 = 0
40-59 = 7
60-78 = 50
80+ = 99

Below I show my running totals for;
Existing deaths + New deaths = New totals (If no 'new' to add then no calculation has been entered)
(since Thursday April 2nd, the date I started logging the numbers officially released).

T 811
F 615
S 1107 (Saturday April 4th)
S 1094
M 940
T 808
W 889
T 778
F 734
S 770 (April 11th)
S 714
M 689
T 643
W 683
T 631
F 605
S 567 (April 18th)
S 518
M 558
T 479
W 487+1=488
T 445
F 431
S 386 (April 25th)
S 374
M 341+1=342
T 338+1=339
W 319
T 301
F 300+1=301
S 263 (May 2nd)
S 244
M 247+2=249
T 245
W 248
T 241
F 199
S 191 (May 9th)
S 188
M 152+3=155
T 171
W 150+1=151
T 155+1=156
F 145+3=148
S 155 (May 16th)
S 127
M 123+6=129
T 120+7=127
W 105+19=124
T 27+81=108
F -----------30

(Figures supplied by NHS England date back to the beginning of March when the UK recorded it's first day with more than 50 deaths.
The figures released daily include deaths from the day on which they happened, so can be from any previous day NOT from just within the past 24 hours)

 

[Lb8535]

I don't understand the resistance to the travel quarantine. If the UK is as the numbers seem to say is reducing cases because people have been isolated, opening travel as a free for all will only bring un-isolated cases back in. If the argument is that the lockdown worked and cases are down why accept new un-locked-down people from god knows where? It doesn't make sense to object if you think cases are down. If you don't think the lockdown accomplished anything - which trev's numbers above clearly dispute, then might as well open up.