NPR

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:26 am Reported deaths for the first 4 days of last week 212

Reported deaths for the first 4 days of this week 271

A week on week comparison for all 4 days (eg Monday 3rd & Monday 10th) shows a rise on all 4 days consecutively.

This is the first week since peak that the weekly count has gone up. So far a rather significant 27% rise.

Little wonder the Govt has mid week sought to revise the numbers downwards.

Clogs wrote: Thu Aug 13, 2020 8:09 am I believe he has posted the official stats to demonstrate that many people died. Do you have official data to disprove it?

Saint wrote: Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:41 am If you're going to call the PHE numbers into question then you HAVE to question the Welsh and Scottish numbers. They've been working to the 28 day standard throughout, so you would expect the difference to the ONS numbers to largely be there.

What this whole thing really exposes is

1 - We're actually really crap as a country in collating and reporting these stats rapidly, and whatever your views on devolution, there needs to be a UK-wide standard for what is reported - even if collation and reporting remains independent
2 - We've been far more open at admitting that fact. We've publically reported a bunch of different stats that contradict each other, with even explained why they do.

The real coverup would have been not to publish the differing stats

Bimbowomxn wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:07 am But 200:plus people didn’t die on those 4 days IH, again using this logic 4,000 people came back to life.

Why can’t you see this ?

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:37 am

Bimbowomxn wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:07 am But 200:plus people didn’t die on those 4 days IH, again using this logic 4,000 people came back to life.

Why can’t you see this ?

The like for like reporting of official Govt released numbers of the deaths for those 4 days says 200 people last week, this weeks it's 270. That's a significant comparative rise,

How do you not see that? (Don't bother, it's a rhetorical question).

Bimbowomxn wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:10 am

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:37 am

Bimbowomxn wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:07 am But 200:plus people didn’t die on those 4 days IH, again using this logic 4,000 people came back to life.

Why can’t you see this ?

The like for like reporting of official Govt released numbers of the deaths for those 4 days says 200 people last week, this weeks it's 270. That's a significant comparative rise,

How do you not see that? (Don't bother, it's a rhetorical question).

It’s not like for like though, it’s records of deaths over months previously not on the days of reporting. This by it’s very nature cannot be like for like.

I guarantee that the two 4 day periods you’ve cherry picked don’t include 200 plus deaths from the actual days of reporting.

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:16 am

Bimbowomxn wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:10 am

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:37 am

The like for like reporting of official Govt released numbers of the deaths for those 4 days says 200 people last week, this weeks it's 270. That's a significant comparative rise,

How do you not see that? (Don't bother, it's a rhetorical question).

It’s not like for like though, it’s records of deaths over months previously not on the days of reporting. This by it’s very nature cannot be like for like.

I guarantee that the two 4 day periods you’ve cherry picked don’t include 200 plus deaths from the actual days of reporting.

I've cherry picked no numbers, I've linked, at least twice, to the official Government published numbers.

I've not said that's the numbers represent people actually dying on that day despite your very desperate attempts to make it seem that way in a pathetic attempt to obfuscate.

The reported deaths, despite any lag between when they died and the reporting of the death, are going up.

dpedin wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:22 am The focus on numbers of deaths is important. However the potential bigger issue for the working age population is not dying but will be the longer term impact of contracting the virus. There is growing evidence base that anything up to 10% of those who get the virus have health issues lasting months and potential after effects or requirement for care for many many months. There is research underway but there is little awareness of this, most folk think its ok it wont kill me. However Tom Wood, Northampton flanker is currently off following a pulmonary embolism as a result of covid19 and is on blood thinners. A fit healthy male with excellent healthcare provision. So c65,000 excess deaths and up to 10% of those who contract the virus suffering longer term effects is the real measure of harm.

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:30 am N=1 example.

Tv’s Kate Garraway says husband Derek Draper has emerged from his Covid-19 coma after 98 days in hospital.

He's still pretty fucked... 'We don't know how much he can see or hear, but he knows the programme is on.'

