Covid 19 outbreak - arguing about Stats (again)

[Oldjohnw]

There does appear to be some truth that the same people who deny that CV-19 kills . . .

That doesn't include me. The disagreement I mentioned above refers to doctors who choose to put covid19 as the cause of death and those who prefer to put the underlying, long term cause. That's a medical practice issue. It only becomes a problem if (as the WHO complain), the "final straw" hides the true extent of say, lung disease.

. . . also deny climate change and support both Trump and Brexit. Not absolute but there nevertheless

Just in passing:

I recognise man-made climate change and passionately support moves to deal with it
I support Bernie Sanders not Trump
I oppose Brexit
If I were American I would ban all guns.
And I don't believe that 5G causes covid19!

However, I do have issues with the over-medicalisation of health.

Actually I wasn't meaning anyone here. You have always made your case re Covid-19 without rancour or aggression.

People who do come to mind in a big way and whose followers presumably think the same are such as Trump and the Boy from Brazil. Farage comes into the picture as well. Often anti-vaccers too.

[Phileas]

However, I do have issues with the over-medicalisation of health.

So the extraordinary spike in deaths recently (or “excess deaths”), is just a random fluctuation?

[horizon]

However, I do have issues with the over-medicalisation of health.

So the extraordinary spike in deaths recently (or “excess deaths”), is just a random fluctuation?

I understand my own statement and I understand yours but not the connection between the two. Help please.

[Ellieb]

However, I do have issues with the over-medicalisation of health.

So the extraordinary spike in deaths recently (or “excess deaths”), is just a random fluctuation?

I understand my own statement and I understand yours but not the connection between the two. Help please.

He means this:

1. It wasn't doing anything at all but deaths and infections rise for their own reasons - though we don't yet know as it hasn't yet ended (except in other countries where AFAIK, there hasn't been an increase). That's my belief.

[horizon]

There is a "spike" every week as cases are added from the weekend (if that is what Phileas was referring to) but otherwise it's a pretty regular curve. AFAIK, most cases now are occurring in care homes, not in the general population.

Other possibility: my "deaths and infections" refers to covid19. This has created a "spike" overall (is that what Phileas meant?) and my point was that fluctuations in that, when they occur, might not necessarily be due to lifting the lockdown.

[reohn2]

There is a "spike" every week as cases are added from the weekend (if that is what Phileas was referring to) but otherwise it's a pretty regular curve. AFAIK, most cases now are occurring in care homes, not in the general population.

My bold
Why do you think that might be?

Other possibility: my "deaths and infections" refers to covid19. This has created a "spike" overall (is that what Phileas meant?) and my point was that fluctuations in that, when they occur, might not necessarily be due to lifting the lockdown.

Fluctuations in death rates are because more people are infected,and those deaths will be because those least able to cope with the virus have been exposed to it,whether they die of any related C19 diseases or directly ofnthe virus.

[Phileas]

However, I do have issues with the over-medicalisation of health.

So the extraordinary spike in deaths recently (or “excess deaths”), is just a random fluctuation?

I understand my own statement and I understand yours but not the connection between the two. Help please.

You also said

The disagreement I mentioned above refers to doctors who choose to put covid19 as the cause of death and those who prefer to put the underlying, long term cause.

Like TUC, you seem to ignore what’s staring you in the face. There is a huge spike in deaths that requires an explanation. The obvious explanation is that Covid 19 is, directly or indirectly, the cause.
There was a link earlier in this thread to an actuarial study that concluded it was not plausible to imply that most of the deaths involving underlying health issues would have happened in the near future anyway.

[horizon]

Like TUC, you seem to ignore what’s staring you in the face. There is a huge spike in deaths that requires an explanation. The obvious explanation is that Covid 19 is, directly or indirectly the cause.
There was a link earlier in this thread to an actuarial study that concluded it was not plausible to imply that most of the deaths involving underlying health issues would have happened in the near future anyway.

I am not sure I disagree with you or quite why we are discussing this. My point was about lockdown in that I wasn't as convinced as many people that it protected everyone from covid19 (that's just my surmise).

I don't think BTW (without looking up all the relevant facts and figures) that there is any dispute over the fact that there is an issue as to what to write on the death certificate when a patient dies but has covid19. AIUI this is a well known problem for health authorities, doctors and medical staff - what to put down as cause of death, indeed before covid19 even came along.

HTH

[Phileas]

@Horizon

My apologies if your opinion has changed but I seem to recall in a previous version of this thread that you were sceptical of the severity of this outbreak and your reference to “cause of death” issues rang alarm bells.

There may indeed be “issues” surrounding the recording cause of death (always have been I assume). However, in the big picture, it is pretty obvious that most of the “excess deaths” in the current period (the spike I referred to) are in some way caused (directly or indirectly) by Covid 19.

It is of course still unknown to what extent lockdown has reduced the death toll but it seems perverse to imagine that public health interventions can have no effect (perhaps you don’t believe this).

[Vorpal]

It's not the flu. It's not 'in line' with the flu. COVID-19 hospitalises a much higher percentage of its victim than the flu.

