Big Numbers today

[IT Minion]

So they're saying without covid, more people would have died ? I find that VERY hard to believe.

If you didn't have any Covid-19 floating around in the community at all, but decided to have a lockdown where people stopped driving as much (fewer Car crashes and air pollution) and suddenly improved their infection control so people caught fewer bugs, mortality would probably drop.

You just have to have lockdown so early in the process that Covid-19 hasn't had time to get to many people.

 

[motorbiking]

Its not died with covid, or died from covid or died from something linked to covid. Its once tested positive for covid, now dead = covid.

If you test positive they check to see if you have been recorded as having died on a daily basis. There have been consequences to our covid strategy which will cause excess deaths not as a result of covid, but as a result of what could not happen due to covid measures. Its about finding the balance.

If you didn't have any Covid-19 floating around in the community at all, but decided to have a lockdown where people stopped driving as much (fewer Car crashes and air pollution) and suddenly improved their infection control so people caught fewer bugs, mortality would probably drop.

You just have to have lockdown so early in the process that Covid-19 hasn't had time to get to many people.

Strokes, heart decease, cancer etc. I doubt lockdown will improve those killers

 

[IT Minion]

Strokes, heart decease, cancer etc. I doubt lockdown will improve those killers

You wouldn't need to reduce every cause of death to drop the numbers enough to outweigh Covid-19, if Covid-19 is small enough.

 

[Ihavenojob]

If you didn't have any Covid-19 floating around in the community at all, but decided to have a lockdown where people stopped driving as much (fewer Car crashes and air pollution) and suddenly improved their infection control so people caught fewer bugs, mortality would probably drop.

You just have to have lockdown so early in the process that Covid-19 hasn't had time to get to many people.

They were referring to old and sick people not dying as usual, ie , dying of sickness or old age.

 

[motorbiking]

Well what we need is a sensible approach to linking death to Covid, so we can either work out if something else is happening or see if we are missing a lot of covid deaths due to not testing etc..

 

[ellal]

So they're saying without covid, more people would have died ? I find that VERY hard to believe.

That's what they're saying in Norway...

In Iceland too...

Because apparently the lockdown/testing was more efficient than what we have here, and normal health services were maintained.

But less contact means that other seasonal illnesses weren't caught as readily.

Plus they don't tend to have a care home system that is based on 'profit before people'...

Add in less accidents and the figures are quite believable.

 

[EddieM]

The data seems to support that lockdown was too late. April saw an excess death figure of circa 40,000 since then it's been slightly elevated (and to echo, worldwide government's comments, I do fully appreciate these number are someone's mum, or dad, brother, sister, friend etc which is awful)

 

[JohnD]

Well what we need is a sensible approach to linking death to Covid, so we can either work out if something else is happening or see if we are missing a lot of covid deaths due to not testing etc..

some say that when a fatal disease sweeps the country, and 65 thousand more people than usual die, that gives you a pretty clear indication.

 

[EddieM]

some say that when a fatal disease sweeps the country, and 65 thousand more people than usual die, that gives you a pretty clear indication.

What's the demographics of those that died?

 

[JohnD]

does that alter the number of excess deaths?

 

[EddieM]

does that alter the number of excess deaths?

No, obviously.

 

[Charlie George]

Up until yesterday, but for now...

"The UK government has halted the publication of the daily number of coronavirus deaths over concerns that "statistical flaws" might be rendering the data inaccurate."

Of course if you could shed light on where to find the data from today onwards, then please do so.

Here you are,if you need any more help just ask.

 

[JohnD]

so the number of "covid associated deaths" includes only those who have had a positive test result.

Add 50% to reach the number of excess deaths achieved, since so many were not tested.

 

[ajohn]

The time from testing to death isn't as straight forwards as the critics suggest, Some one is tested - anything up to x weeks to die. ~6 isn't unusual from reports. Some very soon after testing and others longer.

Where it went wrong really is adding other than in hospital deaths or at least keeping those separate. So some lab rat in Oxford Uni says it's confusing. Correct but then comes total numbers from death certificates. Also those that have more severe complications after a recovery. They may die due to a second stroke or that area may have been weakened by the infection. Snap their heart and possibly other organs. So just what did they die of months after "recovery"?

Death really is associated by the need for hospital treatment and if it's available. If some one catches it and doesn't need that, no symptoms at all they will it seems be fine. Then shortness of breath, managing and "recovering", Boris springs to mind. Then what was needed to get into hospital. Some didn't make it and died at home. The % of positive tests against total tests was very high during the peak. It's a small fraction now.

Increasing age means more likely to need hospital treatment but the age where people start needing treatment in numbers is another aspect. Best way of looking at it is hope for no need to go even when very young.

 

[Brigadier]

If you test positive they check to see if you have been recorded as having died on a daily basis.

Perhaps a DNR note might have been in order?