Had he instead died, under the new 28-day test result Death reporting calculations, it would not have been counted as a Covid death

dpedin wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:22 am The focus on numbers of deaths is important. However the potential bigger issue for the working age population is not dying but will be the longer term impact of contracting the virus. There is growing evidence base that anything up to 10% of those who get the virus have health issues lasting months and potential after effects or requirement for care for many many months. There is research underway but there is little awareness of this, most folk think its ok it wont kill me. However Tom Wood, Northampton flanker is currently off following a pulmonary embolism as a result of covid19 and is on blood thinners. A fit healthy male with excellent healthcare provision. So c65,000 excess deaths and up to 10% of those who contract the virus suffering longer term effects is the real measure of harm.

Sandstorm wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:42 am

dpedin wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:22 am The focus on numbers of deaths is important. However the potential bigger issue for the working age population is not dying but will be the longer term impact of contracting the virus. There is growing evidence base that anything up to 10% of those who get the virus have health issues lasting months and potential after effects or requirement for care for many many months. There is research underway but there is little awareness of this, most folk think its ok it wont kill me. However Tom Wood, Northampton flanker is currently off following a pulmonary embolism as a result of covid19 and is on blood thinners. A fit healthy male with excellent healthcare provision. So c65,000 excess deaths and up to 10% of those who contract the virus suffering longer term effects is the real measure of harm.

There are examples of pro athletes in USA who had mild cases of Covid19 and recovered quickly. But now they have heart damage and cannot perform anywhere near their previous levels. Career. Over.

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:30 am N=1 example.

Tv’s Kate Garraway says husband Derek Draper has emerged from his Covid-19 coma after 98 days in hospital.

He's still pretty fucked... 'We don't know how much he can see or hear, but he knows the programme is on.'

Had he instead died, under the new 28-day test result Death reporting calculations, it would not have been counted as a Covid death

dpedin wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:22 am The focus on numbers of deaths is important. However the potential bigger issue for the working age population is not dying but will be the longer term impact of contracting the virus. There is growing evidence base that anything up to 10% of those who get the virus have health issues lasting months and potential after effects or requirement for care for many many months. There is research underway but there is little awareness of this, most folk think its ok it wont kill me. However Tom Wood, Northampton flanker is currently off following a pulmonary embolism as a result of covid19 and is on blood thinners. A fit healthy male with excellent healthcare provision. So c65,000 excess deaths and up to 10% of those who contract the virus suffering longer term effects is the real measure of harm.

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:00 am

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:30 am N=1 example.

Tv’s Kate Garraway says husband Derek Draper has emerged from his Covid-19 coma after 98 days in hospital.

He's still pretty fucked... 'We don't know how much he can see or hear, but he knows the programme is on.'

Had he instead died, under the new 28-day test result Death reporting calculations, it would not have been counted as a Covid death

He wouldn't be counted by the WHO measure either (60 days)

He also wouldn't have been counted if he lived in Wales, Scotland or NI

There's also apparently at least one death in the statistics where someone had tested positive then been hit by a bus.

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:00 am apparently at least one death in the statistics where someone had tested positive then been hit by a bus.

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:05 am

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:00 am apparently at least one death in the statistics where someone had tested positive then been hit by a bus.

[Bimbo mode on]
Was probably travelling to/from hospital
[Bimbo mode off]

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:03 am

dpedin wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:22 am The focus on numbers of deaths is important. However the potential bigger issue for the working age population is not dying but will be the longer term impact of contracting the virus. There is growing evidence base that anything up to 10% of those who get the virus have health issues lasting months and potential after effects or requirement for care for many many months. There is research underway but there is little awareness of this, most folk think its ok it wont kill me. However Tom Wood, Northampton flanker is currently off following a pulmonary embolism as a result of covid19 and is on blood thinners. A fit healthy male with excellent healthcare provision. So c65,000 excess deaths and up to 10% of those who contract the virus suffering longer term effects is the real measure of harm.