It is transmitted more easily than the flu. These are things that we have evidence for, even though there is much that we still don't know.

Anyway, I'm done moderating this. If you want to discuss it further, ask Graham to unlock the thread.

[The utility cyclist]

Again many German scientists/experts within the German government state that the threat is massively less than first thought/imagined
2 metres, in fact any social distancing other than if you were going to visit a frail/vulnerable person and you were actually showing symptoms is ludicrous and always was.
Locking down has killed tens of thousands more in the UK and hundreds of thousands more yet is still far short of the deaths from influenza
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/fe ... tvFChhSauY

I delved into the stats on another thread...

Hundreds of thousands is a little bit of an exaggeration - I assumed that the early signs of the year (about 400-500 people a month fewer than the 5 year average) continued and only came up with 65k surplus deaths this year.

The vast majority of those deaths are officially covid related - though there were some at the start which were probably mislabelled as flu/pneumonia exclusively.
I haven't looked at the other obvious stats (road deaths and suicide rates) to see what the change has been in those.

I omitted 'globally' after the hundreds of thousands, the tens of thousands of excess deaths are not due to a virus, the register of deaths makes this absolutely clear as the death toll from respiratory diseases is fewer this year than for any of the last 5 years year to date.

Here is the compiled death numbers FROM respiratory diseases by underlying cause for the last 6 years for England and Wales including a comparison up to the latest weekly report up to and including 12th June/Week 23. Each year shows the number of deaths to Week 23 for that year FROM respiratory diseases as underlying cause

All data is directly from the Office for National Statistics.

2019 was a 'good' flu year, also bear in mind population of England and Wales has increased by circa 3.5% since 2015 (approx 0.7%/year)
2020 - 36166

2019 - 36706 ~ 52 weeks 71674

2018 - 43883 ~ 52 weeks 76232

2017 - 38560 ~ 52 weeks 73413

2016 - 37133 ~ 52 weeks 72053

2015 - 42945 ~ 53 weeks 77276 (53 weeks due to the way the weeks fell in that year)

And as to your last sentence, this is again false, I've already made a formal complaint to ONS, they have produced another fake news release (again) regarding C.19 as underlying cause of death. They stated there are in actual fact more than double C.19 deaths by underlying cause than the total of ALL respiratory diseases by underlying cause, this cannot possibly be true

The total number of all respiratory deaths incl C.19 as underlying cause of death from 1st March to 6th June (the point of comparison) is 19,380, this is contained in the register of deaths for England and Wales.

ONS have (falsely) stated that total deaths FROM Covid19 as underlying cause of death is 43,763 for the same period!

Their description of majority of deaths WITh C.19 being underlying cause of death is the total opposite to what Neil Ferguson stated previously and what is reported elsewhere regards to deaths as underlying cause.
Even the NHS lists sub 1600 deaths FROM C.19 where it is the only ailment present!

Not only caught spreading fake news again, unlawfully so, but continue to misrepresent death numbers by misuse of language in their statements/press releases. On top of which we have the unprecedented way of attributing deaths with/involving an ailment even when that is not underlying cause, and on top of that attributing death despite no actual positive test and manipulating numbers by attributing C.19 instead of or as well as pneumonia in every single case.
If this had being done for influenza then we would have had literally half the deaths in the country attributed to influenza, but without the same regime of testing (Just two single flu tests done in mid April according to the weekly ILI report) you would of course not get the same results. the bias and confirmation bias through increased testing is ludicrous, it's even more ludicrous when you know the test is so flawed and tests positive for dead organic matter - as admitted by WHO!

The whole thing is an utter disgrace and the (unlawful) reaction has destroyed the economy and killed thousands prematurely who didn't die from any virus at all! Johnson and his advisers/'experts' should be put on trial for crimes again humanity, as should the Pharma shills that are WHO!

[bigjim]

150 deaths a day even after months of lockdown is not a threat to public health? We must have different definitions of a health threat!

But the UK average death count is about fifteen hundred a day.

[mjr]

150 deaths a day even after months of lockdown is not a threat to public health? We must have different definitions of a health threat!

But the UK average death count is about fifteen hundred a day.

So? C19 is still the third-largest factor in deaths after dementia and ischaemic heart disease, which is not good.

I think the UK is still "running too hot", second only to Mexico (pop'n 129 million) in terms of absolute new daily deaths at a glance, and so shouldn't be unlocking even more - or at least not unlocking indoor activities. If this carried on at current rates, the UK's published "deaths per capita" would overtake Belgium in 3½ weeks despite the suspected disparity in reporting (UK 40% underreported, Belgium 0%).

[bigjim]

Factor is a lot of different to cause. Plus the deaths, factors have been falsely reported. I wouldn't trust any published statistics.

[roubaixtuesday]

Factor is a lot of different to cause.

These are people now dead who would be otherwise alive without COVID.

There are 65000 of them.

Playing semantic games makes you appear in denial, and is frankly insulting to the memory of the dead.

Plus the deaths, factors have been falsely reported.

An empty assertion without evidence.

I wouldn't trust any published statistics.

I wouldn't trust anyone making assertions without evidence.