Wuhan Killer Sneeze (thanks Tea)

Status
Not open for further replies.
luka

luka

Well-known member
Both. And a joke about how I failed maths GCSE. And a joke about statistics and politics. And a joke about my Tea baiting anti-facts personna
 
droid

droid

Well-known member
craner said:
Has there been any comment on the methodology of this, seeing as it's not a real number?
Click to expand...

Its free to read.

The number of deaths in the UK has moved from running at below long-term averages to well above them as a result of the pandemic. Excess deaths from all causes stand 16,952 above the seasonal average across the UK since fatalities from Covid-19, the disease caused by the virus, began to mount in mid-March.

The “all cause excess mortality” figure is widely recognised as the best measure of the death toll linked to the pandemic.

David Spiegelhalter, the Winton professor of public understanding of risk at Cambridge university, said it was “the only unbiased comparison” given the problems measuring deaths and their causes.

But because of the lag in collating the data, the ONS published figures for the period to April 10 are significantly out of date as they are based on registrations received by the statistical office, which on average arrive four days after the actual date of death.

The FT’s analysis has extrapolated these figures using the latest trends in the daily hospital deaths assuming the relationship between these and total excess deaths remained stable, as it has so far over the course of the pandemic.

Using this calculation, a conservative estimate of UK excess deaths by April 21 was 41,102.

Carl Henegan, professor of evidence based medicine at Oxford university, said the deadly effects of Covid-19 were much more marked than during a bad outbreak of seasonal influenza.

“I don’t think we’ve ever seen such a sharp upturn in deaths at that rate,” he said. The 2017-18 seasonal flu outbreak may have killed 50,000 in the UK but “the reason we did not get alarmed then was that they were spread out over many weeks”.

The ONS data also showed that deaths at home and in care homes had also jumped sharply during the pandemic. In the week ending April 10, deaths in care homes reached 4,927, almost double the figure of 2,471 a month earlier.
Click to expand...


https://www.ft.com/content/67e6a4ee-3d05-43bc-ba03-e239799fa6ab
 
Mr. Tea

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
@craner - I'm not a statistician either but I have some grasp of the basic concept, and I can well believe that the true death toll is twice the official figure.

For one thing, they're not counting deaths outside of hospitals, and other Western European countries with a similar age profile to ours are reporting about half of all coronavirus deaths happening in care homes.

Mr. Tea said:
I've been tracking the weekly excess death rates given by the ONS and comparing them to official covid-19 deaths (because I know how to have a good time). In the weeks ending 27/03 and 3/04, the excess deaths (compared to the previous five years' average) was about twice the official covid-19 toll. The week after that (the most recent available) it was about 60% higher. Although that only takes us up to the very beginning of the current period where we're routinely seeing >700 official covid-19 deaths a day.

However, the general mortality rate this up until the pandemic hit was somewhat lower than the five-year average, presumably because the weather's been so mild (hence lower death toll from normal vanilla flu), so the FT may have taken that into account to get this (even) higher number.
Click to expand...
 
droid

droid

Well-known member
craner said:
Yes, I know you are convinced that 41,000 people have died, I was just asking if anybody had any comment on how accurate the number is or how useful the method used to reach it is. Unlike you, I'm not an experienced statistician, so it's hard to tell.
Click to expand...

Im not convinced of anything and have made no indication that I was or wasn't.

However, the FT has been pretty reliable in its modelling and coverage, multiple media organisations have been relying on its analysis and although this estimate seems higher than the widely accepted figures of about +50% the methodology seems reasonable and its certainly within the realms of possibility, so barring the exposure of some major flaw in their method, I see no reason to disbelieve it.
 
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
That wasn't really my question either. I was just wondering why the other papers aren't covering it (even if to attempt to disagree) and why no-one is asking MPs about it (as far as I know). Seems like it should be a big thing to me.
 
craner

craner

Beast of Burden
Mr. Tea said:
@craner - I'm not a statistician either but I have some grasp of the basic concept, and I can well believe that the true death toll is twice the official figure.

For one thing, they're not counting deaths outside of hospitals, and other Western European countries with a similar age profile to ours are reporting about half of all coronavirus deaths happening in care homes.
Click to expand...

Helpful, thanks.
 
craner

craner

Beast of Burden
droid said:
Im not convinced of anything and have made no indication that I was or wasn't.

However, the FT has been pretty reliable in its modelling and coverage, multiple media organisations have been relying on its analysis and although this estimate seems higher than the widely accepted figures of about +50% the methodology seems reasonable and its certainly within the realms of possibility, so barring the exposure of some major flaw in their method, I see no reason to disbelieve it.
Click to expand...

Not helpful.
 
droid

droid

Well-known member
Why do you need help exactly? Its not rocket science. John Campbell has been analysing excess deaths based on the ONS figures for over a week. The NYT had a similar article yesterday.

If its not too ghoulish a task for you try looking at the numbers and comparing them to the ONS. Theyre all available on the website The only potential problem area is with their projection from the April 10th figures but if the relationship stays the same (as it is expected to) then the projection is sound.
 
craner

craner

Beast of Burden
Well, I did, and I asked for it. I'm not really sure why you had to be such a dick about it.

Baffling. Nevermind.
 
droid

droid

Well-known member
craner said:
Well, I did, and I asked for it. I'm not really sure why you had to be such a dick about it.

Baffling. Nevermind.
Click to expand...

lol. Excuse me. You made a passive aggressive attack on me for no apparent reason after I posted a tweet, and then an article (which i thought answered your question) without comment. I gave you a reasonable answer which you then haughtily dismissed, again for no apparent reason, but (unlike you) Im the dick?
 
Last edited:
droid

droid

Well-known member
Also, the fact that some countries are ignoring covid deaths or suppressing numbers through lack of post mortem testing for non-hospital deaths and failure to include nursing home deaths is hardly news to anyone who's been paying the slightest bit of attention. The UK is not alone here but seems to be amongst the worst offenders.

Analysis of how different reporting standards affects per capita death rates in relation to the Irish figure here.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top