Where did all this nonsense about Tom Wood having had COVID come from? he had a pulmonary embolism in his leg that travelled up to his lungs. Not COVID

Andrew Neil
@afneil
·
11h
Transport minister Shapps has just deleted his tweet to me. I suspect he thought 4am Saturday was early Sunday morning. It’s not. It’s 4am Saturday.
Andrew Neil

When it came via a Grant Shapps interview on Sky News, he said it would be from Sunday. We promptly booked our channel tunnel for Saturday afternoon, but now we’ve woken up today to see it’s been changed to Saturday.

Bimbowomxn wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:39 am All governments are rubbish.

My name is Tim and I recently returned from Belgium. There seems to be a widespread belief that the UK government has some type of control over those returning from the countries on the list. This is untrue.
I do not intend to boast about the fact that I have not complied to ‘the rules’ but that is the truth.
The form that you fill out asks for your permission to phone or text you - your permission! If they do phone you they ask you a few questions, “Are you at home?”, I was not but answered “Yes, I am”. That is it.
If this is compared to other nations, for instance, Singapore, where you are locked inside your room, or former CIS nations where you have to download an app and share your location, the UK is a joke.
My neighbour who returned from a nation ‘on the list’ arrived to Stansted Airport where they did not ask him to show the form. He returned to work and told his boss that he had been in Scotland (despite his tan).

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:00 am

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:30 am N=1 example.

Tv’s Kate Garraway says husband Derek Draper has emerged from his Covid-19 coma after 98 days in hospital.

He's still pretty fucked... 'We don't know how much he can see or hear, but he knows the programme is on.'

Had he instead died, under the new 28-day test result Death reporting calculations, it would not have been counted as a Covid death

He wouldn't be counted by the WHO measure either (60 days)

He also wouldn't have been counted if he lived in Wales, Scotland or NI

There's also apparently at least one death in the statistics where someone had tested positive then been hit by a bus.

Blackmac wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:56 am

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:00 am

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:30 am N=1 example.

Tv’s Kate Garraway says husband Derek Draper has emerged from his Covid-19 coma after 98 days in hospital.

He's still pretty fucked... 'We don't know how much he can see or hear, but he knows the programme is on.'

Had he instead died, under the new 28-day test result Death reporting calculations, it would not have been counted as a Covid death

He wouldn't be counted by the WHO measure either (60 days)

He also wouldn't have been counted if he lived in Wales, Scotland or NI

There's also apparently at least one death in the statistics where someone had tested positive then been hit by a bus.

If a fit and healthy person contracts Covid and dies from Covid after the 28 day period, then that is still counted as a Covid death in Scotland. It is only if the death is related to other health issues that it is discounted after 28 days. It seems an extremely sensible process.

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:08 pm

Blackmac wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:56 am

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:00 am

He wouldn't be counted by the WHO measure either (60 days)

He also wouldn't have been counted if he lived in Wales, Scotland or NI

There's also apparently at least one death in the statistics where someone had tested positive then been hit by a bus.

If a fit and healthy person contracts Covid and dies from Covid after the 28 day period, then that is still counted as a Covid death in Scotland. It is only if the death is related to other health issues that it is discounted after 28 days. It seems an extremely sensible process.

Do you have a source for that? The Scottish Gov website, and PHS, both say otherwise

Biffer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:18 pm

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:08 pm

Blackmac wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:56 am


If a fit and healthy person contracts Covid and dies from Covid after the 28 day period, then that is still counted as a Covid death in Scotland. It is only if the death is related to other health issues that it is discounted after 28 days. It seems an extremely sensible process.

Do you have a source for that? The Scottish Gov website, and PHS, both say otherwise

The weekly NRS figures count anyone where Covid is mentioned on the death certificate. The Scottish government refer to the NRS numbers as more comprehensive every week when they're announced, so those are probably the numbers to trust.

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:57 pm Todays UK stats

1,441 tested positive, that steady rise is accelerating (probably includes the ~300 M&S)

new method 11 reported deaths

old method... 122 reported death consistent with 27% increase seen this week.

