@aloith, my view is not “optimistic” or “disingenuous” it is fact based. I’d appreciate it if you didn’t recast my posts into emotion, whether you’re doing it on purpose or not. Thanks.
Malibuflyer wrote:
In a week by week comparison the death rate has increased over every single of the last 4 days (and for a long time now)
The fatality per day in Texas has decreased for three of the last four days. I said “the last four days” which was not quite 100% accurate, but reasonable shorthand. We all know that weekend reporting affects the data, but otherwise I think that data can speak for itself. This was not a four day holiday weekend in the US.
It’s really frustrating that we aren’t able to get much data or detail that should be possible to make available. Particularly for local details. I suspect there’s not a massive number of cases around where I am.
Peter wrote:
It does contain a fairly crucial caution at the end:
Such comparisons are typically outright BS – not saying that there is no quality difference between trusts, but in general it is almost impossible to relate death rates to quality (within the same system):
As 5th indicator to the ones already mentioned comes “case mix (index)” (which can be roughly translated by severity of cases). Typically the best university hospitals have the highest infant mortality during birth as only the most difficult cases get there.
@Silvaire: Thanks for posting! As you now have obviously realized it is exactly as I said: On every single day on the last 7 days the number of new reported cases has been higher than at the same weekday one week earlier. Not a single exception!
Therefore if you compare apples to apples – ah – Mondays to Mondays, it’s ultra obvious that there is absolutely no indication on a slowdown of deaths….
Silvaire wrote:
my view is not “optimistic” or “disingenuous” it is fact based.
Unfortunately, it is anything but fact based. Looking at numbers with poor signal to noise ratio, with obvious local maxima in the middle of the week and obvious local minima on the weekend, in a pattern that has repeated for weeks – and then claiming that the death rate is reducing because the numbers are lower during the most recent local minima at a weekend (in other words cherry picking) is coming to a very flawed conclusion which is not at all based on facts, but an artefact on the way the data is generated and reported. It’s about as far away from facts as you can get, without just using a random number generator.
@Malibuflyer, it is completely pointless to debate with you given your pattern of enthusiastically contradicting something that hasn’t been said, with an added dose of sarcasm. It is not a pattern of strong debating skill and distracts from the value of the discussion.
When clear facts are presented, it is perfectly reasonable to present a different view with additional facts that you may see as relevant. It is not reasonable to dispute factual data.
@alioth, please do not misrepresent what I wrote (again) as drawing a conclusion that I did not draw, and adding emotion. Look at the data if you like and draw your own conclusion, but do not create mine. Thanks again.
It’s really frustrating that we aren’t able to get much data or detail that should be possible to make available. Particularly for local details. I suspect there’s not a massive number of cases around where I am.
You can find all sorts of fun stuff here. At the top you can play with lower tier or upper tier regions.
Most “low population density” areas have very low numbers – so low that you would need to lick the handle on every supermarket trolley in town to have any chance of getting it. An airline flight is something else, however, because you get a broad mix there…
There is a big spike in late June, which is just a number cockup; prior to that they were not counting the biggest category 
Unfortunately that spike has compressed the Y axis to make it near useless so you have to hover the mouse on the barely visible blobs on the bottom line to see numbers.
I wonder what other countries have done along these lines? There are “massive GDPR issues” with publishing useful local data, apparently…
Off_Field wrote:
It’s really frustrating that we aren’t able to get much data or detail that should be possible to make available. Particularly for local details. I suspect there’s not a massive number of cases around where I am.
I agree, if that is the case, and have been looking occasionally at the local data which is in fact available in my area. I’ve found it useful, for example in advising my wife of the issues with local shopping (there are none) and my choice in avoiding urban areas for now.
PS Peter and I crossed posts but its funny that we said almost the same thing.
Silvaire wrote:
Oh for God’s sake, the daily death rate in Texas is 8% of that previously experienced in New York and for the last four days it’s been decreasing. The scope of the problem matters.
Sorry, I’m afraid if that’s not drawing a conclusion, I fail to see what is.
That is not drawing a conclusion, it is statement of facts plus an expression of exasperation. 
I think if I were to draw a conclusion from those facts, I’d say that the problem in Texas is relatively limited, and considerable growth in the numbers would be necessary to reach an extremely bad level. So in my mind (an opinion) current media attention is influenced by a political and money making agenda. Also that the data over the four days is interesting given that the weekend is only two days so it may indicate something… or maybe not because it will go back up again to one degree or another on Monday. Thanks