Insane_Homer wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 5:56 pm yes, but 111 car crashes to make up the difference

Neither method is perfect, but there shouldn't be such a huge discrepancy,

It's a farce.

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:08 pm

Blackmac wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:56 am

Saint wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:00 am

He wouldn't be counted by the WHO measure either (60 days)

He also wouldn't have been counted if he lived in Wales, Scotland or NI

There's also apparently at least one death in the statistics where someone had tested positive then been hit by a bus.

If a fit and healthy person contracts Covid and dies from Covid after the 28 day period, then that is still counted as a Covid death in Scotland. It is only if the death is related to other health issues that it is discounted after 28 days. It seems an extremely sensible process.

Do you have a source for that? The Scottish Gov website, and PHS, both say otherwise

.OverThere wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:46 pm If a new method were better able to explain prior discrepancies, then one could have more faith in the numbers.
The number of deaths for the year has not changed. How does the revised total of covid deaths for any prior period compare against the same period in previous years? In particular against the average number? The difference which was previously an excess of deaths was quite high.
If the number of covid deaths has fallen, there is an even larger no. of excess deaths that require an explanation.

fishfoodie wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:36 pm

.OverThere wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:46 pm If a new method were better able to explain prior discrepancies, then one could have more faith in the numbers.
The number of deaths for the year has not changed. How does the revised total of covid deaths for any prior period compare against the same period in previous years? In particular against the average number? The difference which was previously an excess of deaths was quite high.
If the number of covid deaths has fallen, there is an even larger no. of excess deaths that require an explanation.

It all depends on what you are using the statistics for ?

The daily numbers are first & foremost about tracking infections & deaths; but the most important thing is for the health authorities to be able to estimate the R number daily; as this is what they'll use to decide if they need to trigger lockdowns, & help them prepare for a spike in hospitalizations etc

The problem is that you need to order the point in time when infections probably occurred; & not the order they're detected. So if you get ten people presenting over a 10 day period; you don't want to record their infections on ten different days, if they all got infected on the same day, & the same place, as you'll get a much less accurate R value. I assume this is also the logic for not recording deaths after a prolonged period.

.OverThere wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:54 pm

fishfoodie wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:36 pm

.OverThere wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:46 pm If a new method were better able to explain prior discrepancies, then one could have more faith in the numbers.
The number of deaths for the year has not changed. How does the revised total of covid deaths for any prior period compare against the same period in previous years? In particular against the average number? The difference which was previously an excess of deaths was quite high.
If the number of covid deaths has fallen, there is an even larger no. of excess deaths that require an explanation.

It all depends on what you are using the statistics for ?

The daily numbers are first & foremost about tracking infections & deaths; but the most important thing is for the health authorities to be able to estimate the R number daily; as this is what they'll use to decide if they need to trigger lockdowns, & help them prepare for a spike in hospitalizations etc

The problem is that you need to order the point in time when infections probably occurred; & not the order they're detected. So if you get ten people presenting over a 10 day period; you don't want to record their infections on ten different days, if they all got infected on the same day, & the same place, as you'll get a much less accurate R value. I assume this is also the logic for not recording deaths after a prolonged period.

Politicians tend to use them for politics.

fishfoodie wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:17 pm

.OverThere wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:54 pm

fishfoodie wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 7:36 pm

It all depends on what you are using the statistics for ?

The daily numbers are first & foremost about tracking infections & deaths; but the most important thing is for the health authorities to be able to estimate the R number daily; as this is what they'll use to decide if they need to trigger lockdowns, & help them prepare for a spike in hospitalizations etc

The problem is that you need to order the point in time when infections probably occurred; & not the order they're detected. So if you get ten people presenting over a 10 day period; you don't want to record their infections on ten different days, if they all got infected on the same day, & the same place, as you'll get a much less accurate R value. I assume this is also the logic for not recording deaths after a prolonged period.

Politicians tend to use them for politics.

They can dick about with the daily numbers; but they're fooling themselves if they think they're doing themselves a favour; because it's the excess deaths that people will look at when the Elections roll around; & it's very hard to game them.